JOURNAL OF ISLAMIC LAW AND JURISPRUDENCE RESEARCHES
Year:2016 | Volume:12 | Issue:44|Papers Count:7

This research aims at reviewing the religious jurisprudence of the amount of blood money and the slaughterer’s arbitrary choice, meaning whether the six forms in which the blood money can be paid (camel, ox, sheep, Dirham, Dinar, Yamani Hilla) are still valid or not? Or is it logical that the slaughterer have arbitrary choice over these six forms of payment? According to Shiite Religious Jurisprudents’ fatwa and the Words, the blood money of manslaughter of a Muslim male is said to be in one of the six forms (camel, ox, sheep, Dirham, Dinar, Yamani Hilla). The most prominent Shiite religious jurisprudents believe that the slaughterer is free to choose among these said forms, but the results of this study shows firstly that these six forms of blood money payment are not valid at the present time, rather, what was intended by the religious lawgiver had been some amount of money determined by the Islamic ruler in accordance with Sharia’s references and the era’s conditions to be paid to the slaughtered in order to prevent the blood of a Muslim going to waste, secondly that the arbitrary choice of slaughterer in the form of payment is not logical at present conditions. So it is recommended that the amount of blood money and the arbitrary choice of the slaughterer be revised by the Shiite religious jurisprudents with religious deducing according to present time conditions. The method of this study is descriptive-analytical in which the necessary information has been gathered by studying The Words and reviewing some of the prominent Shiite’s religious jurisprudents verdict on manslaughter’s blood money.

Corruption on earth acting against national security in cyberspace shows significant prevalence as one of the crimes with the highest incidence in today’s society, due to technological advances which seems to be far more destructive than the traditional one. No verdict or sentence has been handed down among FOKAHA in this regard due to the novelty of the field. Examining the spreading corruption on the earth through generalizing it to the proper circumstances, the authors arrive at the conclusion that internet perpetrators, who corrupt in the earth, are required to be subjected to Haad punishments if they are committed to disruption of public safety by attributing to Surah Al-Ma’idah [verse 33] and narratives about corruption on the earth as well as tanqih al-manat.

Some of the renowned scholars have thought foolish exchanges and contracts as foregone conclusions, and some have even banned it as a religious order. On many occasions, contracts have been annulled based on such an order. The underlying meaning is that whenever a contract is made by a person who is insane, and that contract is devoid of reasonable thinking, the contract is inexistent and thus non-rectifiable. The foolishness of the contract is an independent factor which ascribes annulment to the contact. However, annulment is because of the insanity of the person who makes the contract not the insanity of the contract itself. Because of the lack of reason for the annulment of foolish contracts, they become legal unless the foolishness of the person in charge becomes evident. Moreover, the truthfulness of foolishness is difficult to prove when personal bias is in action and excludes the contract from being insane. Therefore, besides the problem that most instances of foolishness share, foolishness on its own as an independent factor in the annulment of a contract should be doubted.

Without any doubt, a deal with someone that we know he uses the dealt merchandise in legit (legitimate) way, is allowable, but dealing with someone that we know he uses the dealt merchandise in taboo way, such as selling provocative clothes to profligate women or make up these women by hairdresser and/ or leasing vehicles or audio and video equipment to the taboo party and/ or selling food and drinks on Ramadan month to fast eater and much more. What is its verdict? Jurists, especially the initiative following the narratives, only annoy the sale and rent and some jurists consider in detail between the sale and rent and have not annoy other cases such as land dedicated to children with the knowledge of using taboo or donate it and also they indicate that avoiding from own property if that lead to use taboo by the owner. The author after quoting the views of the great jurists since Sheikh Tousi time up to present reviews and criticizes the ideas and proves the absolute reverence of deals and his documents are several categories of narrative context, although he knows all other evidences of reverence that other jurists have brought.

According to Iran’s law and its implementing of regulations concerning the collection and sale of abandoned goods, the maximum time for stoppage of any goods from the date of submission of summary manifest or summons will be four months, and if in that period, the owner of the goods does not carry out customs formalities and his duties the goods will be considered abandoned. After being abandoned goods, the Customs should comply with a series of ritual for the benefit of the owner. If after doing the formalities required by customs, the owner of the goods does not attempt to take over the goods, the item will be sold as specified by the Customs Regulations (Arts. 22 and 24 of the Custom Code).This article explains the legal rules according to which the sale of goods is justified. Is it possible to justify the Customs act by rule of abandonment or other basis? The authors after asking the above question and after reviewing different approaches concluded that the mere lack of reference by owner to the customs is not considered abandonment and does not give raise the extinction of ownership. But it is possible to say that the legal basis for selling the abandoned goods by Customs is subjective implied condition.

Being clear is one of the validity conditions of the sale contract. However, in some contracts particularly contracts related to the energy sector the price is not specify in detailed at time of the conclusion of contract. Such contracts is titled the sale by open price. In such contracts, the parties cannot or will not specify the price exactly at time of conclusion but they are assigned the determination of price to indicators more or less variable in future and even in some cases lay dormant. Because of growing volume of these contracts studying their legal status is necessary. The question of this paper is that whether sale by open price is valid because of the pretext of nullity of the contract and defects in the conditions of the contract? This paper is to studying the principles of issue in Jurisprudence and Iranian law is pave the way for the acceptance and development of such contracts.

Inherent dignity is the honor and prestige that all humans share it naturally and innately for being a human being and from religious point of view this right is fixed even for human fetus. In this study the aim is to form jurisprudential principles for munificence. It roots from the same fact that the same method establishes the requirements of social and governmental jurisprudence. In this regard, by analyzing the concept and principles of dignity, legal reasons, and points of view of scholars it could possible to notice this important issue. The notion of inherent dignity has a legal and intellectual support. According to above mentioned materials the principle is as follows “every human being is noble unless something prevent it” that is all human beings are decent unless “ those who exit it by some reason”. According the “inherent dignity” principle, there is a logical proportion between crime and punishment. Everyone is subject to punishment against committing crimes. The inherent dignity prevents multi-punishment for one crime but it does not deny the crime itself. And through dignity, no artificial wisdom and family lineage and presidential relations, will not prevent imposing penalties through forgiveness. The principles of jurisprudential principles have got some effects and results including maintaining dignity, and special rights for all human being which could not be denied. For example, the right to live, the right to respect and dignity, right of piety, the right for justice, the right for equal opportunities, social welfare and insurance, proportion between crime and penalties without humiliation and torture or any kind of intimidation and negation of rights.