islamic jurisprudence

The aim of this research is to examine the extent of environmental exploitation from the perspectives of Islamic jurisprudence (Fiqh) and positive law. This article is conducted using a descriptive and analytical approach. Based on the obtained results, both Islamic jurisprudence and religious principles present the preservation of the environment and natural resources as a moral and religious duty, emphasizing the individual and collective responsibilities of people and the government. These responsibilities include adhering to ethical principles in the exploitation of natural resources and preventing corruption on earth. In this regard, the Quranic verses and Hadiths explicitly stress the necessity of protecting nature and the commitment to its preservation. From a legal perspective, the rights of future generations are recognized as a human right, and the need for the creation and adherence to policies and laws for environmental protection is emphasized. National laws and regulations, including the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act and the Air Pollution Prevention Act, specifically regulate the extent of environmental exploitation and aim to reduce pollution and protect the environment and natural resources. This study investigates the specific responsibilities assigned to the people and government by each of these perspectives, giving particular attention to actions that aim to preserve biodiversity, reduce pollution, manage natural resources sustainably, and implement effective policies to ensure the rights of future generations in the exploitation of the environment. Finally, suggestions based on cooperation and synergy between the people and the government are provided to establish a healthy and sustainable environment for future generations.

Theft is one of the most common crimes across societies, and various legal systems have historically prescribed different punishments for it. Among the conditions frequently mentioned in Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh) and legal texts as a component of theft's nature or a prerequisite for specific types of punishment is "Khafīyyah" (meaning secrecy or concealment). However, there is no consensus on its precise meaning or how it is realized. Islamic jurists from different schools of thought and Iranian legal scholars have interpreted the concept of khafīyyah differently, and the Iranian legal framework does not explicitly address this issue. The primary focus of this research is to explore the concept of khafīyyah in the crime of theft. To achieve this, eight prominent perspectives are critically studied, including: being hidden from all people; being hidden from the owner or their substitute; concealment as perceived by the thief; fraudulent conduct and the thief's act of concealment. Based on the findings, the interpretation that defines khafīyyah as "the thief's act of concealment" emerges as the most defensible. Although this interpretation is not explicitly articulated in classical Islamic jurisprudence from either Imᾱmī and Sunni traditions, evidence suggests that some jurists from both traditions have implicitly considered it. The data for this research were collected through library methods, drawing from Shi'a and Sunni jurisprudential sources as well as legal texts. The analysis was conducted using a descriptive-analytical approach.

The transfer of the right of retaliation (qisᾱs) to spouses and the quality of their share in this right is a significant topic in Islamic jurisprudence and law, drawing considerable attention from jurists, legal scholars, and experts in judicial courts and criminal jurisprudence. Given the paramount importance of human life in Islamic law, this research holds substantial significance. The choice between transferring or not transferring the right of retaliation to spouses can lead to major changes in the forgiveness or punishment of offenders and, in some instances, expedite the processing of criminal cases. Article 351 of the Islamic Penal Code does not currently recognize such a right for spouses. In Imamiyyah jurisprudence, there is a claimed consensus on excluding spouses from inheriting the right of retaliation. However, contrary to Imamiyyah jurists, many Sunni scholars argue that spouses, like other heirs, should inherit the right of retaliation equally. This study employs a descriptive-analytical and comparative approach. It concludes that the primary basis for the Imamiyyah position is Sheikh Tūsī's consensus, which is deemed unreliable due to the inherent weakness of transmitted consensus. Additionally, arguments such as the healing of the guardian's heart (tashaffī walī al-dam) are found to be insufficiently substantiated. Considering the rule of "retaliation is bound to blood money" (al-qisᾱs malzūm al-dīyah), the absence of explicit narrations excluding spouses, and linguistic evidence, the research adheres to general principles and concludes that the exclusion of spouses from the right of retaliation is unfounded. The study aims to propose an amendment to Article 351 of the Islamic Penal Code.

