فصلنامه مطالعات حقوقی
سال پانزدهم شماره 3 (پاییز 1402)

The codification of contractual laws necessitates that a contract falls within the protective framework of either definite or indefinite contracts. It is crucial to ascertain the type of the contract based on both evident and latent aspects. A significant matter within the realm of contract law, closely linked to delineating the rights and extent of obligations of the involved parties, is contract description. This issue arises when the parties, either due to unfamiliarity with the contractual system or for various legitimate or illegitimate reasons, select an incorrect title for their contract or enter into a contract with no explicit terms. Consequently, the judge may either deem the parties' choice satisfactory or encounter uncertainties in determining the contract, potentially resulting in deviations in contractual effects. In contemporary times, novel legal relationships emerge among individuals, which necessitates a careful examination to determine the appropriate contractual classification. Consequently, it becomes imperative for the court to devote sufficient attention to the contract description to accurately ascertain and declare the extent of contractual obligations. The purpose of this research is to effectively assess the true nature of the contract by employing specific criteria and legal tools. The article seeks to address the following questions: What role does the judge play in determining the apparent title of the contract? Can the judge accurately describe the contract type without objection from either party, and in what legal contexts does contract description arise? Is the practice of contract description recognized in the legislation of other countries and Islamic jurisprudence? Furthermore, what criteria should be considered to provide a comprehensive description of the contract title? The author of the present work believes that when describing a contract, the judge should not be bound solely by the apparent title of the contract. Instead, the judge should discern the true nature of the contract during the legal proceedings and attribute its effects accordingly to the legal relationship between the contracting parties. Through the current research, which incorporates the viewpoints of Imamiyya jurists, as well as jurists from foreign and domestic jurisdictions, and employs a descriptive-analytical approach, the following conclusions have been drawn:Contract description involves uncovering the underlying essence of contracts by considering the parties' genuine intentions and prevailing customs. In the realm of contract law, the concept of contract description emerges when parties make errors in naming the contract or assign it a misleading title for various reasons. In such cases, the judge should not merely rely on the explicit language of the contract and consider themselves absolved of responsibility. It is insufficient to act solely in accordance with the apparent intentions of the parties. Instead, when dealing with such contracts, the judge must look beyond the surface-level words and uncover the true title or nature of the contract. The identification of the legal nature of contracts and its application to the legal forms of contracts is a widely accepted and justifiable practice in legal systems worldwide. Nowadays, in international legal documents, there is a prevailing trend to prioritize the true substance of the contract over its apparent form. However, this principle holds true unless the hidden contract is tainted by fraud and deception. In such cases, while the contract may be valid between the parties, it cannot be invoked against third parties. The prevention of formalization in contracts holds great importance for the judge, primarily to avoid falling into the traps of simulation and deviation from the true essence of the contract. Furthermore, determining the nature of mixed or ambiguous contracts is crucial, as it justifies the need for contract description and assists the judge in uncovering the applicable legal principles governing the contract. In cases where the parties have not specified a particular title for their contract, the judge bears a significantly more significant responsibility. Upon the occurrence of a dispute, the judge must first ascertain the type of legal relationship involved, as this forms the basis for rendering a judgment in the case. During the process of contract description, the judge possesses the authority to discern the title of the contract by employing various criteria. These criteria include considering the verbal statements of the contracting parties, giving weight to the true intentions of the parties, and taking into account the customs governing the relevant legal relationships. The language used in the contract plays a significant role in guiding the judge towards understanding the parties' actual intentions, particularly regarding the validity of the contract. However, it is important to note that the wording of the contract serves as a guiding principle for determining the type of legal relationship, rather than being the sole determinant for the inclusion or exclusion of specific contract language. Additionally, prevalent customs within the realm of contract formation, such as guarantees, can help resolve any ambiguities for the court regarding the primary effect of such contracts, aiding in determining their effects and legal implications.

Within jurisprudential texts and the Islamic Penal Code, the recuperation of certain injuries leads to a reduction in the corresponding blood money. Notably, the complete recovery from a spinal fracture, for instance, decreases the blood money from the total to one-tenth of its original value (Allameh Helli, 1420, 5/582 and Article 647 of the IPL). However, a notable limitation emerges: the scope of injuries subject to this reduction remains restricted, and a general rule regarding the influence of recovery on blood money quantity is absent. The core focus of this research is to explore the potential for extending the instances where recovery affects blood money amounts. The research aims to elucidate the position of Imamih jurisprudence and the Islamic Penal Code on this matter.

Research Questions:

 A pivotal inquiry arises concerning the blood money for unspecified injuries assuming recovery occurs. Does the fixed blood money also decrease for these cases upon recovery? Is the decision to reduce blood money exclusive to cases explicitly stipulated in Islamic jurisprudence or the penal code?

Theories:

 The penal code leaves this issue unaddressed, yielding two distinct viewpoints in jurisprudence. One perspective negates the generalization of recovery cases, while the other affirms its possibility. This article refrains from dogmatically endorsing either theory but instead evaluates the impact of recovery on blood money quantities based on fundamental texts concerning blood money and contextual reflection.

This study employs a library-based data collection method. The analysis and exposition follow a descriptive and analytical approach.

The author's contemplation of the potential influence of recovery on the blood money for injuries impacting individuals' physical well-being leads to the following

Amputation of Limbs and Extremities: Religious texts indicate that blood money for organs intends not to compensate harm but to rectify the gap resulting from limb loss. Consequently, blood money for amputations becomes inapplicable upon limb transplantation or repair. Compensation is contingent on expert consultation. Thus, the constraint on blood money does not hinder its effect on recovery.

Extinguishment of Interest:

 Stipulations by certain jurists on fixed compensation in cases of restored hearing and reason imply that if recovery of interest is feasible, the blood money reflects temporary rather than permanent extinguishment. For miraculous or unforeseen interest returns, the prescribed blood money remains unchanged.

Wounds: 

Recovery of head, face, grave, and scratch wounds doesn't impact fated blood money. The juridical titles governing these cases warrant fixed blood money, unaffected by recovery. Consultation with experts determines compensation if wounds heal.

Bone Damage:

 In cases of bone damage like fractures, crushing, and dislocations, recovery reduces blood money, reflecting the influence of recovery described in religious texts. However, scratches and bone-clearing wounds, where blood money corresponds to established titles, remain unaffected by recovery.

Skin Color Change:

 Skin color alteration fixes the blood money amount, and the subsequent return to the original color post-crime has no impact.

