Legal developments

Abstract The independence of the International Criminal Court in relation to the Security Council is relative. On the one hand, the close relationship between the ICC and UN Security Council diminishes the quality and legitimacy of justice(suspension of the investigation or reversal of the Court's actions by the Council) and the other hand, without their cooperation or without pursuing justice through power-politics(referral of the situation by the Council to the Court), some of the most serious international crimes and their perpetrators would never be tried. The question of the present descriptive-analytical research is how to assess the relationship between a judicial institution and a political institution in the prosecution of international crimes? In response, while evaluating all aspects of the relationship under study, using the functional approach of the Rome Statute, namely establishing peace through punishing perpetrators of international crimes, and the methodological approach, namely interpreting existing legal rules and highlighting the legal relationships between these rules, the research findings show that while the Council can positively activate the jurisdiction of the ICC, it can negatively suspend the ICC's activities; So after twenty-four years since the establishment of the ICC and, consequently, its relationship with the Council, and considering the Council's claim to functional control over the ICC, rationalizing the balance of power in the Security Council and the ICC is more necessary than ever. Limiting the exercise of the veto right and revising the Obligatory abstention rule of Article2(3) of the UN Charter, considering the subject matter of the complaint for UN fact-finding mission, and the possibility of reviewing the legitimacy of the Security Council's interventions in light of the Control Criteria, the latter two of which are subject to amendment to Article17 of the Statute or the adoption of a debatable amendment, have been put forward as suggestions.

Abstract The institution of pardon within Iran's criminal justice system, as one of the instruments of executive criminal policy, has in recent years transcended its traditional function as a manifestation of sovereign mercy and has evolved into a regulatory mechanism for managing the penal population. In this context, the Criteria-Based Pardon Circular issued by the Head of the Judiciary in September 2025 (Shahrivar 1404) introduces a novel approach to granting pardons to convicts, grounded in objective and transparent criteria. Adopting a descriptive-analytical method and proceeding from the fundamental premise that pardon constitutes an instrument of criminal policy, this study seeks to evaluate the aforementioned circular. The aim of this research is to conduct a systematic analysis of the circular from a criminal policy perspective, in order to elucidate its objectives, scope of impact, innovations, and potential tensions. From this standpoint, the study may play a significant role in informing future policy-making. The central research question is: which model of criminal policy does the Criteria-Based Circular of 1404 (2025) reflect within Iran's criminal justice system, and what policy-oriented distinctions does this standardized pardon exhibit in comparison with previous practices? The findings indicate that this comprehensive pardon, rather than being predicated upon judicial individualization, is primarily governed by the logic of managerialism in criminal justice. By distinguishing low-risk offences from security-related and major economic crimes, the Criteria-Based Circular reflects a hybrid model combining a differential, lenient approach with an authoritarian one. The broad inclusion of convicts—encompassing both intentional and unintentional offenders—underscores the objective of reducing prison overcrowding and controlling the costs of the criminal justice system.

Abstract The traditional approach to civil liability has primarily focused on compensating and repairing the losses suffered by the victim (compensatory damages). However, in many instances, the violation of a right not only causes loss to the right-holder but also yields significant profits for the wrongdoer—a situation that classic compensation models cannot fully address. Amidst this, disgorgement of profits arising from a violation of rights has emerged as an exceptional, non-compensatory remedy, initially in Common Law and subsequently in contemporary legal literature. Utilizing a descriptive-analytical method and a comparative approach within English and American Common Law, this research examines the possibility or impossibility of cumulating this remedy with other forms of damage payment, whether compensatory or non-compensatory. The findings indicate that, compared to compensatory damages, disgorgement of profits is fundamentally an exceptional institution; if compensatory damages suffice to protect the victim’s rights, awarding disgorgement is unnecessary. At the same time, the unrestricted cumulation of these two remedies can lead to double recovery. Therefore, the appropriate solution in this area is awarding the higher amount or deducting the compensatory damages from the realized profits. Conversely, disgorgement of profits is considered cumulatable with non-compensatory damages, particularly punitive damages, as each serves a distinct function: disgorgement aims to strip the wrongdoer of unlawful gains, while punitive damages serve a punitive and deterrent purpose. Consequently, disgorgement of profits should be applied in a manner that prevents the wrongdoer’s unjust enrichment while simultaneously avoiding both double recovery and under-compensation.