In this research, the gender approach of jurisprudence and law in the field of differential criminal proceedings in crimes against chastity has been investigated with a descriptive-analytical method. Iranian criminal law inspired by the rulings and teachings of penal jurisprudence in crimes against chastity, not directly based on gender-oriented ideas, but in general based on the principle of covering up guilt, prohibiting the spread of prostitution and mitigation, has established a distinct procedure that has effects And there are many challenges. The criminal policy of proceedings in crimes against chastity is based on the general rule of prohibition of prosecution and investigation and the direct jurisdiction of the court, along with the non-interference of the prosecutor's office and judicial officers in the matter of discovery, prosecution and investigation, preventing the confession of the perpetrator and limiting the denial of the accused by not investigating the affairs. Concealing the case and resorting to scientific evidence and strictness in proving the crime by establishing a privileged Sharia evidence system, as well as creating some restrictions on access to documents, papers and the contents of the case and prohibiting the presence of non-governmental organizations supporting the rights of women victims and serving the indictment in person. It can be concluded that in crimes against chastity, the protection of the honor and dignity of the perpetrators of the crime and the principle of victimization is preferable to any criminal policy that is implemented in comparison to other crimes.

Today, the concept of tourism is considered from many aspects such as jurisprudence, law, economics and sociology. This article studies the first and second rulings on tourism from the jurisprudence perspective and the permissibility or impermissibility of accepting non-Muslim tourism in Muslim societies, and the evidence of the obligation to adhere to covenants with infidels and the ruling on tourism by Muslim and non-Muslim women. Tourism in the natural state is permissible and due to the requirements of time and place it ends up being desirable or obligatory according to its propaganda and guidance effects. Receiving non-Muslim tourists under the auspices of Islamic countries will be permissible and required in jurisprudence in some cases, and Muslim women's tourism takes place within an Islamic framework with its beneficial effects, and women's tourism is not subject to evidence of prohibition.

The phenomenon of cyberbullying, as one of the emerging crimes in cyberspace, has created numerous challenges in the legal and social systems of various countries, especially Iran. This behavior, which is carried out through digital tools such as social networks, messengers, and websites, has significant negative effects on the mental and social health of individuals. In societies whose legal system is based on Islamic jurisprudence, such as Iran, it is essential to examine this phenomenon from a jurisprudential perspective and to adapt it to existing laws. Islamic jurisprudence, emphasizing the principles of morality, justice, and the preservation of human dignity, provides solid foundations for combating this phenomenon. Among the relevant principles are the sanctity of harassment, the need to preserve privacy, and the prohibition of defamation and insult. This article analyzes the jurisprudential and legal challenges in combating cyberbullying by utilizing jurisprudential sources and adapting them to Iranian laws. Although Iranian laws, such as the Computer Crimes Law and the Islamic Penal Code, have provided frameworks for combating cyberbullying-related behaviors, problems such as the lack of a comprehensive definition and implementation gaps have limited the effectiveness of these laws. This study, by conducting a comparative study of the laws of Arab and Western countries, provides suggestions for developing more comprehensive and effective laws in Iran. The ultimate goal of this research is to create harmony between jurisprudential principles and contemporary legal requirements to protect the rights of victims in cyberspace.

The dissolution of a company can result in its liquidation, or it may occur without liquidation. The relationship between dissolution and liquidation is one of general and specific absoluteness. On the other hand, the ruling of suspension can be due to liquidation, but not all liquidations arise from bankruptcy; hence, the relationship between bankruptcy and the liquidation of commercial companies is also one of general and specific absoluteness. Liquidation holds significant importance in legal systems. The method of liquidation plays a critical role in safeguarding the rights of creditors and commercial companies. When multiple creditors are involved, and the debtor's assets are insufficient to cover their debts, issues arise regarding the method of claim settlement. Under such circumstances, each creditor will strive to recover their claim before others. This competition among creditors can lead to the fragmentation of the company's assets, reducing their value for all creditors. Therefore, the collective interests of creditors require that the acquisition of the debtor's assets be conducted systematically through bankruptcy proceedings. In principle, individuals can organize their own bankruptcy systems; for instance, a debtor may stipulate the consequences of non-payment of debt within a loan agreement. However, drafting such contracts can be challenging, particularly as the debtor’s assets and creditors may increase over time. Furthermore, empirical evidence, such as the fact that companies rarely draft such agreements and that nearly all countries have at least a basic statutory bankruptcy framework, suggests that reliance on a "private" solution is practically infeasible. In other words, governments universally recognize the necessity of establishing a "functional" bankruptcy system that parties can resort to in the absence of specific arrangements.

