Comparative Studies in Jurisprudence, Law, and Politics

Conflicts of evidence in the science of principles of jurisprudence are among the most important and complex issues in analyzing manifestations and discovering the serious intention of the legislator. Although the Usul tradition has provided rules for the preference of manifestations in the general and specific, absolute and restricted, and conflicting reports sections, an independent and systematic section that monitors all types of evidence (verbal, current, status, verbal, etc.) in the form of a hierarchical system has not been compiled. This research, with the approach of "Principles of Contemporary Jurisprudence" and based on the six-axis typology of evidence - origin (legal, rational, customary, sensory), power of influence (definite and presumed), form (literal, non-literal), connection and separation (connected, disconnected), semantic function (usage, specific, concept, personal, typical), and jurisprudential application (contextual and complementary) - seeks to design a hierarchical system to resolve the conflict of evidence. The main innovation of the research is in adding the axis of jurisprudential application as the connection point of the axes and designing a step-by-step algorithm to systematize the preference process; an algorithm that first resolves the unstable conflict with the customary plural and then, in the event of a conflict, the preference rules are applied based on the levels of authority, the potentiality of emergence, rational and religious preferences, and the contextual/complementary ratio. The findings show that this multi-layered framework not only elevates the conflict of evidence from the level of personal preferences to the level of scientific rules, but also has the ability to adapt to complex jurisprudential and contemporary issues.

The England and Wales Police Notice provides information about the right to remain silent to suspects in police custody. Although previous studies of other groups have suggested that the notice is too complex for detainees to fully understand, this issue has not previously been directly examined among police detainees. In this paper, we examined the understanding of the Notice of Defendant's Rights in two groups: suspects at the police station (n=30) and people attending a job centre in the same area (n=24), who were matched for intellectual ability. In both groups, understanding of the notice was very limited and did not relate to their status at the time of testing or their self-reported experience of the criminal justice system. Even in the optimal test conditions, only 11% (six) of participants were able to demonstrate a full understanding of its meaning. The problem is that although over 96% (fifty-two) claimed to have fully understood the warning after being served in the usual police manner, none of them actually did so. Finally, the research suggests practical measures to mitigate these problems, but the importance of designing a new, simplified version of the current warning cannot be overemphasized; otherwise, there is a risk of miscarriages of justice.

Public oversight of governmental performance is one of the fundamental components of democratic systems and serves as a benchmark for evaluating transparency and accountability in the administration of public affairs. Using a comparative approach and a descriptive-analytical method, this study examines the structures and legal instruments enabling public oversight of government in the constitutional systems of Iran and Iraq. In Iran’s legal system, numerous constitutional provisions—including Articles 8, 56, 59, 90, 173, and 174—alongside institutions such as the Islamic Consultative Assembly, the Supreme Audit Court, the General Inspection Organization, and the Administrative Justice Court, constitute the principal mechanisms of public oversight. In contrast, the Iraqi Constitution of 2005, emphasizing the principle of popular sovereignty and the separation of powers, designates institutions such as the Council of Representatives, the Federal Supreme Court, the Commission of Integrity, and the Federal Board of Supreme Audit as key instruments of public oversight. The findings of this study indicate that, although both countries possess advanced legal oversight frameworks, the practical realization of these mechanisms faces serious challenges—stemming from the concentration of power, weak institutional independence, and insufficient enforcement guarantees in Iran, as well as political influence, structural corruption, and partisan pressures in Iraq. Consequently, strengthening transparency, enhancing institutional independence, and institutionalizing a culture of accountability constitute essential prerequisites for the effective realization of public oversight of government in both countries.

The political relations between the Arab Republic of Egypt and Rwanda have deep historical roots that trace back to the early years of Rwanda’s independence. This connection is founded not only on good neighborliness within the African continent but also on a shared commitment to the principles of non-alignment and regional development. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to explain and analyze the strategic mechanisms employed by Egypt and Rwanda to transform their bilateral interactions into a sustainable lever of geopolitical influence within Africa’s regional structure. This objective includes identifying the transition from traditional diplomacy to a development-oriented soft-power model through the activation of economic and technical channels. The central question is as follows: How have Egypt and Rwanda succeeded, through adopting a hybrid soft-power strategy and institutionalizing complex interdependence via commercial and technical channels, in consolidating their strategic partnership, thereby advancing the political and regional ambitions of both countries? The findings indicate that the bilateral relations between Egypt and Rwanda exemplify a notable model of South–South diplomacy, whose primary aim is to strengthen Egypt’s regional position through non-military and economic instruments. Rather than relying on traditional mechanisms of power balancing, this partnership is founded upon a hybrid strategy of soft power and the development of complex interdependence. By focusing on the transfer of technical expertise (such as free-zone management and pharmaceutical memoranda of understanding) and by facilitating the active presence of non-state commercial actors, Egypt and Rwanda have expanded their influence from the level of high-level political engagement to deeper layers of the region’s economic structure. Despite the initial gap between trade volume and political potential, persistent follow-ups at ministerial and diplomatic levels have removed trade barriers and emphasized regional platforms such as the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA). Ultimately, these relations demonstrate how the regional influence of a major power (Egypt) can advance its long-term geopolitical objectives through the engineering of soft-power penetration and the institutionalization of intersecting interests, while the smaller partner (Rwanda) benefits from the advantages of this economic integration.

