نشریه دین و قانون
سال هفتم شماره 26 (زمستان 1398)

In Islamic fiqh[1], there are diverse views about the compulsory guardianship regarding the child marriage. Some foqaha[2] have allowed child marriage on the condition that it is not counted as sexual abuse. Some others have allowed it on the condition of expediency. Some contemporary jurists have opposed the latter view and have called for the prevention of child marriage. They believe that child marriage is corrupting, against children’s rights and it cannot be justified as their expediency. Suggesting that in our time no advantage or usefulness can be assumed in child marriage, the present article examines and proves the foundations of the prohibition of child marriage.

Value-added tax (VAT), nowadays, is implemented, assessed, and collected in a large number of countries, and the implementation system of this type of tax in developed countries is such that transactions take place as much as possible online, and receiving tax and refunding the excess are done on the spot. In Iranian Taxation System, however, the delay of payments of the parties is one of the important issues wherein the law has used the hindering element of paying a fixed percentage as compensation to solve the problem, by which the important ambiguity or suspicion that these damages can be example of usury and akl-e bel-batil[1] is raised. On the one hand, the legislative parlance of the Islamic Republic of Iran considers taxes and their damages as debt, and according to the fiqhi principles, the suspicion of these debts as usury in compensating the damages of tax laws is seriously created. On the other hand, compensation of tax losses at a fixed rate often leads to the excess payment or receipt in favor of one of the parties, and this leads to akl-e bel-batil and the accumulation of invalid property as well as the expansion of the debts of individuals and National Tax Administration. Using various fiqhi-economic techniques, the present study believes the suspicion of usury of these damages and the suspicion of akl-e bel-batil of the property, and suggests that the above-mentioned excess payments or receipts mean gharar[2].

In this article, an attempt has been made to critique and analyze one of the innovations of the new Family Protection Law approved in 2012. Undoubtedly, the establishment of family counseling centers is a valuable action, an admirable step that the legislator has created with the help of the Judiciary to strengthen the foundations of the family and prevent the increase of family disputes and divorce, in addition to helping the judge to find out the truth and try to establish peace and reconciliation between couples. Criticism and understanding of the functioning of this institution takes place in the context of a comprehensive understanding of family lawsuits. In this article, we try to identify and explain the legal status of counseling centers, with an analytical-critical look at the conflict between the duties of these centers and the inherent duties of the judiciary, as well as the limits of jurisdiction and the duty of the court to follow the centers and finally explain the deficiencies of the law and we will provide the necessary suggestions.

The most important achievement of constitutionalism in Iran was the formation of the National Assembly. One of the common terms being applied to the members of parliament from the beginning of the establishment of this institution and even before it, was the term ‘vakil’[1]. In Shiite fiqh, ‘vekalat’[2] had its own effects and rules, and at first glance indicated a limited bilateral relationship in private law. This use led to proposing the theory of the similarity of the parliamentary representation institution with fiqhi (jurisprudential) representation. By defining the concept of vekalat in the West and describing the intellectual and public atmosphere of the formation of the first National Assembly, this article aims to determine if one can with certainty accept the existence of the theory of similarity of fiqhi vekalat (jurisprudential advocacy) with parliamentary representation as a common theory in the era of the formation of the first parliament. According to the findings of this article, the theory of similarity at the time of the formation of the parliament did not have a serious supporter, and ignoring the western origin of this term and neglecting historical events has led to the proposal as a common theory. This result has been obtained by using the library method and examining the actions and writings of the main currents at the beginning of the constitution, consisting of intellectuals and religious scholars, members of parliament and finally the general people.

Taxes seem to be the twin of human social life and the formation of governments. Initially, this institution was simple, limited and local, and over time, it has evolved and, of course, it has always had its ups and downs. The present article seeks to present a new idea called takaful tax[1] based on which some questions are posed as follows: 1. Is coining such a term; i.e., takaful correct? 2. Is it compatible with the Islamic finance? 3. Is it in line with the tax culture of Iranian society? 4. Can a close example be found in the conventional tax system? 5. In case of the existence of a close institution such as local tax, based on the criteria of good taxes and the characteristics of Islamic financial obligations, what is the position of takaful tax in comparison with it? and finally 6. Isn't it time to assess the feasibility of and paving the ground for presenting a suitable plan or bill for a local Islamic-Iranian institution? While examining the concepts of taxation, the present study reviews the characteristics of Islamic financial obligations and good tax. Moreover, this study aims at introducing takaful tax as a local Islamic-Iranian institution, attracting brokers and legislators to this type of tax, and providing a suitable plan and bill for this type of tax.

The issue of law is an issue that has been increasingly important in the   scientific community since the beginning of constitutionalism in Iran and in scientific societies, its importance has increased day by day. In the meantime, the scholars of the constitutional era, who were charge of the intellectual and religious authority of the society, entered into this issue. Gradually, two currents formed among the jurists, some of whom rejected the initial confirmation and others who adhered to their word. Both groups agreed that the ruling on the Constitution should be religious in nature. Sheikh Fazlullah Nouri, a prominent scholar and jurist in Tehran, was one of those who opposed the law[1] and the National Consultative Assembly, stipulating the condition of legitimacy for the proper course of affairs. The present article is based on the study of library documents and resources and with a descriptive-analytical approach seeks to answer the question that; according to Sheikh Fazlullah Nouri, what are the evidences regarding the non-inclusion of the sharia ruling on illegitimate constitutional concepts? Consequently, addressing the answer will require examining the angles of the case in terms of various jurisprudential and legal views and opinions.