Natural gas and liquefied natural gas (LNG) are frequently traded through long-term take-or-pay contracts. These contractual arrangements, characterized by their extended duration and substantial investments in gas production, possess a unique nature in the energy industry. The execution of long-term contracts offers benefits for both sellers and buyers. On one hand, the sellers generate revenue from the obligations of receiving or paying, which serves to justify the investment in the high capital costs associated with gas production and transportation. On the other hand, buyers and customers attain a degree of supply security, safeguarding their energy needs over the contract's term.Despite the advantage of long-term planning that these contracts afford, it is challenging for parties to anticipate and predict all possible future conditions accurately. Consequently, the initial assumptions on which the contract was based may not remain immutable throughout its lifespan. The prolonged nature of these contracts renders them susceptible to unforeseen events or circumstances that were not envisioned at the time of contract formation. The longer the agreement, and the more exposed it is to geological, commercial, and political risks, the greater its vulnerability to external events.Among the components of the contract profoundly influenced by economic and market fluctuations, the contract price, especially concerning energy, particularly gas, stands out. Various events, ranging from political decisions to economic and market developments, can exert profound and potentially disruptive effects on the price of gas and LNG. Consequently, parties seek to manage the price risk through a variety of tools. Sometimes, they employ mechanisms external to the contract, such as storage and financial contracts. Alternatively, they may manage price risk by adopting strategies like price indexing based on competing energy sources. However, these solutions may not comprehensively address all unforeseen events. In response, "price review clauses" have been incorporated into gas sales contracts to introduce the necessary flexibility to adjust the contract price. These clauses serve as fundamental non-financial mechanisms for price management and support for the involved parties.Price review clauses empower the revision of the contract price when severe and unpredictable price fluctuations occur during the contract's duration. This mechanism allows the affected party to find a solution to compensate and adapt the price formula without compromising the sanctity of the contract. As there is no predetermined standard for setting price review clauses, their structure and functionality may differ from contract to contract. Therefore, a detailed examination of their provisions and an extraction of common concepts and principles governing their revisions become of paramount importance. Enhanced comprehension of these clauses benefits both the contracting parties and those engaged in the market, fostering greater knowledge and transparency in negotiations and reducing potential ambiguities and doubts, which, in turn, saves considerable time and financial resources for all parties involved, including arbitrators who are tasked with resolving any disputes.The primary research question that emerges is whether there is a genuine need to include price revision clauses despite the existence of hardship clauses in gas sales contracts. Are these two contractual provisions mere repetitions of each other, or do they serve distinct purposes?This research endeavors to analyze the characteristics of both hardship and price revision clauses separately, employing the library method to review relevant literature, documents, and case law. By doing so, the research seeks to paint a clear picture of these clauses for the contracting parties and those with a vested interest in this field. Armed with this knowledge, parties can draft more precise and comprehensive price review clauses, and arbitrators can effectively resolve disputes with a heightened sense of insight and understanding.An exploration of expert opinions in this field reveals that price review clauses are indeed independent of hardship clauses, possessing unique characteristics that set them apart from each other. While hardship clauses are established tools to compensate claimants facing economic hardship, they are concerned with mitigating the impact of changes on the parties' positions and allow for contract revision to alleviate the burden and costs borne by the injured party. Conversely, price revision clauses are specifically designed to ensure the equitable distribution of market profits between the buyer and seller. Arbitrators' primary focus in dealing with these clauses centers around maintaining competitiveness, facilitating fair profit sharing, and sustaining a harmonious and continuing contractual relationship between the parties involved. Although the inclusion of price revision clauses in gas sales contracts has experienced a decline, thanks to pricing models based on gas hubs and the prevalence of short-term contracts, they continue to hold significant importance in certain regions, especially in Asia, where long-term contracts remain subject to revisions.In conclusion, natural gas and LNG long-term contracts have become essential instruments in the energy industry, ensuring a secure supply for buyers and providing financing for high capital investments in production and transportation for sellers. However, the extended duration of these contracts renders them vulnerable to unforeseen economic, political, and market changes. The contract price, in particular, is profoundly influenced by these fluctuations, necessitating the inclusion of price review clauses in gas sales contracts to provide flexibility and adaptability. Although similar in some respects, hardship clauses and price revision clauses serve different purposes and are essential in addressing distinct aspects of the contractual relationship. As the energy market evolves and the dynamics of gas sales contracts continue to shift, a comprehensive understanding of these clauses becomes increasingly important for the contracting parties, market participants, and arbitrators alike. By fostering transparency and enhancing knowledge, parties can effectively manage risks, while arbitrators can make well-informed decisions when resolving disputes. Thus, this research contributes valuable insights to the field, promoting better-informed and more efficient gas sales contract negotiations and dispute resolution processes.

The television series "Money Heist" has become a popular cultural phenomenon with significant implications for society's perceptions of crime, criminal justice, and criminology. This study examines the dual function of cinema, which can contribute to the creation of criminal elements and motives while also playing a crucial role in addressing crimes and enhancing awareness among criminal justice agents and preventive measures. Using qualitative content analysis, this research focuses on chapters one and two of "Money Heist," selecting sequences relevant to the topic and summarizing key propositions after removing duplicates. The raw data for this analysis was derived from reviewing characters, items, dialogues, and themes within the series. "Money Heist" was produced in Spain in 2017 and directed by Alex Pina. The series revolves around a character known as the "Professor," who recruits experienced thieves with criminal convictions to execute an elaborate plan involving the Spanish National Mint. The thieves take hostages and print millions of euros, driven by their frustration with government injustice and perceived categorization as absolute good or absolute bad. Committing robbery is their lifestyle, and they revel in it, aiming to execute the most perfect heist in history. Through an examination of the criminal identity of the robbers and the inspector, this study draws on critical and radical criminology approaches, including labeling theories, conflict criminology, general theory of pressure, neutralization, feminist criminology, and developmental prevention. The findings reveal significant theoretical foundations, such as the conflict between rulers and the condemned, social factors influencing crime, resistance against capitalism, and radical and feminist perspectives. The study analyzes the role of the government and the criminal justice system in the formation of criminal motivations, the process of criminality, and factors affecting crime commission. Employing cultural criminology, the research investigates internal factors shaping the criminal identity and process. The series portrays robbery and hostage-taking as political activities and resistance in a capitalist society, reflecting a dominant view of social determinism. Narrative patterns in the series often emphasize social inequalities like poverty, unemployment, and gender discrimination, portraying the corruption of the capitalist system and its role in facilitating crime while ridiculing the effectiveness of punishment and law enforcement. Additionally, feminist and postmodern approaches highlight the double deprivation of social and legal rights for women in patriarchal societies. The series' approach to crime is influenced by postmodern and critical criminology, emphasizing power, discourse, and mentality, and considering crime as a construct of criminalization by the legislator rather than possessing inherent characteristics. The series' widespread popularity and the audience's identification with the hostage takers suggest shared experiences of suffering, joy, hopes, and marginalized discourses. Language and discourse play essential roles in influencing crime commission, with forbidden or marginalized narratives providing opportunities for criminal behavior. Dealing with crime and prevention necessitates collaboration among various institutions, including the government, cultural bodies, and the judicial system. Good governance, characterized by transparency, legality, accountability, and justice-oriented practices, plays a vital role in reducing crime rates and increasing legitimacy. Enacting fair laws, ensuring legal protections without discrimination, and involving diverse social classes, minorities, and cultural groups in the legislative process are crucial to achieving social and economic justice. In conclusion, "Money Heist" serves as a lens to examine criminal identity and criminological perspectives in popular culture, shedding light on how media influences perceptions of crime, justice, and governance. Understanding the impact of such cultural media is essential for shaping effective crime prevention strategies and fostering a just and equitable society.

