The Scope of Efficiency of the Juridical Rule of No Harm

In spite of the consensus among Shii and Sunni jurists on the generalities and grounds of the rule of no harm from which the Article 40 of the Constitution has been taken, there are so many ambiguities about the scope of its efficiency that the legislator and the executor of the laws may be bewildered. The reason behind such ambiguities is that there are many opinions about the content of the rule, and many theoretical discussions about the rule itself in the juridical works.To use this legal principle and important juridical rule more accurately and more completely in legislation, provide solutions for new legal and juridical problems as much as possible, show the efficiency of the jurisprudenc of the Household (PBUT), and prevent misuses which may be made of it, while avoiding falling in long theoretical discussions, the present article tries to analyze the exact limits of the application of this rule according to various opinions as much as the scope of the article allows. The author has tried to provide a new view to the rule, reveal its efficiency, and prevent unjustified uses made of it.Efficiency or inefficiency of the rule of no harm in negation of harmful judgments, proof of new judgments to ward off harms, conflict between laws when executed in warding off harms and finally in the case of conflict between harms according to each one of the existing opinionsin interpretation of this rule are problems the present writing seeks to provide solutions for them.