Feasibility of Recognizing Human Right to Self by Rule of Rule (Dominion)

One of the indisputable and important rules of jurisprudence is the rule of Domination. According to this rule, man has dominion over his property and, consequently, the right to possess. The issue that has been raised in this regard and has caused controversy among jurists as well as jurists is the possibility of recognizing the human right to the body based on the rule of Domination. The specific question in this regard is whether the human right to one's body can be justified on the basis of the rule of Domination or whether another approach should be sought? The results of the analysis of this issue in the present paper are that the inference of kingship over the organs of the body, by analogy with the priority of human kingship over rubbing, does not seem correct because our kingship over property is not absolute so that we can By analogy of priority, let us conclude that we have dominion over the organs of the body. Also, the delegation of human affairs to him can not be considered as a reason for man's dominion over his body parts, because the delegation of human affairs to him is only in matters not related to body (blood) and includes political and social issues. It does not enter into the circle of sensitive issues in which the Shari'a procedure is based on excessive precaution. On the contrary, reliance on the rule and theory of guardianship seems to be a better explanation of the human right to his body.