The historical prevalence of torture, whether perpetrated by governments to extract confessions from the accused or by private individuals for various purposes unrelated to confessions, spans human history. For a considerable time, torture was considered a legitimate means of discerning truth from falsehood and distinguishing right from wrong. However, in the 19th century, attitudes began to shift, and international efforts emerged to address the issue. The Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907, Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions of 1949, and the Protocols of 1977 prohibited torture. Furthermore, the United Nations General Assembly passed several resolutions between 1973 and 1976, condemning torture. The prohibition of torture is now recognized as a peremptory norm of international law (Jus Cogens), meaning it is non-derogable and universally applicable at all times, including during internal and international conflicts and extraordinary public situations. Currently, international rules designate torture as both a war crime and a crime against humanity. Despite these prohibitions, human rights documents typically associate torture with actions committed by government agents with the intention of obtaining confessions. This approach excludes the possibility of torture by private individuals. Some argue that national criminal justice systems can address such private acts of torture under other criminal headings, such as domestic violence or attempted murder. This article explores whether states can be held responsible for actions carried out by individuals and private institutions. The analysis is based on the review of international documents and the opinions of human rights courts, particularly the European Court of Human Rights. A key distinction arises in evaluating this crime in the context of humanitarian law and human rights law. In humanitarian law, the main objective is to protect victims and reduce the suffering caused by war crimes and crimes against humanity. However, with the emergence of non-state combatant entities and non-international armed conflicts, certain war criminals remain immune from punishment due to the requirement of government involvement or intent to obtain information or confessions. On the other hand, in human rights law, any abusive behavior occurring in the private sphere of individuals, even if not strictly defined as torture, is considered cruel, inhumane, and depraved conduct. Regional human rights courts, including the European Court of Human Rights, hold states responsible for protecting individuals from abuses committed by private actors. The international responsibility of states lies not in the direct attribution of actions by private individuals but in their failure to enact legislative, executive, and judicial measures to prevent and punish such acts. States are obligated to uphold human rights by adopting preventive and punitive measures even in relations between private individuals. This approach reflects the theory of horizontal effect, wherein human rights principles apply not only to the relationship between the individual and the state but also to interactions between private individuals. Consequently, states are responsible for safeguarding human rights in both scenarios. To overcome challenges in regulating acts of torture by non-state actors, states must recognize new entry barriers and factors unique to digital platforms. Measuring market power in digital platforms should consider indicators such as the number of users, traffic volume, time spent on the platform, and number of visits. Additionally, market definition should be approached by identifying non-linear value chains and determining the correlation of platform components to specific services. By employing new criteria and embracing the complexities of digital platforms, states can effectively fulfill their obligations and uphold human rights principles in the evolving landscape of technology.

Article 1056 of the Civil Code, sanctioned in 1934, delineates a significant impediment to marriage, referred to as a "heinous act." This act results in an enduring prohibition against the marriage of the offender to their sister, daughter, or mother. Legal doctrine and judicial procedure commonly interpret this act as "Sodomy" (Lavat). The term "Sodomy" in the context of criminal law is linked with the concept of a heinous act as defined in Article 1056 of the Civil Code. Nevertheless, these interpretations often disregard the potential divergence between the civil interpretation of a heinous act and the criminal definition of Sodomy. While the analysis of Lavat as a criminal offense falls beyond the scope of this article, which primarily operates within the realm of private law, particularly family law, it's essential to address the question of whether the civil concept of a heinous act aligns precisely with its criminal counterpart. This inquiry prompts a review of the concept and definition of Lavat in criminal law. The trajectory of legislation concerning Lavat as a criminal offense reveals shifts in the legislator's criminal stance on this matter. This alteration in criminal perspective warrants scrutiny from the angles of investigative elements and resultant penalties. However, the primary objective of this article revolves around investigating a pivotal question:How does the alteration of Lavat's new criminal definition influence the prevention of heinous acts, as outlined in Article 1056 of the Civil Code? To conduct a comprehensive analysis of this subject, it's imperative to address key questions central to the discourse. Is it accurate to equate Lavat with a heinous act without dispute? What overlaps exist between instances of Lavat and heinous acts? Could the principle of legal marriage prohibition extend to cases of heinous acts that do not align with criminal offenses? In essence, what links the issue of Lavat in the 2013 Islamic Penal Code to the concept of a heinous act in Article 1056 of the civil code? The significance of this inquiry lies in determining whether the criminal definition of Sodomy corresponds precisely with the civil understanding of a heinous act. If equivalence exists between the two, a person convicted of Sodomy would be forever barred from marrying the daughter, sister, or mother of the violated individual. However, if disparity exists between the two concepts, an individual may face marriage restrictions despite not being convicted of a Sodomy crime. This research employs a legal methodology while delving into Islamic jurisprudence, primarily focusing on domestic law. It examines alterations in the definition and instances of the Lavat crime in criminal legislation prior to and following the Islamic revolution. While abstaining from an in-depth exploration of the criminal nature of Lavat, the study emphasizes the factor of penetration and its significance, especially within the 2013 criminal code. This investigation endeavors to establish the correlation between the concept of "Lavat" and the concept of a "heinous act," as outlined in Article 1056 of the Civil Code. The research aims to elucidate the authentic interpretation of a heinous act within family law as a barrier to marriage, contrasting it with the criminal concept of the Lavat crime. As per the 2013 Islamic Punishment Law, and in contrast to previous periods, "Lavat" is only recognized when penetration reaches the stipulated threshold (complete penetration). Anything less is termed "tafikhiz," signifying the act of rubbing genitals on the body of the violated person. However, for the purpose of invoking the heinous act described in Article 1056 of the Civil Code, complete inclusion, even if not meeting the specified threshold, suffices to enact the prohibition on marriage. Consequently, criminal Lavat serves as an example of a heinous act, but all instances of heinous acts may not necessarily qualify as Lavat. Therefore, mere acquittal from a Lavat charge does not automatically result in the prohibition of marriage due to a heinous act. To underscore the distinction between Lavat and heinous acts, a proposed revision to Article 1056 of the Civil Code has been offered. The revised article would read: "If a male engages in a heinous act with another male, involving any extent of penetration, he is precluded from marrying his mother, sister, or daughter."

Statement of the Problem:

 One of the fundamental aspects of legal relationships involves situations where one party has undertaken an obligation but finds themselves inclined to dissolve the legal act. In such circumstances, resignation becomes a viable option for individuals seeking to exit a legal relationship. Resignation is generally understood as an act of unilateral will to dissolve a legal agreement. However, the complexities of various laws indicate that in certain cases, the effectiveness of the applicant's resignation hinges on the approval of another authority, thus transcending the mere will of the individual.

The purpose of this research is to delve into the legal nature of resignation within the context of legal actions. By doing so, we aim to ascertain the precise date of resignation and the termination of legal obligations for an individual involved in a legal relationship. This investigation will significantly contribute to a comprehensive understanding of resignation's role in legal actions.

Questions:

 This study endeavors to address the following crucial questions: To what extent does the effectiveness of resignation depend on the applicant's will? Is the nature of resignation identical in both permissible and necessary legal actions? Legally, how can the nature of resignation be categorized to determine its effective timing?

Hypothesis or Claim of the Article: 

Our central hypothesis posits that in the realm of revocable legal actions, the effectiveness of resignation does not necessitate the consent of another party and largely relies on the unilateral will of the applicant. Conversely, in the context of irrevocable legal actions, the effectiveness of resignation becomes contingent upon obtaining the approval of a specific authority, resulting in situations of bilateral discharge or postponed unilateral legal acts.

