Jurisprudence and Fundamentals of Islamic Law
Year:2011 | Volume:44 | Issue:1|Papers Count:7

Unmarried virgin adolescent girl or married, but this marriage hasn’t been consummated or sexual intercourse done in anus or her virginity is removed by non-copulation before maturity or after it, she is equal to maiden and guardianship on her will be arguable in two cases: financial affairs and matrimony. All jurisprudents (Imamiyeh and Sunni) have alliance about non-guardianship in financial affairs of adolescent maiden. With regarding to consensus of all juristic opinions about it, they are at variance in case of guardianship at the marriage of adolescent maiden. Jurisprudents' comments about this can be divided into five categories: Not proving guardianship absolutely, sharing in guardianship, prove of guardianship in permanent marriage and not in temporary, vice versa of previous and proving guardianship absolutely. This study, with critical approach, explains and analyzes the views in the provinces surrounding guardianship at the marriage of adolescent maiden in Islamic jurisprudence and Iranian law. At the end, selected comment that is sharing in guardianship will be described.

Novation is one of the important topics of the obligations law, that is in its special and traditional meaning a legal act, and has been adopted from Roman law and it has been used in civil codes of the most countries, among them Iran. With due attention to special role of the Imamiyah jurisprudence rules in codification of the Iran civil code, some questions are propounded in connection to novation in Imamiyah jurisprudence, that pursue the remarkable theoretical vacuums; the vacuums and questions which have not been discussed certainly and in expanded way hitherto. The institution of the novation has not been ordained in Imamiyah jurisprudence, because the Islamic law and Imamiyah jurisprudence advanced legal rules have provided for the need to novation in desirable ways. But a sort of substitution of the obligation subject and a type of the changing of legal relations can be seen in Imamiyah jurisprudence that explanation about their nature and making their segregation and subscription points clear toward novation, not only can demonstrate the school of Imamiyah jurisprudence freedom of want, but also can answer to existent questions in this base.

This article which is aimed at regulating the change of laws in legislative system of Islamic republic of Iran, intends to shed light over a significant change which has recently been taken place in the inheritance law of Iran. (Articles 946-949 of Civl law of Iran). This is analyzed from various view points such as historical, political, social, economic, legal and juridical aspect.The probable consequences of it are anticipated in various conditions, and finally the probability that this change would be leased on new juridical proofs is reinforced and other probabilities like the effect of social events and political happenings in this change are put in doubt or rejected.

Although the contemporary term "Consumer" has not been mentioned in Islamic Jurisprudence; Jurisprudence have mentioned his rights and how to protect them. Meanwhile, the government's responsibility in this regard has been discussed.Rules for trading that is prescribed in Transactions sections, and the special options given to the seller and the buyer for certain contract or to revocation it, As well as usury prohibition, forbids the hoarding and.. .., Just as examples to consumer protection in Islamic jurisprudence is considered.To study these examples in the Jurisprudence' we should not limit ourselves to Transactions sections, because nowadays such rights can not be restricted to the contract between buyer and seller, but covers consumers and other individuals as well. So comparing the Guaranty (Zaman) subject and the books on "Hesba" (market surveillance) and the Islamic ruler's power to protect consumers rights make us familiar with the valuable efforts of Muslim jurisprudents and the high capacity of jurisprudence to fulfill the current needs.

Insulting to prophet or Imam is obscene, shameful and insupportable for any Muslim, so the person who insults must be killed. Any where that there is no Islamic government or it has not been ordained any rule about killing insulter; Killing insulter has no retaliation (punishment).But when legislator especially issued a rule for Killing punishment in article 513 for the crime of insulting to prophet or Imam, it is for in habiting to execute private justice and the government is responsible to execute putting to death (Killing), that its necessity is public trial (judgment) and legal formality nonetheless, if a person Kills insulter for executing legal (juridical) task, Killer must be proved his/her crime in the court, and in any case, according to article 612 act of Islamic punishment rule, providing disruption in regularity and security of society, he/she is meritorious for governmental punishment. Unless, based on religious law and constitutional law, leader permit Killer from governmental punishment, because Judicial power is his status, but if killer kill insulter in out of Iran, he/she immunes from punitive pursuit and retraction. But if insulter is killed with non – divine stimulus, Killer must be condemned to punishment for intentional Killing.

In this article it has been tried to consider the general rules and provisions of options as one of the common traditions of Islamic jurists. Therefore, in order to reach to that general rule, the profound viewpoint of Sheikh Ansari and some of the contemporary Shi'i jurists and some highly qualified jurists have been analyzed critically, specially matters such as "criterion and nature of the revocation option", "type of right in options", "the principle of necessity in optional contracts", "cancellation of revocation option with the deliberate act of option holder" and "waste in the option period" have been considered and in each case after analyzing the subject and setting the context of the debate and eliciting the rationales and principles of each viewpoint, the selected view of the authors has been offered and explained.

Sometimes, following of Islamic law, there is a liability of paternal relatives, relatives and public treasury that some of the jurists say that this liability is a against of personal liability and therefore they oppose or limit this liability. But the analysis of this liability shows that this liability is a tort. In the other hand, in some of the countries the vicarious liability is a principle. Therefore, with inference of some of the Islamic jurisprudence and with legal interpretation of the vicarious liability in other country, the legislator can change this legal institution in to the social institution.