نشریه مطالعات تطبیقی حقوق کشورهای اسلامی
پیاپی 3 (زمستان 1401)

Citizenship is considered as one of the legal issues that affects various legal and even extra-legal and extra-legal categories. Learning the citizenship of a child through the mother is one of the challenging issues raised in legal circles. The following article seeks an analytical answer to the question, what is the approach of Islamic Arab countries regarding the acquisition of citizenship of a child through the mother? Rakhman's hypothesis for the next few lines is that Arab Muslim countries are more inclined towards recognizing the citizenship of a child through the mother. In order to verify its hypothesis, the following article has used the descriptive-analytical method and has shown that in Arab Muslim countries, some of them believe in non-recognition, some believe in absolute recognition, and others believe in Conditional recognition of the citizenship education of the child through the mother. The present article has reached the conclusion that the course of the legislative process of Arab Muslim countries regarding the acquisition of citizenship of a child through the mother shows that the legislation in this area has moved towards more tolerance and this means that gradually The direction of moving away from the classical approach of absolute non-recognition of the child's acquisition of citizenship through the mother has moved. In fact, from the absolute lack of identification (thesis) and from the approach of absolute identification (antithesis), it is moving towards conditional identification as a synthesis.

Citizens' participation is not a new concept, but it has become much more important during recent decades, due to the occurrence of violations such as administrative corruption crimes. In general, citizens have not only the right but also the duty to participate in decisions that affect their general welfare. This participation, while being a moderator of the ruling power, helps to deal more appropriately with cases of administrative corruption. embezzlement as one of the economic crimes that violates public trust towards the government has been recognized in various domestic and international documents throughout history. The objectives pursued in this research are to identify national bases and international public participation in the prevention of administrative corruption by emphasizing embezzlement and identifying their differences with each other. The results of the present research indicate that there are differences between the domestic and international anti-embezzlement frameworks, such as the lack of criminalization of embezzlement in the private sector, as well as the lack of provision for the mechanism of international judicial assistance in the field of embezzlement, lack of It is worth mentioning the detailed explanation of whistle-blowing regulations regarding the fight against embezzlement in Iran's internal law, in contrast the regional to international nature of anti-embezzlement rights and the lack of guarantee of effective implementation at the international level to fight embezzlement

According to the different legal systems of Roman, German and Common Law, the criminal security orders in Iran and England are largely different, and the nature and basis of their issuance and the authorities and procedures of their issuance have differences and similarities. In general, criminal bail orders are issued with the aim of guaranteeing the presence of the accused at a specific time and place, and the variety of these orders is different according to the Bail Act 1976 and Article 217 of the Criminal Procedure Law approved on 12/4/92 with subsequent amendments. . In English law, the addition of conditions to bail or surety is foreseen, and also the possession of surety and surety is recognized as a right for the accused, and the issuance of any type of them is objectionable, while in Iranian law, arrest The issuance of the two aforementioned orders and the temporary arrest order can be appealed.Regarding competent authorities in issuing security orders, in Iranian law, prosecutors, assistant prosecutors, investigators, and court judges, and in English law, judges of magistrate courts and criminal and appeal courts have jurisdiction, and one of the most important differences is the delegation of authority to issue security orders to Bajilan (police) in English law is against Iranian law

One of the most important general and comprehensive orders of Islam is fasting in the holy month of Ramadan, which does not differentiate between the rich and the poor, the rich and the poor, and all people with conditions are obliged to fast without any privileges, but unfortunately, pretending to fasting is a serious challenge that It can be said that it has spread among all Muslims and has become a social abnormality. Fasting in public, apart from the fact that it is considered a violation of the sanctity of the month of Ramadan, is disrespectful and insulting to the religion and the fasting people and brings dozens of negative religious, social, moral and educational consequences. Based on this, the researcher is trying to evaluate the pretense of fasting from the point of view of Iran's Islamic Penal Code, the Afghan Penal Code and Islamic Jurisprudence, and examine the proof of the crime of pretending to fast. To understand the legal position of this act on the one hand, and on the other hand, to reduce the concern and reaction of citizens regarding the criminalization of this act, and to clarify the position of its criminalization in criminal policy. The findings of the upcoming research, which is based on the analytical and descriptive method, showed that the articles of the criminal laws of Iran and Afghanistan are not clear in this regard, but their content as well as jurisprudential statements consider the phenomenon of pretending to fast as a crime.

Mirza Malkam Khan Nazem-ud-Dawlah is one of the first Iranians who dreamed of establishing a constitution for his homeland. He had acquired this new awareness that no country will be founded in the modern era without having a constitution. The foundation of a country, according to the authors of the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen of 1789, was nothing but a piece of paper supposed to remove the supreme power of the Sultan to make it a new format and broadcast it in a way that is never despotic. Malkam rightly believed that Iran will not be settled until the old order becomes legal and power is constitutionalized. Malkam can be considered as one of the sympathetic pioneers of the school of reformism in Iran. An intellectual whose career has been neither white nor black. His name has been mentioned in some of history's corrupting conflicts and he has been portrayed as thinking only of bread, but the fact is Malkam was a man of law, modern order and new consciousness. In the present research, we try to answer this simple question: is the knowledge of Malkam, as one of the intellectual pioneers in Iran, compatible with the foundations of constitutionalism and constitutional law?

Today, tax is one of the most important sources of government income, which plays an important role in providing public expenses. In addition, tax can be used by the government as the main tool of financial policies and ensuring social justice. On the other hand, in the process of tax recognition and collection, taxpayers are always There are influential factors in the tax system of the countries; therefore, respect of the taxpayers' rights by the relevant organization is one of the basic strategies and a condition for the success of the tax organization. The tax laws of Iran will help greatly. The main question is whether the legislators of Iran and the United States have recognized the rights of taxpayers? And what are the supposed rights for taxpayers in these countries? According to the available documents, the United States is the only country that has established modern and specialized laws in its tax law in relation to the rights of taxpayers, which is set as a suitable model for other countries. On the other hand, in Iran's tax laws, the rights of taxpayers have been dealt with in a general way, and there are scattered and inconsistent materials that can be examined. Therefore, the localization of the laws of other countries, especially the use of the tax laws of the United States, in Iran's tax laws, in order to protect the rights of taxpayers and As a result, it is suggested to improve the tax culture. The rights of taxpayers are mentioned in the tax authorities and tax dispute resolution bodies that constitute the country's tax system. In this article, only the rights of taxpayers are discussed by the tax administration.