This article adopts a rigorous research approach that combines library documentation with an analytical descriptive method. Due to the limited availability of direct sources on the subject, we meticulously collected relevant information from legal and jurisprudential books and articles, thereby facilitating a comprehensive legal analysis.

In revocable legal actions, resignation is predominantly deemed a unilateral legal act, taking effect solely based on the applicant's will. However, exceptions arise where the law or contract explicitly stipulates otherwise. For example, in civil law, a lawyer's resignation is typically a unilateral act, unless mandated otherwise in the contract, making it bilateral in nature. When a mandate is included as a corollary condition in the revocable contract, a lawyer's resignation requires consent from the lawyer, thus assuming a bilateral discharge.Similarly, in civil companies, the resignation of a manager is typically unilateral, yet under an irrevocable contract, the resignation's effectiveness is contingent upon the consent of other partners, leading to a bilateral discharge. When it comes to corporations, the resignation of managers is generally effective through the declaration of the applicant's will, representing a unilateral legal act. However, if their resignation is subject to the approval of an authority, it transforms into a bilateral discharge scenario.Contrarily, irrevocable legal actions require the approval of a specific authority for resignation to take effect, leading to instances of both bilateral discharge and postponed unilateral legal acts. In labor law, an employee's resignation nature varies based on contract terms,either becoming a bilateral discharge or a postponed unilateral act. In certain exceptional cases, resignation may have no effect at all. For instance, in employment relationships, parliamentary roles, labor-employer relationships, endowment, and contractual wills, resignation may not be legally recognized or effective.In conclusion, understanding the legal nature of resignation in legal actions is pivotal in clarifying the dynamics of legal relationships. The distinction between revocable and irrevocable legal actions, along with the role of consent from other authorities, has far-reaching implications for individuals seeking to dissolve legal agreements. This study sheds light on the complexity of resignation in different legal contexts, providing valuable insights for legal practitioners, policymakers, and scholars alike. Further research and analysis in this area will continue to enhance our comprehension of resignation's significance in the broader landscape of legal actions.

One of the emerging sciences of the last century is the study of climate change on both local and global scales, which attributes many weather events. At the local level, climate modification techniques encompass activities like cloud fertilization to induce local rainfall.However, geoengineering, often defined as "deliberate large-scale intervention in the Earth's climate system to mitigate global warming," entails altering the climate on a global or hemispheric scale. This can have effects beyond national borders, spanning continents and hemispheres, potentially resulting in disasters such as the accidental and man-made blizzard in Beijing, imperiling human life.Despite numerous governments capitalizing on climate change for their agendas, the actions and consequences, which often impact countries beyond the responsible nation, lack coverage under national or transnational law. This research aims to highlight the absence of legal frameworks addressing governments' climate manipulation, imposing accountability on perpetrators towards victims of these actions. It reviews existing national and international documents related to climate change and seeks to address how governments can be held responsible for geoengineering.

This research adopts a descriptive-analytical and comparative approach. This research employs a comprehensive descriptive-analytical and comparative methodology, drawing on a multifaceted approach to ensure a thorough examination of the subject matter. Combining these methodologies allows a nuanced understanding of the necessity for an international Convention on the responsibility of the Geoengineering executive government and its proposed structure.Descriptive analysis allows for a meticulous examination of existing literature, legal documents, and agreements related to climate change, geoengineering, and international law. By scrutinizing these materials, the research aims to identify gaps, inconsistencies, and areas in need of further development within the current legal framework. This approach enables a clear articulation of the issues that the proposed international Convention should address.Moreover, a comparative methodology is integral to this research, as it enables the systematic assessment of existing international agreements that could serve as models for the formulation of a comprehensive geoengineering treaty. By juxtaposing agreements such as the Environmental Modification Convention (ENMOD), the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), the Montreal Protocol, and the United States National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the study aims to distill the most relevant and effective components from each agreement. This comparative analysis facilitates the identification of elements that can be integrated into the proposed geoengineering Convention to ensure its robustness and efficacy.The research also delves into historical contexts and case studies to illustrate instances where climate manipulation techniques have led to unintended consequences and the absence of legal accountability. This historical analysis enhances the research's depth by providing real-world examples of the potential risks and impacts associated with geoengineering.In addition, the research employs a qualitative approach by engaging with expert opinions, legal scholars, and policymakers in the field of international environmental law. By conducting interviews and surveys, the study seeks to gather insights into the perspectives and opinions of stakeholders regarding the need for an international Convention on geoengineering responsibility. These qualitative data provide valuable context and viewpoints that contribute to a well-rounded analysis.By blending these methodologies, the research endeavors to offer a comprehensive and robust examination of the subject matter, substantiating the necessity for an international Convention and proposing a structured framework that addresses the complex challenges posed by geoengineering on a global scale.

This study underscores the imperative of drafting and regulating an international agreement concerning geoengineering practices and resultant responsibilities. After elucidating geoengineering techniques and discussing arguments for and against such endeavors, it examines four international agreements as potential models for various aspects of international disputes, responsibility, implementation, and related matters: the Environmental Modification Convention (ENMOD), the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), the Montreal Protocol, and the United States National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). It assesses how these agreements could inform the formulation of a comprehensive global environmental reform law. Additionally, the connection between the proposed document and the United Nations Law Commission's "Liability for Out of Acts Not Prohibited" proposal is explained. The potential consequences of instituting international geoengineering laws are evaluated using cited evidence.By amalgamating attributes like "mandating governments to perform environmental assessments in accordance with NEPA, delineating dispute resolution procedures outlined in the TRIPS Agreement, and incorporating the precautionary principle, preventive approach, and multilateral fund from the Montreal Protocol," alongside the overarching framework presented by the ENMOD Convention, a robust treaty addressing geoengineering and its associated responsibilities could be devised. This approach not only addresses existing challenges but also offers comprehensive legal guidelines for holding responsible governments accountable for geoengineering's outcomes.

Conclusions:

 Given the absence of international documents or treaties governing the planning, oversight of geoengineering actions, and legal liability for related disasters or environmental modifications, policymakers should leverage existing international law capacities. This can involve formulating standards for the management and supervision of geoengineering actions. Governments should work towards an agreement that anticipates potential geoengineering disasters, encompassing elements like damage assessment systems, impartial assessors, compensation methods, and mechanisms for resolving disputes among involved nations to avert detrimental conflicts.While assigning liability for "Out of Acts Not Prohibited" could offer some compensation for those affected by climate change, it falls short of meeting the complex needs in terms of management, oversight, compensation dimensions, and dispute resolution. Therefore, harnessing existing capacities is crucial. The Environmental Modification Convention (ENMOD) is a pertinent international treaty that could serve as the foundation for a geoengineering treaty. Legitimacy for any environmental action could hinge on its peaceful nature, requiring countries to demonstrate the peaceful intent of their actions. The Montreal Protocol, a successful model of international environmental cooperation, emphasizes the precautionary principle and employs a range of measures, from financial assistance to embargoes, making it a viable blueprint for a comprehensive treaty. The TRIPS Agreement establishes essential principles and stringent regulations, including dispute resolution mechanisms, making it a suitable basis for a geoengineering agreement. Incorporating NEPA's requirement for governments to report on environmental impact assessments into the comprehensive document could provide a framework for managing and overseeing environmental remediation techniques.In summary, ENMOD, the TRIPS Agreement, NEPA, and the Montreal Protocol offer valuable principles applicable to geoengineering. Combining these principles and additional provisions from TRIPS and NEPA could shape a coherent structure for an international geoengineering treaty. Furthermore, leveraging the "Liability for Out of Acts Not Prohibited" proposal could yield a legal framework and guidelines for the document's dispute resolution bodies