Abstract The interpretation of Article 816 of the Civil Code that "... shall be void" as the effect of intercession in the validity of customer transactions has become a source of disagreement among jurists, as to how a valid transaction becomes a void transaction from the first day of its conclusion. Will it be?! How can the regressive effect of receiving shafea be combined with the accuracy of the customer's possessions?! By looking at the jurisprudential records, including the possibility of annulment from the first day of the contract, or its rescission, together with other rulings in the civil law itself, including the validity of the buyer's legal possessions or his ownership of separate interests from the date of the sale to the acceptance of the intercession. The theory of canceling such contracts seems more compatible with the existing legal system and rules. In the matter of material possessions, the two assumptions of the impropriety of the buyer's material possession of the property subject to protection and its permissibility are separated from each other, and in the first case, the buyer is obliged to take possession of the property and agriculture, without the right to receive compensation. However, in the second assumption, despite the buyer's right to dispose of his properties by owning them, if the properties include buildings and trees, there is a possibility of removing them by the intercessor, because taking the intercession causes ownership of the seller by the intercessor

Abstract The rich and Persian multi-layered classical literature is not only an artistic and linguistic treasure, but also an unic source for interdisciplinary studies, especially in the fields of philosophy, sociology, and law. This article, with a critical and analyticaldescriptive approach, expands and deepens the analysis of the fundamental concepts of criminal law and criminology in a wide range of Iranian literary works. This research, beyond a superficial look, explores the roots and various dimensions of phenomena such as crime, punishment, justice, criminal responsibility, victimization, and crime prevention in literary texts and contrasts and comparasion them with contemporary criminological theories. From Ferdowsi's Shahnameh as the oldest document of national identity to Rumi's spiritual Masnavi as the pinnacle of mystical thought, and from Saadi's Golestan and Bustan as a school of practical ethics to the poems of Hafez and Obaid Zakani as symbols of social criticism, are explored. This article shows how Iranian classical literature has functioned as a historical criminology and reflected the profound views of a nation towards these phenomena.

Abstract This research examines the role of legal moralism as a fundamental criterion in the criminalization process, with a focus on the Iranian legal system. The present study was made by using a descriptive approach and library-based research and shows that perspectives in this field are largely divided between proponent and opponent. The proponent of legal moralism, consider morality as the foundation of social cohesion and emphasize on the necessity for lawmakers to protect it in order to strengthen social solidarity. In contrast, opponents, highlighting the relativity of morality and it's potential conflict with individual freedoms, view the imposition of moral principles through law as a threat to the effectiveness of the criminal system. In the Iranian legal system, given the principles of Sharia and the collective conscience, legal moralism occupies a prominent position; however, it's application must be based on logical, legal, social, and ethical criteria. This ensures that while individual rights and freedoms are protected, the moral values and norms of society are maintained and social stability and cohesion are guaranteed. Such a balanced approach allows for the coexistence of adherence to collective morality and the safeguarding of individual rights.

Abstract This research aims to conduct a legal and human rights‑based analysis of the assassination of General Mohammad Reza Zahedi in the airstrike carried out by the Israeli regime against the consular section of the Iranian Embassy in Damascus. It seeks to examine this incident within the framework of peremptory norms of international law (jus cogens), the prohibition of the use of force, and States’ extraterritorial obligations to protect the right to life. The necessity of this study arises from the fact that extraterritorial targeted killings have emerged in recent years as a serious challenge to the international legal order, undermining the foundations of human rights and collective security. The central research question is: from the standpoint of the international human rights law system, which fundamental obligations does the assassination of General Zahedi violate, and how can the responsibility of the acting State be established? This study adopts a descriptive‑analytical approach, relying on international instruments, judicial and arbitral jurisprudence, United Nations reports, and legal doctrine. The findings indicate that the action constitutes a clear instance of arbitrary deprivation of life, a violation of the principle of non‑intervention, a breach of the inviolability of diplomatic premises, and a violation of Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Moreover, it may be characterised as a form of State terrorism. The research concludes that the operation violated absolute and non‑derogable human rights obligations, exposes the acting State to international responsibility, and underscores the urgent need to strengthen legal accountability mechanisms at the international level.

