JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE STUDIES ON ISLAMIC AND WESTERN LAW
Year:2017 | Volume:3 | Issue:4 |Papers Count:7

Because of their capacity and elegance, children are the most vulnerable members of the society, So, they need to especial support. This vulnerability is felt more seriously during armed conflicts that causes perdition, exploitation and abuse of children such as sexual violence against girls, which include violation of their natural rights and human dignity; therefore, they are exposed to some physical and mental disasters. According to the valuable Islamic thoughts and stipulates of the international humanitarian law, the child has the right to be secured his health in a proper manner, under all circumstances, as a perfect human being (whether Muslim or non-Muslim), with disregard to geographic boundaries, language, race, etc. In this descriptive - analytical and comparative study, according to the legal system of Islam and the rules and regulations of the international humanitarian law, after reviewing the foundations of the right to health of child, effects of armed conflicts on children's health of the victim and involved, and the mechanisms of securing this right, at any case this result has been achieved that the members of human society, national and international institutions and governments should prevent violence against children in armed conflicts, according to their power and possibilities. In addition, according to Islamic humanitarian law, those who caused harm to the children's health, should be prosecuted and punished as war criminals; While international humanitarian law does not contain any proper sanction, in case of violation of the right to health.

There are many potentials in Islamic countries legal systems to pace toward legal integration. One of them is common resources of law which can be used to have “Common Legislation”. Common Legislation can take place in forms of inter-governmental (treaties) or internal (approved acts by parliaments). The main question here, is that whether the Muslim States can take common legislative measures on humanitarian law? Various Islamic schools (Mazaheb) have communal resources, regulations and verdicts in the realm of humanitarian law which can be used to have a common legislation.In result, this article is to analyze the common legislation of Islamic countries on humanitarian law: necessity, possibility, barriers and normative challenges facing in this regard. According to this article, Common legislation in the Islamic countries and Muslim world, yields many benefits specially to frustrate Islam phobia. According to this article, common legislation in Muslim World on humanitarian law would be necessity any also available because of many possibilities such as common history, culture, resources and removability of barriers or reducing their influence.

Recognition of the relationship between law and ethics is one of the most complex issues in philosophy of law. The history of legal theories in the West is a good evidence of this claim, in such a way that theories of natural law, positivism, historical theory of law, critical studies of law, each have a certain position in relation to the separation, unification or interaction of legal rules and moral norms. The purpose of this article is to explain the ultimate relationship between moral and law, which has been done by a descriptive-analytic method, and also a comparative study of legal philosophy. Law and ethics provide normative systems, in respect to the human behavior, interacting with each other. Legal rules are, on the basis of practical logic, provided to meet human needs and interests, and since ethics are part of the human needs and interests, it can be the ultimate goal of a legal principle or source of its validity. It does mean that imperatively all ethical rules and norms be converted into legal rules, but ethical ends must be considered in the validity of legal rules.

This article is a comparative study of the interest in an important international document to determine one of the reasons for Iran's no accession to the above-mentioned document. Iran has so far not joined the Convention on the International Sale of Goods. This is one of the factors: the probably conflict of the Convention with some values and rules of Iranian municipal legal system. Among these cases, we can refer to acceptance of the Interest in two articles of the convention. In this paper, the subject of interest has been studied based on the provisions of the Convention and the domestic law. Finally, we came to the conclusion that, one of the Iranian legal system sample, to some extent can be acceptable, just about one of the two planned of interest in the convention. In many cases, when one of the parties is non-Muslim, according of the Islamic Jurisprudence, Interest is allowed.

It is said that the imminence of threat of attack, is the most controversial condition that is provided for justifying self-defense. The challenges that have been studied in this essay, are defenses that occur in non-aggressive situations and possibility or impossibility of extending the concept of imminence, especially putative self-defense and battered women syndrome. That there is no imminence and factual attack in that situation. Analyzing the concept of imminence and common approaches with respect to mentioned subjects in western laws and then considering it, under the light of Islamic and Iranian laws, are subjects of this paper. The selected approach in Islamic law, is prudently and far from biases, according to which self-defense could be justified only when there is imminence and factual attack -according to the opinion of some theorist - or impendent attack- according to some others- on the basis of certainty of the danger. Finally, it has concluded that defenses that occur in non-aggressive situations cannot be justified as legitimate self-defense. Whether, there is not any attack, or there is no imminent attack.

Traditionalism and Modernism take different approaches with regard to ontology, epistemology and anthropology. This writing considers the relation between these two and answers the question that which process followed by the modern methodology and what was its effect on modern legal methodology and do these influences affect the nature of modern law and the Islamic traditional law? The outcome of this investigation considers Modernism as replacing ontology by epistemology, that represents itself in research and renders the paradigm of physics-based into other sciences. Modern law presents itself as positive-method science. The positive-method science forms formal and objective law. In addition, positive-method science shapes differentiated and secular law. On the other hand, traditional law accepts metaphysics and considers the method as discoverer, not creator. In this approach, Hojiat or integrity of certainty legitimates Islamic methodology that makes it a unified-nonobjective science, under theology and obliged in religious and moral matters.

In spite of the development of the protection of civilians, prisoners of war and even foreigners in armed conflicts, particularly in twentieth century, such an improvement in legal systems, except in the Islamic law, is not observed in respect of the obligation of states to support their own soldiers and forces. The Quadruple Geneva Conventions and its Additional protocols are important legal steps to protect civilians and prisoners, but similar steps have not been taken to address the obligation of states for protection of their own troops in legal systems. Some states even consider the soldiers as a property with whom any treatment is allowed. The emergence of such changes as happened in the Persian Gulf Syndrome as well as the Sexual Assaults crisis in the US military, especially during the occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq, have made a focus on the obligation of states to protect their own forces. Due to the lack of international documents on the obligation of governments to protect their own soldiers, theoretically, it seems that some legal principles could be extracted from International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law, particularly, on the basis of customary rights and at the top of them, principles of the right to life and human dignity. The provisions of the Geneva Conventions, its Additional protocols and more than 20 out of 161 customary principles codified by the International Committee of Red Cross, provide indirect guidelines on the obligation of states to protect their own soldiers.