Undoubtedly, money stands as one of the most practical human credit inventions, playing a crucial role not only in economics but also in law. Among various obligations in transactions and lawsuits, monetary obligations hold a special position as they involve the payment of sums of money. Money's unique liquidity-providing role, ease of use, and acceptance by individuals set it apart from other goods. Today, money is not merely a means of exchange or a measure of value but is considered a valuable capital and asset in itself, capable of generating profits. When a debtor fails to fulfill their monetary obligation on time, the creditor incurs losses due to the devaluation of money and the lost opportunity to utilize their funds profitably. Such compensation to the creditor is based on two principles: 1. Compensating the creditor for their lost opportunity, and 2. Preventing the debtor from unjust enrichment by utilizing the money without fulfilling their obligation. Consequently, late payment of monetary obligations gives rise to three distinct rights for the creditor: liquidated damages if agreed upon by the parties, damages resulting from money devaluation, and interest as compensation for the loss of use of money. In the Iranian legal system, certain concepts like interest are not recognized as damages and cannot be compensated, leading to discrepancies between primary and secondary monetary obligations. To address this issue, this article  delves into the three types of damages, providing a descriptive and analytical approach, and analyzes the Iranian legal situation and judicial practice. The findings of this research highlight that while achieving the principle of full compensation requires recognizing various rights, the Iranian legal system only accepts the devaluation of money under strict conditions and does not acknowledge interest. The limited scope for individuals to agree on the amount of damages also hinders full compensation. However, given the modern economic landscape, accepting these rights becomes essential for achieving full compensation in monetary obligations. As a solution, this article proposes amending Article 522 of the Civil Procedure Code to properly compensate for money devaluation. Additionally, based on the comparative findings of the opportunity cost criterion, a flexible approach is suggested to determine an appropriate interest rate for compensating the loss of use of money for the creditor, encompassing both subjective and objective criteria. In conclusion, this study sheds light on the rights arising from late payment of monetary obligations through a thorough analysis of the Iranian legal and judicial system. To achieve the principle of full compensation, the recognition of devaluation of money and the acceptance of interest in certain cases seem indispensable. One proposed solution is to introduce a more comprehensive article acknowledging and compensating for the devaluation of money based on the real rate of inflation in the market, announced by relevant institutions. This proposal aims to create a clearer and fairer framework for calculating damages related to money devaluation. By considering the real rate of inflation, the compensation for the creditor's loss can accurately reflect the economic realities. Moreover, a reevaluation of the restrictions on individuals agreeing on the amount of damages is crucial. Allowing parties to agree on liquidated damages can enhance contractual autonomy and provide a more effective means of achieving full compensation. However, it is essential to establish appropriate limits and safeguards to prevent potential abuse. Beyond the Iranian legal system, this study also considers the broader perspective of international practices in compensating for late payment damages. By examining the approaches taken by different legal systems, it becomes evident that flexible and adaptive solutions are crucial for addressing the intricacies of monetary obligations and late payment compensation. Furthermore, the concept of interest as a means of compensating the loss of use of money should not be disregarded. Interest serves as an important tool to achieve the principle of full compensation and ensure fairness between parties in monetary obligations. While its recognition and implementation require careful consideration, embracing the economic realities of the modern world demands a more nuanced approach. In conclusion, a comprehensive understanding of the rights arising from late payment of monetary obligations is crucial to establish a just and efficient legal framework. Embracing the principles of full compensation, contractual autonomy, and economic realities can pave the way for meaningful reform. By reevaluating existing legal provisions and aligning them with international best practices, the Iranian legal system can better address the complexities of late payment damages and protect the rights of all parties involved.

The application of competition rules in legal systems necessitates defining the market and measuring market power. These two prerequisites form the basis for enforcing competition laws, and their regulation becomes increasingly crucial with the expansion of internet-based platform businesses and their impact on consumer rights. This research addresses the challenges in setting prerequisites for applying competition rules in digital platforms and offers new solutions. The traditional approach to competition analysis involves defining the relevant market and assessing market power. However, the unique characteristics of digital platforms present obstacles in achieving these objectives. To establish rules governing market definition and market power measurement, a three-step process is proposed. Firstly, the traditional rules for market definition and market power measurement in conventional businesses are examined, as they are commonly used in judicial authorities. Secondly, the specific competitive challenges in digital platforms are assessed to identify cases where traditional criteria fall short in providing  prerequisites. Finally, new criteria for market definition and market power measurement in digital platforms are proposed. The research reveals that both market definition and market power measurement in platform businesses face significant challenges. Defining the market in digital platforms proves difficult due to the inability to assert that virtual and traditional businesses coexist within the same market. Additionally, the traditional product and market scope determination method (SSNIP test) may not apply to two/multi-modal platforms and platforms offering products with zero prices. Furthermore, traditional indicators for calculating the market area, such as "transportation" and "main area," do not apply to virtual markets with cross-border transactions. Measuring market power in digital platforms presents its own challenges. Relying solely on income as a criterion is inadequate, as it cannot be compared to other factors like the number of active users, volume of traffic, or time spent on the platform. Furthermore, using income to determine market share is not applicable to platforms with zero-priced products. Measuring product demand elasticity using the Lerner index is also hindered by the zero marginal cost of many platforms. Moreover, identifying effective entry barriers specific to digital platforms and devising mechanisms for measuring them presents a challenge not yet addressed by legal systems. To overcome these challenges and provide new criteria for market definition in digital platforms, a three-step process is proposed. The identification of non-linear value chains helps identify platform components. Assessing whether each component constitutes a separate market or a part of the same market relies on their correlation and their contribution to specific services. To address challenges in defining the product and scope, the research suggests using the SSNDQ test (small but significant and stable reduction in quality) instead of the SSNIP test. Criteria such as "service speed," "data protection," "privacy protection," "exchange cost," "negotiation cost," and "search cost" can measure the quality of service provision in digital platforms. For measuring market power in digital platforms, distinguishing between "transaction-based platforms" and "audience-based platforms" is suggested. The "users' payment" criterion, instead of platform income, can determine market share using indicators like the number of users, traffic volume, time spent, and number of visits. Recognizing new structural and strategic entry barriers in digital platforms within relevant laws and regulations is crucial. Evaluating the three-stage process of "possibility of entry," "possibility of competitive influence," and "possibility of limiting market power" in platform markets offers potential solutions to measuring market power in this context.