Following the Civil Aviation Act of 1949 and its subsequent amendments, the Statute of the Civil Aviation Organization has served as the legal foundation for the institutional structure of the Civil Aviation Organization of Iran, defining the principal framework for regulation, oversight, and policymaking within the aviation industry. Despite the latent capacities embedded in this document—including extensive statutory powers granted to the Civil Aviation Organization—the obligations arising from international instruments and conventions, together with the evolving and dynamic nature of the aviation sector, appear to have rendered a revision of this statute unavoidable. Through an analytical–critical approach, this study identifies the existing capacities of the statute while elucidating its legal and institutional gaps and challenges. It demonstrates that inconsistencies between certain provisions and the principles of regulation and accountability have constrained the statute’s overall effectiveness. The findings indicate that revising and structurally reforming the statute is fundamentally necessary to enhance transparency, accountability, compliance with international standards, and governance mechanisms—thereby strengthening the position of the Civil Aviation Organization within the national aviation industry and ensuring the safety and efficiency of the national aviation network.

Domestic violence against children is one of the fundamental challenges faced by criminal justice and child-protection systems. Its consequences are not limited to physical or psychological harm; rather, such violence also disrupts the cycle of trust, safety, and the child’s social development. Purely punitive responses, although necessary for containing violent behavior, cannot by themselves ensure the restoration of damaged relationships or the revival of the family’s educational and nurturing functions. Using a documentary–analytical method, this article examines the capacities of the restorative justice approach alongside the criminal response for addressing domestic violence against children more effectively. The findings indicate that linking criminal mechanisms (such as judicial prosecution and deterrent measures) with restorative mechanisms (including supportive dialogue, parental rehabilitation programs, specialized mediation, and non-financial forms of reparation) can, while maintaining the firmness of the justice system’s response, create opportunities for repairing harm, strengthening the child’s lifeworld, and reconstructing the family’s behavioral patterns. Ultimately, the article concludes that an integrated punitive–restorative model, grounded in support-oriented interventions and rehabilitation, constitutes a more effective approach for reducing domestic violence and promoting children’s social development.

Since its emergence, international law has always faced diverse challenges, and in the field of space law, the beginning of SpaceX’s (Starlink’s) activities—along with the technological advancements and the support provided by the United States government for this company—has created numerous challenges in this domain. However, this study aims to answer the following question: What is the approach of international law regarding the participation of Starlink satellites in the Russia–Ukraine war? It appears that international law considers this company to have adopted a dual-use policy, encompassing both military and non-military functions. Accordingly, by examining the rules of international law and the actions of Starlink during this war, the study reaches conclusions indicating that, aside from a few international treaties—most importantly the 1967 Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space—the legal status of the passage of space objects through the airspace under the sovereignty of other states remains entirely undefined, giving rise to significant legal disputes in this area. The absence of an international treaty aligned with the advancements in this field is strongly felt in discussions regarding Starlink’s support for Ukraine. This treaty gap, alongside issues such as space debris, state responsibility, space insurance, and similar concerns, may serve as challenges that could pave the way for the emergence of a third world war in outer space.

Although the Iranian Civil Code has defined the general principles governing the agency contract, it lacks precision in clarifying and distinguishing between the related legal institutions of delegation of agency to another (tawkil be-ghayr) and transfer of authority (tafwidh). This legal ambiguity—particularly evident in notarial offices—has led to serious uncertainty in the preparation of official powers of attorney. Notaries, as the legal officers responsible for drafting documents, frequently face conceptual challenges in determining whether a given document merely constitutes permission to employ another agent (delegation of agency), or whether it entails a full transfer of the original agent’s powers (transfer of authority). The purpose of this article is to analyze and precisely distinguish the legal nature of tawkil and tafwidh, with a specific focus on their practical differences in the field of official document drafting. The research method is descriptive–analytical, based on jurisprudential principles (usul al-fiqh), relevant provisions of the Iranian Civil Code (particularly Articles 656, 672, and 673), and prevailing practices in notarial offices. The findings indicate that the fundamental difference between delegation of agency and transfer of authority lies in the continuation of powers, responsibility of the primary agent, and mode of termination of the secondary agency. In tawkil, the first agent (secondary principal) retains his original powers and shares responsibility with the secondary agent (sub-agent) for actions taken. Conversely, in tafwidh—as commonly practiced in notarial offices—the first agent’s authority is completely revoked, and the agency relationship is directly established between the original principal and the second agent. This distinction has profound implications for termination, dismissal, and liabilities arising from agency. These differences are crucial when drafting notarial instruments and determining the contractual clauses contained therein (such as the phrase “even repeatedly”), as they directly affect the survival or cessation of the legal effects of the agency.