نشریه تحقیقات نوین میان رشته ای حقوق
سال سوم شماره 3 (پیاپی 10، پاییز 1402)

Compensating for material and moral damages to the affected individual and restoring them requires a solution known as civil liability. Civil liability is a legal relationship that entails one person's obligation to compensate for damages caused to another. Immunity and, consequently, impunity may lead to individuals tolerating the violation of each other's rights, resulting in harm. Judges, like other individuals, are prone to errors, and it is not unthinkable that they may negligently or even maliciously, misuse their discretionary power, causing harm to the rights of the parties involved. The error of a judge is of double importance as it may jeopardize the lives, property, and reputation of individuals. Therefore, it is essential to take measures to compensate for the damages inflicted on individuals. Legislators, in consideration of the principle of equality before the law and to enhance democracy, have brought judicial liability into focus, gradually moving from absolute immunity towards civil liability, as the responsibility of judges was previously overlooked in the pursuit of the principle of absolute immunity. In this research, after clarifying the concept of civil liability and its foundations, we delve into a comparative study of judicial civil liability in Iran, France, and the United States.

4In today's world, the enemy, especially relying on various tools in the virtual space, constantly seeks to achieve its sinister goals, including weakening the significant issue of Islamic hijab in Islamic societies. The Islamic Penal Code of the Islamic Republic of Iran, rooted in the Islamic faith, designates this important and religious duty as part of the religious obligations and obligates its recipients to adhere to this principle. The current conditions in the country indicate multiple efforts by the enemy in this regard, and unfortunately, many sisters have fallen for foreign deception and will be incited to pursue these sinister goals. Non-compliance with Islamic hijab in the present circumstances initially raises the question for the judges as to whether the actor has committed this act merely out of emotion, or whether it was, in fact, a deliberate act with a previous intention and for the purpose of encouraging others of the same gender to engage in similar actions. This issue has created differences of opinion among judges, especially resulting in contradictory rulings Regardless of the validity of the reasoning of either proponents of the two viewpoints, it seems that in choosing the type of punishment and, consequently, determining the penalty, the prevailing conditions in the country should also be taken into account, and making an absolute decision in this matter appears inappropriate.

Authorized murder is a complex issue that the legislator has allowed to be committed with exceptional actions and created conditions for it in the law. This issue is rooted in old traditions or jurisprudence-religion that has infiltrated the laws of countries. In Iran, although there is a discussion of legal murder in local cultures, the main source of Iran's Islamic Penal Code is jurisprudence, and the conditions considered in this law for authorized murders originate from jurisprudence. In the United States, this issue is mostly derived from the common law system, but the local culture has also influenced this issue, and therefore we see that in some states, different conditions are considered in regrd with authorized murder than in other states. Considering this issue, we have done an analytical-descriptive study of the issue of authorized murder in the criminal systems of Iran and America and we have advanced our discussion with the library method. The results of the research show that legal murder in Iran has strict conditions that make it very difficult to strictly comply with the legal standards for committing murder at that moment and this causes the legislator to not recognize authorized murder but instead authorized murder. In contrast, in America, especially in the state of Texas, it has the conditions that the legislator has considered certain signs for committing murder and this issue has caused many murders to be committed and thus, the lax conditions of the legislator have caused the spread of this type of murder.

The word "arms", which is seemingly simple and innocent, is considered to be taboo in the world of criminal law. Iran's legislative history proves that the legal concept of arms is ambiguous. By enacting the supplementary note to Article 651 of the Islamic Penal Code in 2007 and approving the Law on the Punishment of Weapons and Ammunition and Owners of Unauthorized Weapons and Ammunition in 2010 and its Executive Regulations, the legislator has revised the content to some extent, but in relation to the rules and standards of weapons in the note of Article 614 of the Islamic Penal Code approved in 1375, the ambiguity still remains and the conflict of opinions and beliefs, although it is the cause of the dynamic of knowledge, but different attitudes and different ways of thinking from the mentioned note sometimes lead to laxity and sometimes to strictness in formal proceedings and finally, acquittal or conviction in substantive proceedings is the same for the perpetrator in similar circumstances. From the beginning of the formation of human societies, crime and the fear of its occurrence have been one of the main concerns of humans, but in today's age, when using new technology, borders have practically disappeared, and globalization also encourages the expansion and facilitation of cross-border communication. Committing "organized crimes" is a problem that threatens the world society of the 21st century and the entire humanity. The importance of this issue has led countries to spend a large amount of national income to fight crime and organize various national and international efforts to curb it. These efforts sometimes appear in the form of reaction and suppression and sometimes in the form of passive and indirect measures. In this research, library studies have been used to explain and analyze the actions and measures taken by the scientific police in an active and reactive manner to prevent crime.

The present study aims to examine the legal effects of the merger of banks and financial and credit institutions towards the third party and the resulting civil liability. In Iran's legal system, due to several factors, including the prevention of bank bankruptcy, the non-compliance of laws, rules and regulations, and guidelines governing the field of commercial law and monetary and banking law with the current standards in the field of international trade and banking, there are ambiguities and significant legal loopholes regarding bank mergers. Due to the features and advantages that merger has; it can be one of the most effective methods to prevent bankruptcy. The merger of banks is one of the most effective economic mechanisms to save an economic enterprise from financial turmoil and bankruptcy. The current research method is exploratory and analytical in terms of nature and library-based in terms of data collection. This research has been compiled in response to the legal and economic characteristics of the merger of banks and financial institutions compared to other mergers and in order to investigate the imposed merger of banks and financial institutions on third parties. What was deduced as a result of the mentioned discussions is that in terms of commercial regulations, there is no difference between the merger of banks and financial institutions with other economic enterprises; but in terms of competition rules, due to serious financial effects, these mergers must be done under certain conditions, such as the approval of the central bank. Regarding the economic feature, considering the fact that the customers of the banks are very large compared to the commercial companies, and people's deposits from small to large are kept in the banks, it seems that the abuse of them will lead to loss of people's trust, economic downturn, and loss of social stability and order. Therefore, the merger of these groups should be done with more care and supervision. The forced merger of banks and financial institutions will increase the capital and financial credit of the bank accepting the merger, which is considered a strong support for their demand. The impact of such a merger on the debtors of the institution is that they are placed with the bank accepting the merger and are obligated to pay the debt to the bank.

Citizenship rights are the set of fundamental rights that a person has as a citizen, which includes the principle of legitimate freedom, the principle of acquittal, the right to access a lawyer, the right to access a competent court, etc. The constitution has given special attention to these rights and the Islamic Council has protected them in the law respecting legitimate freedoms and protecting the rights of citizens. Every human being is a human being regardless of his/her thoughts, ethnicity, and language, and as a human being, he/she has human dignity and rank; for this reason, his human dignity cannot be undermined with any excuse. On the other hand, every person in any society has a series of fundamental and necessary rights that must be respected and protected by the government. Based on this, the present research aims to compare the single article of the Law on Respecting Legitimate Freedoms and Protecting Citizen Rights and answer the question whether the concept of freedom and examples of freedom are the same in both human rights and citizenship rights documents. This article is of a descriptive-analytical type and its results showed that due to the security orientation of the new law in accepting citizenship rights, the legislator has considered the aspects of caution and in some cases has set some limits regarding the claim of moral damages.