The outbreak of the Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic in 2019 prompted global efforts to develop vaccines and combat its spread. As countries grappled with the devastating effects of the pandemic, discussions on compulsory vaccination, particularly for children, emerged from the intersection of human rights and bioethics. This article employs a descriptive-analytical approach, relying on library resources, to investigate the implications of compulsory vaccination for children, especially in the context of the COVID-19 vaccine. The central question explored is whether such requirements align with bioethical principles and respect human rights. Human rights documents universally recognize the fundamental importance of respecting human rights, including the right to health and individual freedoms. Governments and health systems worldwide have pledged to uphold these rights as a priority. However, the unprecedented challenges posed by the pandemic brought forth a complex ethical dilemma: striking a balance between protecting public health and safeguarding individual liberties. The crisis  underscored the tension between ethics and rights, necessitating a thoughtful evaluation of compulsory vaccination policies. The Principle of Solidarity and Compulsory Vaccination for Adults The principle of solidarity, a cornerstone of bioethics, calls for collective responsibility and unity for the greater good of society. Governments may take measures to promote public health, even if they entail some limitations on individual freedoms. In emergency situations like a pandemic, the principle of solidarity justifies compulsory vaccination for adults. Vaccination not only shields the vaccinated individuals but also provides protection to those who cannot receive the vaccine due to medical reasons. By achieving herd immunity, societies can combat the spread of the virus more effectively. However, the principle of solidarity does not unconditionally justify mandatory vaccination. While it can support compulsory vaccination for adults, the intervention must be necessary, proportional, and respectful of individual rights. Governments must carefully consider the balance between public health benefits and potential infringements on individual autonomy. Informed Consent and the Rights of Children When it comes to children, additional ethical considerations emerge. The principle of informed consent is paramount, underpinning human rights conventions such as the Nuremberg Laws. Consent must be obtained from the parents or guardians before vaccinating children. This requirement highlights the importance of respecting the autonomy of parents in making decisions on behalf of their children while safeguarding their well-being. The Ethics of Compulsory Vaccination for Children To assess the ethics of compulsory vaccination for children, an examination of COVID-19's impact on different age groups is crucial. Data from the World Health Organization (WHO) indicate that the disease's severity and mortality are disproportionately higher among the elderly and those with underlying health conditions. In contrast, the statistics reveal that children experience milder cases and lower mortality rates. Consequently, prioritizing compulsory vaccination for at-risk groups, particularly adults, aligns with the ethical principle of proportionality. Furthermore, the unique nature of COVID-19 vaccines demands careful ethical evaluation. Traditional childhood vaccines, such as those for Poliovirus (OPV) and MMR, have long-established safety records and proven efficacy, developed through a thorough biological cycle spanning 10 to 15 years. In contrast, COVID-19 vaccines are relatively new and have undergone expedited development due to the urgency of the pandemic. This situation raises ethical concerns about the extent of knowledge regarding their long-term effects and efficacy, especially in the context of compulsory vaccination for children. Morality, Proportionality, and Necessity Enforcing compulsory vaccination for children requires a thorough evaluation of moral justifications. Given the relatively low infection and death rates among children due to COVID-19, implementing such policies without adequate consideration of the principles of necessity and proportionality could be deemed immoral. Balancing the potential benefits of vaccination against the limited risk children face from the disease is essential to ensure ethical decision-making. Conclusion This study sheds light on the complex interplay between human rights and bioethics concerning compulsory vaccination for children, particularly in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. While the principle of solidarity supports mandatory vaccination for adults in emergencies, the ethical implications of enforcing vaccination for children demand careful consideration. Respect for informed consent, the principle of proportionality, and a commitment to protect individual rights are essential in navigating this challenging terrain. Striking a balance between public health imperatives and individual freedoms is crucial to ensuring morally justifiable and ethically sound policies regarding compulsory vaccination.

Despite the pivotal role of agricultural development in combatting hunger and achieving food security, limited attention has been directed towards the repercussions of terrorism on agriculture. Nevertheless, empirical evidence does suggest that conflicts detrimentally impact agricultural inputs and outputs, including land, production, and income. In light of this, indicators of terrorism such as domestic, transnational, and unspecified terrorism, total terrorism, number of attacks, and fatalities due to terrorism can be correlated with agricultural indicators encompassing inputs (e.g., agricultural land and labor force) and outputs (e.g., agricultural productivity growth). Agricultural terrorism falls under the category of bio-terrorist crimes, with its primary consequence being the disruption of the agricultural sector. This includes actions such as livestock slaughter, vegetation pollution, and resource supply disturbance. Deliberately introducing animal or plant diseases to evoke terror, inflict economic harm, and destabilize targeted countries characterizes agricultural terrorism. This form of terrorism may be perpetrated by governments or independent terrorist organizations, sometimes acting on behalf of specific governments. Broadly defined, agricultural terrorism involves the deliberate introduction of animal or plant diseases to incite terror, inflict economic damage, and disrupt a nation's stability. Historical precedence reveals terrorist attacks targeting agriculture, orchestrated either by governments or independent terrorist groups linked to specific governments. The aftermath  of biological attacks on agriculture can encompass severe economic crises in the agricultural and food industries, erosion of government trust, and even human casualties. If the chosen disease proves transmissible to humans, both food security and public health face peril. In armed conflicts, various methods of war result in the destruction of crops, displacement of agricultural populations, eradication of agricultural fields, and hindrance of humanitarian aid reaching vulnerable populations. Such actions infringe on the "right to food," a quintessential human right. Observing the principles and regulations of international human rights law can help mitigate armed conflicts' effects on agricultural security. International law unequivocally bans the exploitation of civilian starvation as a method of war. Imposed famines, as seen in countries like Syria, Tigray, Yemen, and now Ukraine, are not only a grim reality but also qualify as war crimes. Consequently, the International Criminal Court bears the responsibility, as per Article 8 of its Statute, to investigate and prosecute deliberate starvation as a war crime. Notably, the provision criminalizing intentional starvation in non-international armed conflicts was amended just a year after the adoption of UN Security Council Resolution 2417. The Assembly of States Parties to the International Criminal Court addressed this deficiency in the Rome Statute by including war crimes related to non-international armed conflicts. While comprehensive international measures against such terrorist crimes are yet to be sanctioned through the United Nations, the international criminalization of agricultural terrorism holds potential. Given its inhumane nature, expanding the court's jurisdiction in line with the provisions of Articles 5, 6, and 7 of the statute could impede its proliferation to some extent. The utilization of rural law enforcement agencies in countering and preventing terrorist acts against agricultural products is an undeniable necessity. Threats arising from various forms of terrorist crimes, including those targeting agriculture and the environment, necessitate continuous monitoring to avert destruction and insecurity. Additionally, domestic educational and research institutions possess considerable capability in tackling agricultural and environmental terrorism. By dedicating specific training centers to instruct officials and law enforcement officers in proper responses and preventive measures, this system can play a pivotal role. Prominent organizations like the American Academy of Sciences are establishing high-level national security centers to train university elites and scholars to address challenges posed by agricultural terrorist crimes, enhancing biological security and safeguarding food sources. Farmers should adopt measures such as permanent marking of farm and livestock equipment, minimizing predictable absences, and promptly reporting missing equipment to law enforcement. Incorporating investigation and prevention of terrorist acts against agricultural products into police curriculum and textbooks is crucial. Regional and national information resources related to agricultural terrorism should be developed and shared with law enforcement agencies. Additionally, research should address questions concerning the extent and types of agricultural terrorism and explore existing and potential preventive measures. As demonstrated, considering the territorial scope and outcomes of committed actions within the context of crimes under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court's Statute, with government consensus and collaboration, criminalizing agricultural terrorism is feasible. Inclusion within the statute's ambit covers terrorist crimes, facilitating the implementation of provisions for criminal pursuit and justice. Although political alignments during terrorist acts pose challenges to pursuing and prosecuting them in the International Criminal Court, a shared approach and cooperation among governments offer avenues for combating such crimes. On the non-criminal front, adopting preventive policies involves establishing technical, technological, and even social frameworks. Implementation of these measures ensures that the offensive and defensive ambiance stemming from terrorist acts remains subject to control, supervision, and management.

