Determinacy or Optionality of the Right to Qiṣāṣ (Nemesis)

When an intentional crime against physical integrity is at issue, the question arises as to whether the right to Qiṣāṣ (nemesis) is a determinate right for the victim or his/her family or they have also a right to Diyah (blood money) and the option to choose one of them according to the Iran Islamic Penal Code and what Fiqh arguments are available for the issue. After the Islamic Revolution, legislator generally followed the popular view of Imami Fiqh scholars i.e. the right to Qiṣāṣ (nemesis) is a determinate right for the victim or his/her family and the right to Diyah (blood money) is not a right alongside the right to Qiṣāṣ (nemesis) although it is permitted on the basis of the criminal's consent. But when the enforcement of the right to Qiṣāṣ (nemesis) is conditioned to the payment of surplus of the Diyah (blood money) like Qiṣāṣ of a man for a woman, the legislator has not had a fixed position. This article is trying to determine the determinacy or optionality of the right to Qiṣāṣ and the evolution of legislative policy with an approach to the Fiqh scholar's opinions and their evidence.