Alimony (nafaqa) is one of the most important financial institutions in Iranian family law, rooted in the principles of Islamic jurisprudence (Imamiyya) and codified in civil law. It plays a crucial role in meeting the material and emotional needs of womenin marital life. This article aims to analyze the functions of alimony in Iran’s legal system and compare it with other countries. Initially, the theoretical foundations and economic and social functions of alimony are explored. The article then addressesthe legal and practical challenges of implementing alimony in Iran, such as the lengthy judicial process, complexities in determining the amount of alimony, and evasion of payment by some husbands. Moreover, a comparative analysis of alimony in Iranian law with that of other countries, especially Islamic and European countries, highlights both differences and similarities in this legal institution. In the concluding section, the article offers legal and practical suggestions to improve the alimony system and reduce family disputes. These recommendations include legal reforms for clearer determination of alimony, strengthening oversight over the enforcement of alimony judgments, and raising social and cultural awareness regarding the significance of alimony in strengthening the family unit. The findings indicate that alimony, beyond being a financial obligation, serves as a supportive tool that enhances marital relationships and reinforces the family structure within society.

The issue of whether it is possible to commit the crime of murder by act of omission is a topic of discussion in Islamic penal jurisprudence, which has been concerned by jurists for a long time; that is, whether the crime of murder may be realized in certain circumstances by act of omission. This research uses the descriptive-analytical method to study the issue. The majority of Islamic jurists (Mᾱlkῑs, Shᾱfi'ῑs, Hanbalῑs, Imᾱmῑs, Zaidῑs, and Zᾱhirῑs), believe that it is possible to commit the crime of murder both through affirmative action and act of omission. In Hanafῑ school, Abu Yusuf and Muhammad believe that this type of murder is among the murders caused by reason; however, Abu Hanῑfa believes that the destruction of a human being by act of omission is not basically murder and is not liable to indemnification (ḍimān). Those who doubt the validity of act of omission as a material element of the crime of murder, state that act of omission and refusal are non-existent which cannot cause existence. Based on the findings of this research and available jurisprudential evidence, the belief that the crime of murder by omission is fulfilled in the case of intent to commit murder and the existence of a religious obligation indicating the performance of a duty/obligation and the abstained ability to perform the deed, are more consistent with the spirit of Shari'a, which among the existing views, this opinion seems preferable. Accordingly, if a person has a Shar'i/legal or contractual obligation, his refusal to fulfill this obligation is not just a pure act of omission, but rather, it is a type of breaching contract, that itself manifests as an act. In other words, omission of a pure act itself does not create criminal responsibility, and what is seen objectively is the human actions that have the form of an action. However, it is important to consider the subtle distinnction between abstaining and violating in this context.

From the perspective jurisprudence of Islamic religions and the Written Law of Iran, defendant’s oath is decisive for litigation, just like confession and adequate evidence. However, in many cases, after the oath is taken and a final verdict is issued, the opposing side requests a resumption of the trial, alleging that the oath was false. While the Iranian Civil Procedure Law allows for the reopening of final judgments under certain circumstances, this article employs an analytical-descriptive approach, drawing upon authoritative sources from jurisprudence of Islamic religions and Iranian law, to delves into the nature of termination in litigation based on oaths and examines the possibility of reopening a case based on a false oath. The central question of this article is whether, under Iranian Islamic jurisprudence and law, a claim of a false oath can be considered a valid ground for reopening a case (the proceedings). The findings of this research show that Islamic jurists unanimously agree that according to Shari'ah once a verdict is finalized based on the oath of one of the parties, retrial is impermissible and will not be entertained. From a legal standpoint, while some jurists, influenced by Article 595 of the new French Civil Procedure Code, argue that a final verdict can be reopened if the oath is proven false, false oath is not recognized as a legitimate ground for reopening a case. The presented evidence shows that, according to legal principles, resumption of proceedings under in the mentioned circumstances is also rejected.