Legal will is the cornerstone of private law, as legal actions manifest the sovereignty of will in the world of credit. Parties enter into agreements with their free and informed wills, and upon the fulfillment of the Intent to Authorship, they become obliged by its effects, in accordance with the principle of freedom of will. In most cases, the distance between the authorship of will/intention and its realization/fulfillment can be ignored, as Article 191 of the Civil Code clearly states that a contract is fulfilled as soon as it is concluded, provided that this intention is compatible with the external intent that indicates it. When the contract is concluded in the world of credit, the will takes effect in the outside world. The will is realized when the inner authorship of will/intention is connected to an external implication in the world of matter and persuades the wise with decisiveness to identify its effects. In all legal systems, the condition for the effect of the will is to identify it in the world outside the mind and verify its occurrence in the common range of the parties' will in the agreement. The Intent to authorship becomes effective in the outside world when it is expressed. The identification of the influence of will in remote contracts and unilateral legal acts affecting the addressee of  unilateral will is clearly visible. The moment of identifying the influence of the will has been a subject of different opinions in legal systems. The closest theory to the time and place of legal action in the world of credit and the influence of will is the approach of the declaration of will/expression of intention. This theory is accepted in the legal system of Iran. In some cases, the legislator has deviated from this principle and decisively followed the Receipt Theory to govern the identification of the influence of will. This article aims to investigate the basis of expediency supported by the legislator in choosing and applying the Receipt theory in these exceptions. From the legislator's perspective, maintaining market balance is more important than anything. The rules of contract law are often derived from common sense in the market, which is sometimes approved by the legislator. Most of the rules governing commercial and private law have been formed based on customary practices in the Muslim market. The conflict between the necessity of securing individual interest/ expediency and the rules governing society raises the question of which one will prevail. The legislator's intervention to deviate from common practice helps identify the interests/expediencies protected by the law and the means to protect them. The conflict between customary practices and individual interests is the strongest channel for the legislator's interference in the customary affairs of the Muslim market. This article aims to investigate the possibility of expanding the circle of exceptions to the principle of the sufficiency of the declaration of will, based on common expediency supported by the legislator. Identifying the legislator's expediency basis in excluding some people from the inclusion of the principle of the sufficiency of the declaration of will is the key to the puzzle. The exceptions to the principle of the sufficiency of the declaration of intent are rooted in the necessity of guaranteeing the rights of the addressee and the third party. In Iran's legal system, the legislator has protected the relevant interests by applying a superior ruling wherever the necessity of providing expediency is demanded. Induction in civil law indicates that in the exceptions to the rule of the sufficiency of the declaration of will, the influence of the will is conditional on the communication of the will to the addressee. It doesn't matter whether the declared will is unilateral or bilateral; as soon as the effects of the will conflict with the rights of the addressee, the will is effective when it is communicated to the addressee. The Receipt theory has a relative superiority over the theory of the declaration of will due to providing the beneficiary with the opportunity to protect/defend his right. The rights protection of the third party or the addressee of the will is the fundamental reason for choosing the Receipt theory to safeguard the interests of surrounding parties affected by the effects of the will. In the international system, the acceptance of the necessity of communicating the will to the addressee shows the maturity of the Receipt theory in providing commutative justice. The most recent change in the recognition of the influence of the will in major legal systems is related to the 2016 reforms in the civil part of the Code of French Law. By explicitly choosing the Receipt theory, French legislators have taken a fundamental step in harmony with valid international documents and business world requirements. The increasing favor of the Receipt theory is not due to luck and taste; rather, it is due to necessity and maximum support from parties around the will, making it unavoidable. Identifying the time of influence of the will plays a key role in gathering the interests of parties surrounding the will and providing equal opportunity to protect/defend the rights of the addressee. Additionally, adopting the criterion of the common basis of the examined exceptions is an escape to eliminate the disadvantages of the rule of the sufficiency of the declaration of will in the legal system of Iran. In receiving the offer, notifying the dismissal of the lawyer, notifying the spouse to Revoke FEDYE/Ransom, and notifying the testator of rejecting the testamentary executor, the concern supported by the legislator is the rational necessity of information, protection of the rights of the Incapables, and the opportunity to protect/defend the right. Determining the common basis and resorting to it makes the development of exceptions subject to a specific rule. Therefore, what is developed is the intention supported by the legislator; procrastination is against reason and causes harm. According to the present research proposal, this rule is to preserve the rights of third parties, the opportunity to protect the right of the addressee of the will, and the rational necessity of receiving the will. The governing rule of Iran's legal system is the principle of the sufficiency of the declaration of will; except in cases where rational or customary necessity requires it, the influence of the will is postponed until it is communicated to the addressee.

The legal concept of "genetic resources" is a subject of central importance, casting its influence over various domains of genetics, including the utilization of genetic resources, the benefits derived from them, legal frameworks governing access and benefit sharing of genetic resources, and the obligations of involved parties. However, despite its critical role, the definition and interpretation of genetic resources remain enigmatic. The understanding of governments and legislatures concerning genetic resources holds profound implications for the development of legal articles and systems regulating access and benefit sharing. Any interpretation of this concept resonates within the legal framework, leaving discernible impacts on the mentioned domains. The nature of interpretation regarding genetic resources holds the power to either expand or restrict the scope of legal systems governing access and benefit sharing. A narrow interpretation of genetic resources limits the reach and subject matter of the legal framework, whereas a broader interpretation  leads to its expansion and the inclusion of obligations within the access system. In a narrow interpretation, access to many genetic resources carries no legal obligation to share the benefits arising from them and their derivatives. Conversely, a broad interpretation subjects access to any genetic resource, its derivatives, and products to a legal obligation for benefit sharing. Within a narrow interpretation, products and derivatives derived from genetic sources fall outside the scope of legal obligations for benefit sharing. In contrast, a broad interpretation challenges the legal status of these derivatives and products, even when removed from their original source. The legal framework for sharing profits from future products and derivatives originating from genetic resources poses questions about the legal forms of profit sharing. Can future sales, fluctuating pricing, or contractual conditions provide legal solutions for sharing future benefits? Furthermore, the article explores how many stages of products and derivatives remain subject to legal obligations for profit sharing and how to calculate the extent of these obligations among subsequent parties who produce new products. One of the complexities of this issue is the sheer variety of products and derivatives obtainable from genetic resources. It becomes challenging for the owner of the genetic resource to track the emergence of new products from the primary source. A mere commitment in the initial contract to notify the owner, even in cases involving subsequent parties, may be insufficient. The owner lacks a criterion to establish that the new product originates from their genetic source. This complexity arises from two different criteria used for identifying genetic resources. Despite these theoretical challenges, research findings reveal that the Nagoya Protocol, established in 2010 and implemented in 2014, has practically expanded the scope of genetic resources by diminishing the relevance of the functional criterion of heredity. In contrast, domestic law appears to lag behind these legal developments. While the legislator was not oblivious to the evolving concept of genetic resources, the definition of genetic resources remains anchored in the old criteria of the functional unit of heredity. In doing so, the national law neglects a significant portion of genetic resources, including those beyond plants, animals, and microorganisms, such as artificial biology. This oversight may result in a substantial gap within Iran's legal system concerning the sharing of benefits from their use, both on the national and international fronts. Further examination of Iran's domestic law reveals that certain articles within the Law on the Protection of Genetic Resources extend beyond the legislative criteria for genetic resources. The article aims to leverage these openings in domestic law to broaden the scope of genetic resources. It is important to note that although the Nagoya Protocol included cell metabolic derivatives and products as examples of genetic resources in 2010, Iran has yet to become a party to the protocol, leaving this issue unresolved and adding to the complexity of legal analysis. This article employs a descriptive, analytical-comparative method and legal analysis to clarify the concept of genetic resources in international documents and domestic laws, resolving conflicts between criteria for defining genetic resources and their examples. The research findings suggest that the legislator's incomplete definition of genetic resources should not overshadow the potential for using other articles within domestic law to expand the scope of genetic resources. Additionally, the article questions why products from non-human genetic sources are not included in commercialization or the obligations system, even though the legislator did not explicitly address this matter.

