Comparative Studies in Jurisprudence, Law, and Politics

Moral vices are among the social harms that can challenge the ethical and social well-being of society and create conditions that weaken human and religious values. In this regard, Imami jurisprudence, as one of the most significant normative systems in Islamic thought, not only explains individual legal rulings but also possesses substantial capacities for guiding social behavior and preventing the spread of moral vices within society. The main issue addressed in this study is the examination of the role of Imami jurisprudential teachings in controlling and reducing moral vices and the clarification of the effective jurisprudential mechanisms in this regard. The present research was conducted using a descriptive–analytical method based on library resources and jurisprudential texts. The findings indicate that teachings such as enjoining good and forbidding evil (al-amr bi al-ma‘ruf wa al-nahy ‘an al-munkar), the prohibition of assisting in sin, the prohibition of spreading immorality, and certain jurisprudential principles related to preventing corruption and preserving social order constitute some of the most important instruments of Imami jurisprudence for controlling and reducing moral vices. Based on the results of this study, Imami jurisprudence, through the provision of a set of normative principles and legal rules, can play a significant role in strengthening moral values, preventing the expansion of moral vices, and promoting the ethical health of society.

Fair trial is one of the important and key concepts of justice in the judicial system, which has numerous dimensions and examples. Numerous studies have been conducted on fair trial and its various dimensions. The purpose of the present article is to examine fair trial in pre-Islamic Iran in comparison with Islamic teachings. The following article is descriptive and analytical and uses a library method to examine the subject in question. The findings indicate that both in ancient Iran during the Achaemenid and especially Sasanian rule and in Islamic teachings, fair trial was of great importance and emphasis. The obligation of judges to be impartial and to judge fairly and the right to object to the verdict are among the most important evidences of fair trial in pre-Islamic Iran. The impartiality of the judge and the equality of all before the law, the right to a lawyer, and the defendant's defense rights such as citing witnesses are among the most important examples of fair trial that have been emphasized in Islam. The richest Islamic source in this regard is perhaps the life of Imam Ali (AS), who always emphasized the observance of justice in proceedings and even advised judges to treat both parties to the dispute equally.

The transfer of the benefits of immovable property, as one of the most common forms of property exploitation, plays a significant role in economic and social relations. Nevertheless, the absence of an effective obligation to execute an official deed, or the practical disregard for registration formalities, has resulted in serious challenges at the stage of proving such transfers before courts. Differences concerning the evidentiary value of unofficial documents, conflicts between unofficial and official deeds, and inconsistencies in judicial practice regarding the admissibility of evidence are among the issues threatening individuals’ legal security. The present study, employing a descriptive–analytical method and relying on legal sources and judicial practice, examines the evidentiary challenges relating to the transfer of the benefits of immovable property arising from the execution or non-execution of official deeds. The findings demonstrate that the lack of consistency in the interpretation of registration regulations and evidentiary rules has led to contradictory judgments and has revealed the necessity for legislative reform and the unification of judicial practice. As stipulated in the Law on the Mandatory Official Registration of Transactions Relating to Immovable Property, a system has been established for individuals lacking official deeds concerning the ownership of benefits exceeding two years in order to organize unofficial documents and register them within the system. In the subsequent step, it is argued that the restriction of “more than two years” for the registration of ownership of benefits should be amended, and that the ownership of benefits, regardless of any temporal limitation, should be subject to organizational registration measures so that the legal ownership rights of individuals lacking official deeds may be guaranteed. Finally, practical legislative, judicial, and procedural solutions are proposed in order to reduce disputes and enhance legal security.

Ensuring the security of individuals in society while observing human rights principles is one of the duties of governance. However, while emphasizing the importance and necessity of this duty, the present study seeks to explain the effect of the role and participation of the people in achieving desirable and sustainable security. Certainly, security that derives from the cooperation, solidarity, and synergy of different social groups with the institutions responsible for security will be sustainable and inviolable. Since there are many commonalities, especially in some important human rights categories such as the right to life, human dignity, the right to freedom, the rights to education and training, and similar matters, between Islamic human rights and what is referred to as universal human rights, despite the foundational and fundamental differences between Islamic human rights and what we believe in as the rights of the nation based on our country’s Constitution, and despite the fact that this issue has become a point of pressure, bargaining, and exploitation by major powers, it is necessary to design a model that includes explanatory, defensive, and offensive approaches for interaction within this framework. Consequently, because human rights and human security focus on a single subject, namely “human dignity,” and on the development of different dimensions of human life, including individual, social, and international dimensions, they have the capacity to overlap with and reinforce one another. Human rights provide the legal and juridical foundations necessary for realizing human security strategies, namely “protection” and “empowerment.” Conversely, by emphasizing the operational dimensions of international human rights instruments, particularly economic, social, and cultural rights, as well as the securitization of certain concerns shared with human rights, human security provides the necessary support for the objectives explicitly stated in international human rights instruments.

The present article examines the relationship between monetary policies—particularly the process of liquidity creation—and their socio-behavioral consequences in the form of increased various types of delinquency in Iranian society. The primary objective of the study is to explain the socio-economic mechanisms through which disproportionate liquidity growth and inefficiencies in the banking system can intensify livelihood pressures, reduce social capital, and ultimately increase the propensity toward delinquent behaviors. The research adopts a descriptive–analytical method based on document review and theoretical analysis. Within this framework, the trends of liquidity creation in Iran’s economy and their inflationary consequences are first examined; subsequently, drawing on approaches from economic sociology and theories of social pathology, the relationship between economic variables and indicators of delinquency is explicated. The findings indicate that an increase in liquidity without productive backing, through generating chronic inflation, reducing purchasing power, and exacerbating economic inequalities, creates conditions that weaken informal social controls and heighten structural pressure on vulnerable groups. These conditions, indirectly, increase the likelihood of both minor and major forms of delinquency. Furthermore, the inefficiency of monetary policies and weak banking supervision intensify this process and contribute to the reproduction of the cycle of social harm. Ultimately, the article concludes that reforming monetary policies, controlling unproductive liquidity creation, and strengthening transparency within the banking system are not only economic imperatives but also critical strategies for preventing social harm and enhancing social security.

