فصلنامه پژوهش تطبیقی حقوق اسلام و غرب
سال دهم شماره 2 (پیاپی 36، تابستان 1402)

The inter-governmental Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) was established within the framework of Chapter VIII of the UN Charter to support the struggle of the Palestinian people, empower them to attain their inalienable rights, and ensure global and regional peace. The OIC requires all member states to adhere to its principles. However, despite the Zionist regime's persistent efforts to quietly plan the annexation of occupied territories and its failure to respect the minimum rights set forth in international law for the Palestinian people, some Arab states have signed peace agreements to normalize their relations with Israel. This study employs a descriptive-analytical approach to examine the international legal aspects of the normalization of relations between certain Arab states and the Zionist regime. It explores the Zionist regime's disregard for international law and regional requirements, as well as the need for other OIC member states to support the Palestinian people in accordance with the provisions of the Organization. The study aims to shed light on the dimensions of international law surrounding the normalization of relations between certain Arab states and the Zionist regime, highlighting the Zionist regime's non-compliance with international law and regional requirements, and emphasizing the necessity for other member states of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation to support the Palestinian people within the goals and requirements of the OIC. Additionally, the study underscores the importance of the OIC's role in effectively maintaining regional peace and stability.

The relationship between the foundation of ethics and the criteria for assessing good and bad actions and behaviors of individuals from the perspective of divine command theorists, and its connection with human rights, has always been a subject of contemplation. In one approach (the theory of divine command), the nature of ethical actions and behaviors is rooted in divine rules and the will of God. However, in another approach (human rights), ethical concepts inherently possess value rooted in a rights-based moral system and based on autonomy and inherent human dignity. This research aims to evaluate and analyze the prevailing discourse on human rights and its theoretical foundations in comparison to the theory of divine command. Through a descriptive-analytical method, the main finding of this study suggests that the relationship between human rights and the theory of divine command, which belongs to the duty-based ethics, is inherently contradictory in terms of their respective principles, and the emphasis on obligations in the duty-based approach hinders the assertion and claim of rights.

Situational prevention seeks to identify the external factors contributing to criminal behavior, separate from the characteristics of the perpetrator. Similarly, environmental prevention focuses on designing suitable living, working, and social environments to deter criminal acts. Violence against women is an area of significant concern that can benefit from these preventive measures. This study aims to investigate the presence of situational and environmental preventive measures addressing violence against women in international instruments, Iranian law, and legal doctrine. By examining and analyzing these measures, the article proposes practical and implementable recommendations derived from the aforementioned instruments and theories. The research methodology employed is a descriptive-analytical approach, utilizing library research. The findings highlight that Iranian law, reputable international instruments, and legal doctrine exhibit a strong commitment to protecting women's rights, preventing various forms of violence against women, and mandating actions to address such violence. As a result, specialized forums have taken steps to address this global issue through the formulation of regulations and the proposal of practical and implementable measures.

In many countries today, specific frameworks have been established to recognize physical injuries and provide compensation for bodily harm. These frameworks, in line with criminal policy objectives, aim to deter future harm and ensure compensation. This paper employs an analytical and descriptive approach to examine this issue within the criminal justice systems of Iran and England, exploring the conceptual differences in the recognition of bodily injury and the provision of compensation in both legal systems. The present research reveals that in the Iranian legal system, the compensation for bodily injuries is based on the concepts of "diyyah", "arsh", and "government", while the English legal system evaluates and calculates compensation based on tariff systems, consideration of the function of body parts, the lost enjoyment of life, and the valuation of human life and the quality of life years. Both legal systems strive to realistically calculate and compensate for bodily injuries.

Distinctiveness is a fundamental element of a protectable trademark, referring to its ability to differentiate goods and services of one person from those of others and indicate the source of origin. This component usually needs to be inherent, meaning that the trademark should possess this characteristic at the time of filing for registration. However, certain marks can acquire distinctiveness over time through continuous investment, advertising, and activities carried out by the mark's owner. The stance of different countries regarding acquired distinctiveness is not uniform, especially considering that trademarks are not of a single type, and we are currently witnessing the proliferation of non-traditional and modern marks that effectively serve as distinctive indicators with new approaches. This research employs an analytical-descriptive method, along with a library and field approach, to undertake a comparative study of this subject in selected legal systems. Ultimately, the research concludes that the significance of these marks has become evident today,and factors such as continuous use have been influential in establishing acquired distinctiveness. Additionally, the sufficiency or insufficiency of each adopted criterion in proving acquired distinctiveness appears to be dependent on the specific circumstances. Furthermore, signs of acceptance of acquired distinctiveness can be observed in the legal system of Iran.

The contract of maintenance and preservation is one type of service contracts that includes contracts such as cloud computing, parking services, lease of wombs, etc. In the European Union, this contract has been identified as a specific category of contracts, and its specific rules are provided in two documents, namely, the Principles of Euroean Law on Service Contracts (PELSC) and the Draft Common Frame of Reference (DCFR). According to this contract, one party is obligated to preserve and maintain the deposited property in exchange for receiving compensation. The aforementioned document includes obligations for the service provider, such as the obligation to provide necessary objects and personnel (providing premises, equipment, and suitable workforce), the obligation to exercise care, the obligation to return goods, the obligation to comply, and the obligation to provide reports. This research examines these obligations in the document of European Principles of Service Contracts and compares them with Iranian law. It appears that European countries have been successful in this regard by drafting the aforementioned documents, and the existence of specific laws in this area has led to the establishment of new and consistent procedures. Therefore, it is recommended that since Iran's law does not specifically address the contract of maintenance and preservation, the legislator should address ambiguities regarding this type of contract and related issues by enacting separate legislations, in order to achieve coherent rules and regulations based on the experiences of European countries in this realm.

According to the general rule of liability, a person is responsible for their own acts or acts committed under their instruction. Therefore, liability arising from the act of another person has exceptions and is contrary to the general rule. Another form of liability arising from the act of another person is known in common law as "vicarious liability," which is interpreted as proxy liability. In the civil liability sources of common law, the discussion of employer's liability for the actions of their employees has been addressed under the same title. This article, using a descriptive-analytical method, examines the latest theories on the foundations and conditions of this liability in Iran’s and England’s laws. According to Article 12 of the Iranian Civil Liability Law, employer's liability is based on the theory of fault and its specificity lies only in the fact that it arises from the act of another person. In contrast, in English law, this liability is considered distinctive from two perspectives: firstly, it is contrary to the principle of personal liability, and secondly, it falls within the framework of the theory of strict liability and is solely based on the element of harm.

In order to determine the timing of smart contract formation, which is considered a type of electronic contract, the authors initially examine the viewpoint of traditional contract law. In England and the United States, the doctrine of receipt of acceptance is accepted for instantaneous transactions, while the doctrine of dispatch of acceptance is applied to non-instantaneous contracts to determine the timing of contract formation. In Iran, a unified approach has not been adopted by legal scholars, and the authors advocate for the acceptance of the doctrine of declaration of acceptance. However, regarding the timing of electronic contract formation, the legal systems of England and the United States consider the time of sending the data message as the moment of contract formation, while the Iranian legal system, we claim, relies on the time of signing the acceptance letter as the criterion for contract formation. Various assumptions can be conceived regarding the timing of smart contract formation, and the authors argue that legal systems adhering to the theory of receipt of acceptance should rely on "receipt of the message containing acceptance of the smart contract," while legal systems favoring the theory of dispatch of acceptance should consider the "time of signing the contract with a private key by the acceptor" as the criterion for determining the timing of smart contract formation.