Forced adultery is one of the crimes that lead to the violation of public modesty and leaves destructive effects on the psyche and health of the victim of this crime. The destructive consequences of this crime are so numerous and unfortunate that the laws have determined severe punishments for it. Criminalization of adultery has been done in our legal laws due to the influence of Islamic jurisprudence. The severity of the reaction to this crime in the laws shows the importance of preventing it. Undoubtedly, it is very important to take preventive measures against rape. These measures can often be realized in two ways: 1. Through criminal solutions, 2. Through social work and action measures. This research is written by examining and comparing researches and other scientific achievements with a descriptive-analytical method, and it tries to identify the most important components of the prevention of forced adultery in the penal policy of Islam and Iran. This research has found that the prevention of forced adultery in Islamic criminal policy and jurisprudence, especially in Iran, has special criminological components that should always be paid attention to, including social and situational prevention, control of potential criminals, protection of criminals and crime targets, educational measures in the family and social environment, reduction of irritants, cultural and socialization measures, promotion of religious values and Islamic hijab, and police measures to prevent the occurrence of this crime of rape.

Violation of contractual obligations and damages caused by it is one of the most important issues that are discussed in the field of contract law. This violation can take various forms, including non-fulfillment of contractual obligations, delay in fulfilling contractual obligations, and delivery of defective goods. In legal systems such as the Islamic Republic of Iran, only material and moral damages directly caused to the injured party through breach of contract can be collected. The motivation and reason for choosing the present topic has been important in several ways. First, among the disputes related to contracts, the most disputes that arise are related to the compensation of moral damages, while Iran's legal system has not been properly updated in this area. Second, the complexity of relations. A contract in the current era has also caused several models to be accepted in the field of moral compensation. In Iran's legal systems, forcing the obligee to fulfill his obligations is intended in the first place, and compensation is only if the obligee cannot or does not have the will to fulfill his obligations. It seems that according to the two main bases of contractual liability, i.e., the right to confront, according to the provisions of verse 194 of Surah Al-Baqarah and Article 221 of the Civil Code, the provisions of the agreement of the parties in determining the scope of contractual liability, damages due to breach of contract can be claimed in the following forms. First, the benefits that the parties expect to obtain through the execution of the contract in a conventional and reasonable manner, as required by the right of reciprocity. Secondly, the costs incurred as a result of relying on the execution of the contract, as required by the law of reciprocity and that the breacher of the contract knew that by not executing the contract, the costs incurred by the other party relying on the execution of the contract would be useless and wasted. . In addition, here some kind of implicit condition can also be invoked.

In the subject law of Iran, criminal investigations are mainly focused on the two main axes of understanding criminal behavior and identifying factors related to crime. Conceptually, there is no fundamental difference between these two terms, the term "criminology" and "criminology". But some sources may make a subtle difference between the two terms, which usually refers to a difference in approach. Hence, criminology may examine the nature of crime, the purposes of punishment, and the relationship between crime and society. But criminology may be focused on examining the causes of crime, the effectiveness of punishments, and the design of prevention and correction programs. Considering this difference, the current research aims to analyze the criminal knowledge law of the reduction of penal imprisonment approved in 2019 with a descriptive-analytical method in order to investigate the benefits of applying this law. It should be stated that the Law on Reducing Ta'ziri Imprisonment, approved in 2019, with the aim of reducing the criminal population and adopting alternative approaches to imprisonment, created significant changes in Iran's criminal system. However, some critics have considered this law as having many challenges due to reasons such as ignoring the principle of proportionality of crime and punishment, incomplete analysis of the causes of crime, implementation challenges, violation of victims' rights. As a result, the criminological evaluation of the law on reducing the punishment of penal servitude approved in 2019 shows that although this law pursues innovations and positive goals, it also faces criminological challenges and dilemmas in terms of substance and form. Therefore, substantive criminology issues and challenges can be seen in the inflation of laws, contradictions with legal articles, and the lack of predicting the reduction of punishment in some crimes. It is important to mention that the mere use of profit-seeking criminology is not sufficient for the victims; Therefore, it is necessary to have a thorough opinion and a deep attitude in determining, converting, changing and suspending in order to be more effective, while maintaining this law by applying reforms and empowering strategies to solve the existing problems in the form

