Legal developments

Abstract The opposition of formalism- which the registration of documents related to transaction is one of it's manifestations- to the principle of the consensualism in contracts, reveals only part of it's role in the contemporary law in civil law countries, and the allegation that a simple exchange of creative intention is sufficient to create a contract also accounts for only part of the positive law. To discover the importance of formalism, one must go beyond the analysis of the rules relating to the formation of contracts. Despite the establishment of the principle of consent in contracts, formalism plays an important role in contemporary law and is also a complemention to it. In Islamic jurisprudence, the focus of jurists was mainly on the expression of the intention of the contract by method other than writing, especially by words. Some even considered words to be a constituent element of the contract and something substantial that can be compared to the mandatory formalism in Roman law. However, only a group of later jurists, accepted the use of writing to express intention in rare cases without the parties being obliged to do so. Although there is no position for writing in legal acts in civil law, in negotiable instruments law, transactions made on a instrument must necessarily be in writing and the Registration of Documents and Real Estate act, as well as the Hesbi Affairs act, have also emphasized the need to use writing in some legal acts such as peace agreements, gift agreements, wills, etc. In Iranian legal regulations, which it is emphasized on the writing of legal acts, the role of registration is a complementary aspect and the principle of consensuality of legal acts as well as the constructive role of the intention has never been denied in them.

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 Given the increasing number of executive institutions and the increasing complexity of relationships between different governmental units, the emergence of intra-governmental disputes is invariable. Referring these disputes to judicial authorities, including the judiciary, is usually a long, costly process that requires specific legal expertise. A thing not consistent with the need for coherent cooperation between different parts of the government in the direction of effective management of public affairs. For this reason, governments are always seeking to use domestic, non-judicial, and less costly mechanisms to resolve disputes before resorting to formal courts. In the law of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Article 134 of the Constitution grants the authority to handle disputes between executive institutions to the Council of Ministers. Following this ruling, the government has enacted numerous and diverse regulations in the form of regulations since 1979 to regulate these types of disputes. Regulations that have in some cases been the subject of conflict and debate with the general jurisdiction of the judiciary under Article 159 of the Constitution. A similar mechanism is seen in the South African legal system. According to the country's Intergovernmental Relations Framework Law, administrative disputes must first be resolved within the governmental structure and through methods set forth in the law, and only if these methods were ineffective or the dispute was officially declared, it is possible to refer to a judicial tribunal. This article, by reviewing the historical development of these procedures, examining the interpretive foundations of the constitutions of the two countries, and conducting a comparative analysis of existing mechanisms, evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of each system, and finally proposes solutions to improve the efficiency of the process of resolving intragovernmental disputes.

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.

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 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.