نشریه دانش حقوق عمومی
سال هفتم شماره 4 (پیاپی 22، زمستان 1397)

In previous and current Islamic Penal Code, legislator has two different approaches about enforcement of retaliation in cases of difference blood money. It originates well-known jurist opinion (Fatwa) and non-well known jurist opinion that are exist about enforcement of retaliation. According to well-known jurist opinion and basis of article 258 Islamic Penal Code Act 70, difference blood money is paid before retaliation and for changing retaliation to blood money, criminal consents payment of blood money. However, according to non-well-known jurist opinion and criteria article 44 law of Hodod and Retaliation Act 61 and also article 360 Islamic Penal Code Act 92, two rights, enforcement of retaliation that difference blood money is paid before retaliation and to take blood money, exist in cases of difference blood money. So, it is necessity that practical precedent of Council of Guardian reviewed, as authority of conformity and contradiction Shariah criteria rev, to recognize basis not accepting well-known jurist opinion about enforcement of retaliation in cases difference blood money. Therefore, in this research through a descriptive-analytic method and refer to theories of jurists of Council of Guardian, changing of juristic opinion shows that it uses accessible jurisprudential approaches to make more efficient jurisprudence as law.

The eleventh government's approach in presenting the bill of the Sixth Development Plan and the reaction of parliamentarians to it has become a factor for more attention by lawyers to the legal nature of development programs and a milestone in reviewing the legal and procedural bases of the laws of the economic, social and cultural development programs. Given the subject matter of the development program bills, which include mid-term and long-term programs in a variety of topics such as macroeconomics, administrative system, agricultural system, public education, social insurance, and so on, the preparation and adoption of these Bills require the coordination of the Powers in carrying out their duties in this area. According to the current procedure, the development plan should be in accordance with the policies that the leader ratifies after consulting with the Nation's Exigency Council. Subsequently, the content of the bill is prepared and regulated by the government focused with the country's management and planning organization. In the end, the legislature is responsible for reviewing the bill and approving it. In this paper, it was attempted to investigate the disagreement between the government and parliament during the approval of the sixth development plan as a legal case with the procedural-analytical method, and regarded with an analytical approach to the reasons raised by members of the parliament as the plaintiff and records of the governors as the defendant as a legal case,and was reflectedon the question that how the process of preparing and approving the bill on the sixth development plan from the legal point of view would be evaluated? Analyzing procedurally the challenges occurred and paying attention to the views of the supporters and opponents, and the government's perception of programming and accounting in legal documents and resources, suggests that, although the government's action has contrasted the current procedure, but the existing capacities in Principles 43, 126 and 134 of the Constitution, Provides legal justification for government actions.

This study tries to get a conclusion impartially with the necessary exactitude and emphasis on judicial obligatory aspects from the rules approved by the legislative power between the government bill of purchasing and land acquisition way in1979 and the guardian council opinion and planning & budget act in1972.This subject is approved by guardian council regarding to the alternative No:9 from the article No:50 in Planning& Budget Act of Iran approved in1972 mentioned the government duty unique to the sources in occupation of a land outside the city limits, but governmental bill of purchasing, land acquisition and real estate way for public, development and military programs of government approved in1979 expands the legal obligation publicly in immovables in or out of the city limit and absolutely in the sources and building site value We want to prove, absolute assumption of the guardian council opinion with existent condition is canceled in the above text via analytic method, so arguing the opinions of civil-public absolute assumption of the guardian council opinion is not convenient. Concerning the mentioned matters, knowing the retrospective effect of the governmental bill with embittering effects on judicial, political and economic fields has the legal objection.

Non-Muslim citizens of the Islamic Republic of Iran, in terms of being believer or not in one of the Abrahamic Religions, divided into People of the Book (Ahl al-Kitāb) and People of no Book. Shia jurisprudents have had different aspects as to the legal status of People of no Book. Because of the Islamic content of Iranian laws and the disagreements in the issue of Rights of the People of no Book, this issue needs a special investigation. Fourteenth Article of the Iranian Constitution as the most relevant article to this issue presents legal Interaction manner with this category of People of no Book. This study aims to explain the aspects of people of no Book's human rights and the behavior along with good morality and Islamic justice with them by choosing the view of "People of no Book are not hostile infidel (Harbi)" and by scrutiny of the Fourteenth Article. Also, with relying on Iranian laws and governmental decree of Imam Khomeini, it has been tried to clear legal status of People of no Book who conspire and act against Islam and Islamic Republic of Iran.

Public law knowledge seeks to protect public interests. One of the most important examples of public interests is public property and the protection of this national capital. In many legal systems for the maintenance of public property, they impose a ban on the referral of disputes related to it to arbitration. The purpose of this rule is to prevent of the decision making about public property in non-judicial procedures such as arbitration. This rule has been accepted relatively in Principle 139 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the sense that the referral of these disputes to arbitration is possible by the approval of the government or the Islamic Consultative Assembly. Due to ambiguity in writing and lack of clarity of basis for writers, this principle has encountered difficulties during the implementation phase. What does the legislator mean by "public and government property" and "important domestic matters" in this Principle and where is the competence of the government and the parliament in this matter? in understanding this principle is "public property" and not "public persons" and that the jurisdiction of the Islamic Consultative Assembly is exclusive to the "national property" only in the important internal affairs

Due to the high importance of anticipating a competence in the legal system, paying attention to special principles in its designation and realization is also of extra importance. The judicial system of Iran besides various administrative and executive competences has anticipated the judicial competence for the head of judiciary. The purpose of this paper, while clarifying the orientation of the legislator in expressing the judicial competence of the head of judiciary is to state the effects of such competence in accordance with the Act on the Organization and Procedure of the Administrative Justice Court. The results indicate that not only the orientation of the aforesaid law doesn’t pave the way for such an issue, but also it is inconsistent with the principles and legal rules. Besides, the procedure anticipated for the emergence of judicial competence of the head of judiciary contradicts with judicial principles like res judicata or claim preclusion and independence of judges. This is also disharmonic with judicial interests due to the vast amount of judicial files in the Judiciary.