Financial administrative corruption is one of the most common forms of corruption, which has devastating consequences in various personal and social spheres. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to examine the most important preventive policies against administrative corruption in Islamic jurisprudence, the Law on Promotion of Administrative Health and the Merida Convention. This article is comparative and descriptive. Materials and data are also qualitative and data collection was used to collect materials and data. The findings showed that requirements such as the formation of special procedures and institutions for the development of national preventive measures, private sector preventive measures, measures related to public prevention and other important sectors such as financial and judicial institutions and money laundering prevention measures are considered. All three have been placed, with the difference that in the Merida Convention, while having a participatory perspective, the laws have a suitable executive guarantee. As a result, both Iran's laws and the Merida Convention are silent on the act of changing the nature, origin, and source of the lawsuit resulting from the crime of corruption, which has caused preventive policies to be calculated in a coherent and appropriate manner.

One of the most effective people in the criminal process are the judicial officers who arrest the accused in the process of discovering the crime. The criminal laws governing the phase under consideration generally require the observance of some defense rights of the accused (rights of the accused) in the proceedings. The answer to the degree of compliance of the governing principles with international standards and its level in the laws of Iran, England and America forms the purpose of the article. The method of collecting information and data is provided in a library and document manner and from various sources. Information is analyzed in an argumentative, rational and inferential way. The findings showed that the basic and normal laws of the three countries of Iran, England and America refer to the studied principles; Except that the United States Constitution has silenced the presumption of innocence and Iran's common law has limited the principle of access to a lawyer. Also, by not specifying the period under observation in American law and the need to introduce the accused to the judicial authority quickly and without undue delay, this country has taken a step forward in respect of the rights and freedoms of the accused. The results show that keeping under observation is an action against the principle of respecting people's freedoms and is an exception. The principles and rules of proceedings, which require the observance of certain defense rights in the stage under consideration, make the transition from this stage easy and minimize the material and moral damages of the accused and the suspect. Each of the principles governing the stage under consideration is necessary and binding on each other, and the dependence between them prevents law enforcers from failing to implement these principles and the secondary rights recognized at this stage.

Universities are among the educational and training centers in every country, focusing on higher and specialized education as well as research in the fields of science and technology. Various scholars and schools of thought have addressed the topic of the goals and functions of universities. Some have concentrated on the domain of education, others on research, and some on vocational training and entrepreneurship, among other areas. The aim of this research is to determine the goals and functions of higher education based on an Islamic approach from the perspective of jurisprudence, utilizing Islamic sources (with an emphasis on the ijtihad method) to formulate important and applicable rules in this regard. This paper discusses critical and practical jurisprudential rules for establishing the goals of higher education, such as the necessity of aligning education with spiritual growth, the need to address the requirements of Muslims, and the principle of negating any subjugation. The results indicate that higher education, from an Islamic viewpoint, should pursue goals such as: teaching Islamic teachings, promoting education and training in society (virtue-centered approach), focusing on spiritual purification and integrating development with higher education, producing knowledge (with emphasis on humanities and applied sciences), providing practical sciences to meet the needs of Muslims, and engaging in education and research aimed at maintaining independence and self-sufficiency.

In the realm of social fiqh, discussions regarding public order and security, and particularly the deprivation of social security and actions such as Muhāribah, which involve intimidating behaviors accompanied by the display and use of weaponry, are among the serious issues that have been met with the most arduous punishments in criminal jurisprudence, as explicitly addressed in the Holy Quran. Alongside this, the issue of assassination and targeted killings is also considered in criminal jurisprudence due to its conceptual and legal affinity with the discussions of Muhāribah. It is necessary that such issues be regularly reexamined and scrutinized in a comprehensive view of social and state fiqh. The present article addresses the topics related to assassination and muhāribah, examining their characteristics through a descriptive-analytical method utilizing library resources.

