مجله فقه مقارن
پیاپی 3 (بهار و تابستان 1393)

Pardon is an action which takes place to relinquish all or part of the punishment of convicts. According to Islamic jurisprudence, this right in the realm of the discretionary punishments is absolutely in the hands of the ruling authority; But in the realm of prescribed punishments (Hudūd) that pertain to God, the ruling authority is allowed to forgive if the crime is proved by confession, whether the offender repents or not, and in case that pardon is expedient or lack of forgiveness causes corruption. Pardon right, not just for the Fourteen Infallibles (Ma‘sūmūn). And at the time of occultation lies in the hands of Walī-al Faqīh (Guardian Jurist), but other judges who are permitted by Walī-al Faqīh have no right to pardon. Unless Walī-al Faqīh, in addition to the judicial authority, gives them the authority of pardon.

Most of Islamic jurisprudents from diverse schools of law, in a cursory way and with the utmost brevity, have considered the announcement of ruler and the presence of people at the scene of the implementation of punishment desirable counting it as necessary or recommended, relying on verse 2 of Sūrah al -Nūr, certain traditions and the nature of its deterrence of people from committing the same crime. Verse 2 of Sūrah al- Nūr, with two constraints of "group" and "believers", is narrower than the proponent's claim and each of the narratives has a symmetry that the utility does not withdraw from them. And visiting the scenes of punishment for deterrence and crime reduction also has not been proven. After reaching the primary ruling of the subject, examining the effects and consequences of this operation is essential in today's world which can even in the assumption of accepting the claimed utility in the religion, on the basis of interests, prevent it. This paper, by reviewing evidence in Islamic jurisprudence, investigates the issue and according to the social and political effects of public punishment and temporal requirements, seeks to find the primary and secondary rulings in this regard.

A non-Muslim citizen is a member of the Muslim community, who despite holding non-Muslim beliefs has the right to participate actively in promoting the affairs of his community and enjoy individual, civil, political, social and religious rights. Based on the prior literature of jurisprudence, non-Muslims by accepting the treaty of ahl al-ḏhimmah can be citizens of the Islamic community and sponsored by the Islamic government. In Islamic law, restrictions are mentioned about the religious freedoms of non-Muslim citizens in an Islamic state, on the expression of religious rituals and promoting it, setting up a house of worship, repairing and renewing the ruined temples. In addition to explaining the religious rights of non-Muslim citizens, it strives to mention the above restrictions and explains the limitations of such laws that have been variable and the basis of all these constraints is interest.

Normal Reproduction of mankind is done through sexual intercourse. In this way, the sperm and ovum form Zygote or egg cell and the embryonic stages begin. In cloning process, Living being is produced without sexual intercourse and sperm involvement. Thus it differs from the somatic cell and through its combination with an egg cell from which the nucleus has been removed, a complete Living being is born. Cloning of plants and animals is permissible in Imāmīyeh and Sunnī jurisprudence; however have different ideas about human cloning. Some of Imāmī jurists consider it absolute permit, and some of them limited permit and others find it unlawful but Sunnī jurists recognize it as an unlawful action. Changing the creation of God is among the reasons for the prohibition of the practice. In the current paper by examining this reason, one may conclude that this reason does not include the cloning and in this case cannot be banned human Cloning.

In Islamic texts, endowment of money has appeared, mostly in the form of the "endowment of dirham and dinar" because money in the early Islamic era has been confined to these two types. The definition provided by the jurists for Waqf (religious endowment) caused to dedicate some important things whose advantage do not waste them. And thus, expanding the circle of Waqf and equipping many assets in its frame have been impossible. Due to the Contractual Nature of money, this question is raised: "Is endowment of money legitimate?" Some Imāmī, Hanbalī and Shāfi'ī and most of the Hanafī jurists, among the community of Shiite and Sunnī scholars, have permitted the endowment of money and many of the Mālikī jurists have agreed absolutely with this issue. These reasons can be cited by the jurists; being the same sentence of Waqf with loan and hire of money, endowment of money's capable of being owned, no contradiction between endowment of money and its remaining, Wise people's view and applying its reason, etc. In the article, we write about it.

Two significant concerns of every community are public health and access to healthful consumption resources, and fraud on food products can jeopardize both of them. Fraud on food products consists of replacing the original food product, using additives, and making unauthorized changes in raw materials or in the manufacturing process, misrepresentation and unauthorized packaging of food. In this writing, based on the library method, are examining the crime against public health through fraud in food products to identify the holy lawgiver's discernment and our country's approved policy in positive law. From the perspective of Comparative jurisprudence and rights, argument can be evaluated from several aspects: The first aspect of the Hereafter and divine reward and punishment, the second from the viewpoint of business jurisprudence, the third from the view of criminal law in the issues of Qisās and Diyyāt and the fourth discretionary punishments of offenders and finally, the position of Comparative jurisprudence towards discretionary punishment in this fields.