تببین خلاف بیّن شرع از منظر فقه اسلامی و حقوق موضوعه

Internal Review: 3 weeks
Review: 5.1 weeks
Final Decision: 6.3 weeks
Production: 8.4 weeks

قاسم  سلمانی; پرویز  ذکائیان; بیت الله  دیوسالار

doi:10.61838/csjlp.6.5.8

Authors

Ghasem Salmani PhD Student of Islamic Jurisprudence and Foundations of Islamic Law, Faculty of Law, Islamic Azad University, Chalus, Iran. Author https://orcid.org/0009-0001-2584-8601
Parviz Zokaeiyan PhD in Islamic Jurisprudence and Foundations of Islamic Law, Faculty of Law, Islamic Azad University, Chalus, Iran Corresponding author https://orcid.org/0009-0008-6595-1444
Beytollah Divsalar PhD in Islamic Jurisprudence and Foundations of Islamic Law, Faculty of Law, Islamic Azad University, Chalus, Iran Author https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1227-6405

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.61838/csjlp.6.5.8

Keywords:

Manifest Contradiction of Islamic Law, Finalized Judgment, Supreme Court, Article 477 of the Criminal Procedure Code, Law Amending Article 18 of the Law on the Establishment of General and Revolutionary Courts

Abstract

In the Iranian legal system, the principle is that judgments issued by the relevant courts become final after the exhaustion of appellate procedures. Once the judgment attains finality, the ruling proceeds to the execution stage. However, there are exceptions where a final judgment may be revoked, and the execution process halted. Among these exceptions is the issuance of a judgment that is manifestly contradictory to Islamic Sharia, as reflected in Article 477 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Given that Iran's legal system is derived from and influenced by Shi'a jurisprudence, no law should be enacted contrary to the definitive principles of jurisprudence. Consequently, judicial decisions, which by constitutional mandate must be based on statutory law, must not contradict fundamental jurisprudential principles. The enforcement mechanism for this issue involves the annulment of the judgment (even if finalized) and its return to the judicial process.