Abstract One of the defining characteristics of the digital age is the accelerated pace of communication and the role of the Internet as the gravitational centre of global information. This connectivity, in addition to bringing individuals closer together, has enabled the interaction and overlap of various technologies, including social media algorithms and machine learning systems. These developments have led to fundamental transformations in the concept of property law. Digital property rights encompass access to and control over digital information, data, internet accounts, as well as contractual and intellectual property rights in the digital sphere. This study aims to examine the evolution of property law in the digital context within the European Union and to analyse its legal doctrine with a view to proposing solutions for the enhancement of digital property law in Iran. The research question is as follows: how have the policies and regulations
of the European Union and Iran concerning digital property evolved? The findings indicate that over the past two decades, EU policy on digital technologies has shifted from a liberal economic approach towards a legal doctrine grounded in digital currencies. This transformation arises from the emergence of the information society, which has created new opportunities and challenges for fundamental rights and democratic values. The adoption of the Regulation on Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) in September 2020 exemplifies the EU’s effort to regulate and manage digital assets through legal frameworks. In contrast, Iran still lacks a clear legal framework for crypto-assets, and such assets are traded on the market without legal oversight. An examination of the EU’s legal doctrine can serve as a model for improving the Iranian legal system with respect to digital property. Conducted through a descriptive-analytical method, this study, while examining EU legal doctrine, offers recommendations for its adaptation to Iranian law.

Abstract In the Iranian legal system, agency, as a consent contract , is subject to the client's consent and the limits of his powers. Based on general principles, the agent is obliged to be subject to this consent in all his actions, and any breaching it, can lead to the invalidity of the act and civil liability of the first (principal) agent. The results of the present study indicate that since, in the assumption of a longitudinal relationship between agents in secondary, the secondary agent is not appointed directly by the client, but through the first agent; therefore, the limits of his powers are a function of the powers of the first agent and are subject to the same amount of permission that the client has given to the first agent in the context of the power of agency. However, the author, using a descriptive-analytical method, seeks to identify and examine the limits and legal effects of the powers of agent in the framework of longitudinal agents' relationships in Iranian statutory law .

Abstract Assignment of claims has long been a subject of interest in the legal systems of developed countries. This article examines and compares assignment of claims in Iranian law with a view to the laws of England and France. Using a descriptive‑analytical method and library‑based research, the study explores the similarities and differences between Iranian domestic law and the two foreign legal systems. The Iranian legislator, particularly in the Civil Code, has not specifically addressed assignment of claims. Only through the general principles of other contracts can certain conclusions be drawn, although some jurists have equated this institution with novation under Article 292 of the Civil Code. Nevertheless, a clear legislative gap exists in our statutes. While not discussed in Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh), assignment of claims does not conflict with sacred Sharia law. By its nature, elements, conditions, and related legal concepts — including novation through substitution of debtor, suretyship (zamān), assignment of debt (hawalah), bills of exchange, insurance, and factoring — assignment of claims is fundamentally distinct. Therefore, the specific provisions governing those legal acts cannot be extended to assignment of claims; rather, it has an independent nature and requires dedicated rules. In English law, assignment of claims was initially opposed for religious reasons, but it was eventually accepted and has gained recognition in commercial instruments and international trade. In French law, assignment of claims is accepted, and the new reformed Civil Code has devoted detailed provisions to it.

Abstract The Contemporary societies are confronted with complex environmental and social crises that demand integrated solutions. Such crises can only be addressed through the synthesis of three complementary approaches jurisprudential, criminal policy, and social prevention providing comprehensive and sustainable pathways toward intergenerational justice and the preservation of social order. This practical and descriptive–analytical study, inspired by verse 41 of Surah al-Rum (“Corruption has appeared on land and sea…”), combines jurisprudential principles, criminal policy frameworks, and social prevention strategies to propose a theoretical and practical foundation for innovative governance in the field of social prevention. Key questions explored include: How can jurisprudential teachings be applied to strengthen environmental criminal policy? What connections exist between jurisprudential rules such as Itlaf (destruction), Hifz al-Nizam (preservation of order), and La Darar (no harm) and social prevention policies? Finally, what role can universities, as fourth-generation institutions, play in socially preventing environmental crimes? Within the jurisprudential approach, rules such as Itlaf, Hifz al-Nizam, and La Darar are examined as normative and ethical foundations. The criminal policy approach emphasizes the criminalization of destructive behaviors and the design of both penal and non-penal sanctions. The social prevention approach highlights universities as fourth-generation institutions engaged in scientific monitoring, social responsibility, and reducing criminogenic conditions. Data collection relied on library and documentary methods, with analysis of jurisprudential, legal, and criminological sources. Findings suggest that the synergy of these three approaches can provide a coherent framework for reducing environmental and social crimes, advancing intergenerational justice, and strengthening social capital.