AbstractThe Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran is a foundational document that serves as the cornerstone of the nation's legal and political framework. As a written constitution, it necessitates careful and nuanced interpretation to ensure its effective implementation. The process of interpreting the Constitution is a complex endeavor, encompassing two overarching approaches: the originalist and the non-originalist. According to Article 98 of the Constitution, the Guardian Council, as the competent interpreter of the Constitution, predominantly adheres to the originalist approach. This approach places paramount importance on the text itself, inviting the application of linguistic tools to unlock its deeper meanings. Among these tools, one that stands out as particularly relevant is text coherence, a concept rooted in linguistic theory.Text coherence, in essence, refers to the structural attributes of a text or statement that unify its various components, creating a systematic and interconnected framework within the discourse. Scholars have developed several models to measure and establish text coherence, and intriguingly, some of these models have found practical application in the interpretation of the Constitution. This research, conducted through a meticulous descriptive-analytical method, seeks to address a fundamental question: "What constitutes a systematic approach to interpreting the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, grounded in text coherence patterns?"  To explore this question thoroughly, we delve into four key text coherence patterns: "Halliday and Hassan's coherence pattern," "Kintsch and van Dijk's Discourse Model," "Rhetorical Structure Theory," and "Foundation Subject Analysis." These patterns serve as invaluable tools for crafting a coherent interpretation of the Constitution at three distinct levels: individual words or phrases, underlying principles, and overarching thematic elements.Halliday and Hassan's pioneering work in 1976 categorized the tools that foster cohesion in the English language into three essential categories: grammatical cohesion, lexical cohesion, and relational cohesion. Grammatical coherence tools encompass reference, substitution, and deletion, offering a framework for understanding how different parts of the text interact. Lexical coherence tools delve into repetition, co-occurrence, semantic synonymy, semantic contrast, and semantic inclusion, providing insights into how language choices contribute to textual coherence. Meanwhile, relational coherence tools, which include additional, causal, contrastive, and temporal links, reveal the intricate relationships between elements of the discourse.Kintsch and van Dijk's seminal work in 1978 laid the foundation for understanding the prerequisites for constructing a coherent text base. In particular, they highlighted the significance of referential coherence as a linchpin for semantic coherence. Referential coherence centers on the alignment of topics across propositions, and as such, it emerges as a crucial criterion for determining the overall coherence of a text.Rhetorical Structure Theory, a groundbreaking framework introduced by Mann and Thompson in 1987 and 1988, offers a deeper understanding of text organization by elucidating the relationships between different parts of a text. This theory underscores the hierarchical and interconnected structure of texts, where each component plays a distinct role in relation to others. This hierarchical structure ensures that texts maintain a coherent and logical flow, a critical element in the interpretation of any document, particularly a constitution.In 2004, Watson-Todd introduced the concept of Foundation Subject Analysis, which represents a significant advancement in text analysis. This method identifies key concepts within a text and delineates their hierarchical relationships, allowing for a comprehensive analysis of text coherence. Two fundamental relationships connect these key concepts: McCarthy's inclusion relationship and the cause-effect relationship. These relationships play a pivotal role in establishing the logical and thematic coherence of a text.Collectively, these four text coherence patterns serve as invaluable tools in the interpretation of the Constitution. Their application begins with contextualization, a process that involves breaking down the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran into manageable segments. This is essential because, at its core, the Constitution spans 12,910 words, comprising 177 principles, 14 chapters, and a preamble. Analyzing this extensive document necessitates a structured approach that takes into account the patterns of continuity and coherence within the text.In the interpretation of the Constitution, several common scenarios arise, each requiring a nuanced approach. The first scenario involves the interpretation of individual words or phrases within the Constitution, often arising when ambiguity or uncertainty surrounds a particular term. In such cases, a systematic approach at three levels proves invaluable. First, the interpretation of the desired word or phrase should align with the principle in which it is situated. Second, a systematic approach to the chapter containing the word or phrase should be employed. Third, the entire Constitution should be considered in the interpretation process, ensuring that the interpretation remains consistent with the document as a whole. The patterns presented in the previous section offer four distinct tools at the vocabulary or phrase level: reference, substitution, deletion, and return.When the intention is to interpret one of the principles enshrined in the Constitution, a systematic approach is equally crucial. Such an approach entails examining the principle as an integral part of a larger system and considering its place within the broader framework of the Constitution. Here, the text coherence tool of relational coherence becomes invaluable. Some principles may formally overlap with others within the Constitution. By drawing on the insights provided by rhetorical structure theory and Kinch and Van Dyck's discourse model, these overlapping principles can be jointly interpreted from a shared perspective, offering a more comprehensive understanding of their implications.In the analysis of issues based on the Constitution, the method of analyzing the foundational subject should also be employed. In this approach, the focus shifts from principles to key issues that may not be explicitly defined in the Constitution. This approach involves identifying the central issue and determining the relevance of other principles based on its significance. However, it's worth noting that this approach can be particularly challenging in cases where the Constitution lacks clarity on a specific issue, highlighting the critical role of text coherence patterns in guiding the interpretation process.In conclusion, the interpretation of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran is a multifaceted endeavor that demands precision and systematic analysis. Text coherence patterns, as outlined in this research, serve as indispensable tools for interpreting this foundational document. By applying these patterns at various levels, from individual words and phrases to overarching principles and thematic elements, interpreters can unlock a deeper and more coherent understanding of the Constitution. In doing so, they contribute to the preservation and effective application of the Constitution's principles in the legal and political landscape of Iran.