In accordance with the recognition of international charters and most modern constitutions, the right to ownership and its transfer can be defined as one of the natural and fundamental human rights, granting citizens the right to own and dispose of property, as well as to transfer it, without conflict between their individual right to own property on one hand and the state's right to acquire ownership on the other. This issue gradually sets the groundwork for the transfer of ownership of immovable property. Therefore, the present article, employing a descriptive-analytical research method and reviewing legal documents, aims to address the question of what similarities and differences exist in the nature of the means of transferring ownership of immovable property in Islamic jurisprudence, Iranian law, and U.S. law. The findings of the research indicate that, firstly, there are significant similarities regarding the registration of transactions involving immovable property in Islamic jurisprudence, Iranian law, and U.S. law. These similarities can be viewed from two perspectives: on one hand, all three legal systems emphasize and focus on the registration of transactions, including those involving immovable property; on the other hand, sale is considered one of the means of transferring ownership of immovable property in all three systems. However, in Islamic law, the failure to document a transaction does not invalidate the legal action. Rather, in accordance with verse 282 of Surah Al-Baqarah, it can be proven through testimony and confession. Secondly, although Iranian law, following Imamiyyah jurisprudence, considers the conclusion of a sale contract as a means of transferring ownership of immovable property, various factors, including the wording of specific articles—particularly Article 48 of the Registration Act—have prevented the legislator's full intent from being realized. In practice, the transfer of real estate has become widespread through the use of informal documents known as "commitment letters" and "sale agreements" in real estate agencies.

For a long time, peace and peaceful relations are the most important way to resolve conflicts between countries. The Hague Peace Conferences of 1899 and 1907, the first example of the effort of the international community that has changed the mechanisms of organizations for the peaceful resolution of disputes. The Islamic world is currently facing the phenomenon of Islamophobia, especially in the Western world, which causes the pure foundations of Islam to remain out of sight in many issues, including issues of Islamic jurisprudence. This highlights the necessity of analyzing the peaceful resolution of the conflict from the perspective of Islamic teachings and international law by using the analytical-descriptive method. According to the results of the upcoming research, negotiation is one of the most important peaceful ways to resolve disputes, which has a fixed origin in the Quran and Sunnah .In addition, its rules in jurisprudence are more compatible with modern principles and have been successfully applied to resolve some crises peacefully. The term mediation in Islamic jurisprudence is closely related to the concept of reconciliation. Finally, the analysis of the charters of the Prophetic era shows that the Holy Prophet (PBUH) was a pioneer in the development of theories on how to resolve disputes that are also present in modern theories. Islam has addressed the issue of peaceful resolution of disputes before international law

The desire for freedom has a history as long as human civilization itself. From the very beginning of creation and the emergence of the world, humans have sought freedom. In the course of their demands, the only factors limiting freedom have been the interests of other individuals, and gradually, societies and political systems. Essentially, laws have been enacted to limit freedoms. The concept of individual and group freedoms, and the examination of their boundaries, is as ancient as human history, yet remains novel and evolving. This is because, with the emergence of different political systems, the concept of freedom has been shaped by the perspectives and frameworks of each system, and its types and boundaries have changed accordingly based on the views of the policymakers of each system. Regardless of certain religious, ethnic, or cultural viewpoints, some types of freedoms, according to human rights beliefs, are considered fundamental and essential freedoms. However, this human rights belief, which has been repeatedly stated in various declarations and accepted by many countries, is often violated by the same countries. The reason for these violations undoubtedly goes beyond purely political interests, as the concept of freedom is in balance with concepts such as security, economy, and culture. Additionally, in systems where religion plays a dominant role and intervenes in all matters of society, the concept of freedom is only acceptable within the confines of religious prohibitions. In this context, in a religious society like Iran, it is first necessary to determine the permissible scope of freedom violations. In this process, the limitations on freedoms must also be taken into account. Subsequently, the unlawful violations of freedoms in the Iranian criminal system must be scrutinized, and the cases of freedom restrictions imposed by the government in Iran should be identified. No matter how many instances exist, they all have one major and essential, yet very vague, reason to justify the violation or limitation of freedom: the broad concept of security and the notion of being contrary to the interests of society and Islam. The violation of individual and group freedoms is significant at the stages of legislation, the judicial process, execution, and even in the process of prevention. The discussion also extends to the bylaws, the constitution, and the violation of the perceived rights within these laws.