In international multimodal transport documents of goods, despite the recognition of the unified liability of the multimodal transport operator, contrary to the principle of full compensation for damage, the scope of the operator’s liability is subject to specific limitations. Based on the value of the cargo and with due regard to the place where the damage occurs, the extent of liability for compensating the incurred loss is determined. Nevertheless, the parties to the contract of carriage may, by stipulating Paramount and Kaspiana clauses or by entering into agreements concerning the limitation of liability, modify the scope of liability in respect of potential future damages, provided that the level of liability does not fall below the minimum threshold prescribed in the multimodal transport convention as the governing law. Furthermore, the scope of liability of servants, agents, and representatives of the multimodal transport operator is determined in accordance with the international convention governing unimodal carriage of goods; however, the parties to the contract of carriage may, by stipulating a Himalaya clause, determine the scope of liability of these persons by agreement, thereby extending the limitations of liability to all persons involved in the multimodal transport of goods.

Crimes against public morality are of particular significance due to their infringement upon both the material and immaterial aspects of human life. Accordingly, Iran’s criminal policy, following Islamic criminal policy at the levels of theory and legislation, has addressed such crimes with the utmost severity and has prescribed heavy punishments for them. However, at the level of implementation, the approach of both criminal policies in dealing with these crimes—during prosecution, investigation, proof, and enforcement of punishment—stands in contrast to the strictness of the policy at the evidentiary and substantiation stage. In the adjudication process, a policy of concealment of the offense (crime-covering) is recommended and favored. Consequently, a category of offenses has been criminalized under the title of crimes against public morality. In Iranian law, crimes against public morality are divided into two categories: hudūd crimes against public morality, for which specific punishments are prescribed under Islamic law, and taʿzīr crimes against public morality. Taʿzīr crimes against public morality are, in fact, criminal behaviors occurring in the context of unlawful sexual relations that do not fall within the scope of hudūd punishments. This study was conducted using a descriptive–analytical method, and the findings indicate that, with respect to crimes against public morality, an examination of the relevant legal provisions in Iranian legislation and judicial practice reveals that the legislature’s general policy—following Islamic teachings—emphasizes concealment of the offense and the use of institutions such as enjoining good and forbidding wrong, as well as crime prevention. At the same time, in its legislative criminal policy, it has adopted a punitive and repressive approach, which is not fully aligned with the judicial criminal policy that tends toward leniency and forbearance through the application of sentence mitigation. As a result, Iran’s criminal policy in combating crimes against public morality requires review and reform from various perspectives. Judicial practice in punishing crimes against public morality generally follows and is subordinate to the legislative criminal policy and the Islamic Penal Code enacted in 2013, except in certain cases where interpretations and opinions issued by judges and the General Department of the Judiciary do not conform to the prevailing criminal policy. Nevertheless, in determining which of these two approaches or policies should prevail in the issuance of judgments, the circumstances surrounding the commission of the crime are decisive, and the determination rests with the judge. Accordingly, the legislator has, in various provisions of the Penal Code, clarified the punishments for crimes against public morality and enumerated all conditions for their realization so that judges do not encounter difficulties in legal inference and so that the full rights of victims in this regard are duly safeguarded.

The Administrative Justice Court, as the most important specialized judicial authority for examining complaints, grievances, and objections of citizens against the decisions and actions of governmental and public bodies, plays a fundamental role in guaranteeing citizens’ rights and realizing the rule of law within the Iranian legal system. From a theoretical perspective, this institution is expected to function as an effective mechanism for controlling administrative power, preventing arbitrariness by executive authorities, and restoring violated citizens’ rights. However, empirical assessments indicate that the Court’s performance does not always fully correspond to this ideal function. The central issue of this research is the pathology of the role of the Administrative Justice Court in guaranteeing citizens’ rights, with a focus on institutional deficiencies and procedural inefficiencies. The main research question is which factors within the structure, competences, and procedures of the Court have weakened its effectiveness in providing meaningful protection for citizens’ rights, and what consequences these shortcomings have entailed for public trust and the rule of law. The research method is descriptive–analytical and is based on the examination of statutory documents, judgments, and judicial practices of the Administrative Justice Court, the viewpoints of public law doctrine, and a limited comparative analysis with certain advanced administrative law systems. The data have been analyzed through library-based sources and qualitative content analysis. The findings indicate that factors such as limitations on the Court’s supervisory jurisdiction, ambiguity in adjudicative standards, excessive length of proceedings, lack of uniformity in judicial practice, weakness in the enforcement of judgments, and susceptibility to administrative considerations constitute the most significant obstacles to the Court’s effective fulfillment of its role in guaranteeing citizens’ rights. In practice, these shortcomings have led to a decline in the efficiency of judicial protection and a weakening of citizens’ sense of legal security. The conclusion of the study suggests that reforming the role of the Administrative Justice Court requires a simultaneous reconsideration of its institutional structure and judicial procedures. Finally, the research recommends that through expanding the Court’s competences, strengthening judicial independence, enhancing procedural transparency, expediting adjudication, and improving the enforcement of judgments, the conditions for a more effective fulfillment of the Court’s role in guaranteeing citizens’ rights can be achieved.