JOURNAL OF HISTORICAL RESEARCH, LAW AND POLICY
Year:2024 | Volume:2 | Issue:1|Papers Count:9

The significant role of transportation in trade, the circulation of goods, and the distribution of wealth in the international arena has necessitated the establishment of uniform international laws and regulations. Among the most important conventions—and the most up-to-date development in this regard—is the Convention on Contracts for the International Carriage of Goods Wholly or Partly by Sea, known as the Rotterdam Rules (2008). One of the key issues in maritime transport is the obligations of the shipper toward the carrier. Unlike its predecessors, the Rotterdam Rules dedicate an entire chapter (Chapter 7) specifically to the shipper’s obligations and enumerate them in detail. The purpose of this article is to examine the obligations of the shipper toward the carrier, as well as the challenges arising from the breach of these obligations. Finally, based on the policy orientation of the Rotterdam Rules—which establish balanced and reciprocal obligations and liabilities for both parties to the contract of carriage—it is suggested that the Iranian legislature consider acceding to this convention. The research method adopted in this study is descriptive–analytical, and the data collection has been conducted through library-based sources.

This study aims to identify and analyze the legal gaps and institutional deficiencies affecting the protection of internally displaced persons (IDPs) in Iran, focusing on their experiences with legal recognition, access to rights, and administrative support. A qualitative research design was employed, utilizing semi-structured interviews conducted with 22 participants from Tehran, including IDPs, legal practitioners, and humanitarian actors. Participants were selected purposively to capture diverse perspectives. Data collection continued until theoretical saturation was achieved. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed thematically using NVivo software to identify core themes and subthemes related to legal protections and gaps. Three main themes emerged: (1) inadequate legal framework, characterized by the absence of dedicated national legislation, unclear legal status of IDPs, and conflicting property laws; (2) institutional and administrative gaps, including poor interagency coordination, weak enforcement capacity, inconsistent documentation procedures, and lack of legal aid; and (3) sociolegal consequences for IDPs, comprising rights deprivation, social marginalization, psychological impacts, reliance on informal justice systems, and distrust of formal legal mechanisms. These gaps collectively contribute to the marginalization and vulnerability of IDPs in Iran, limiting their access to justice, social services, and durable solutions. The study highlights critical legal and institutional shortcomings that impede effective protection and inclusion of IDPs in Iran. Addressing these gaps requires comprehensive national legislation, improved interagency coordination, expanded legal aid, and strengthened documentation and data systems. Such reforms are essential for fulfilling constitutional guarantees, enhancing legal recognition, and promoting the dignity and rights of displaced populations.

The purpose of this study is to conduct a comparative analysis of the challenges and strategies related to academic research freedom in the legal systems of Iran and the United States. Using a descriptive–analytical method and relying on library sources and legal documents, this study examines the legal structure, executive obstacles, and statutory guarantees of scientific research freedom in both systems. The findings indicate that although both countries emphasize the importance of academic freedom in their constitutions and ordinary regulations, there are fundamental differences in the nature and scope of legal protection, governmental intervention, and operational limitations. The most significant challenges in Iran include ambiguous legal restrictions, extensive governmental oversight, and the absence of strong supportive judicial precedent; whereas in the United States, although research freedom is protected under the First Amendment to the Constitution, challenges such as interference from private institutions, economic conflicts of interest, and political and social pressures are also observed. The study recommends revising domestic regulations, defining clear boundaries for academic freedom, formulating legal support mechanisms, and drawing on the successful experiences of the United States regarding university autonomy and tolerance for diverse scientific viewpoints.

The “La Darar” (No Harm) rule, as one of the fundamental principles of Imamiyyah jurisprudence, occupies a special place in the interpretation and implementation of Islamic legal rulings and statutory provisions. Its role in preventing unjustified and intolerable harm within legal and familial relations has consistently attracted the attention of both jurists and legislators. One of the most significant areas of application of this rule is divorce, where the identification and assessment of harm may serve as the basis for judicial decision-making and verdict issuance. Given the importance of safeguarding women’s rights and preventing the infringement of familial rights, a meticulous jurisprudential and legal examination of this principle is deemed essential. The objective of this study is to analyze the jurisprudential foundations of the La Darar rule within Imamiyyah jurisprudence—particularly in the legal thought of Imam Khomeini—and to investigate its reflection in the Iranian Civil Code, especially Article 1130. The research methodology is library-based and analytical–comparative. In addition to the examination of authoritative jurisprudential sources such as Tahrir al-Wasilah and Jawahir al-Kalam, relevant statutes and judicial practices have also been reviewed. The findings indicate that, in Imam Khomeini’s view, the La Darar rule functions not merely as a means of eliminating individual harm but also as a principle for maintaining social order and achieving justice. This interpretive approach can serve as an effective foundation for the expansive interpretation of statutory provisions related to divorce. The novelty of this research lies in its integration of textual jurisprudential analysis with a comparative critique of the Civil Code and its proposal of reform-oriented recommendations aimed at strengthening legal protection for the aggrieved party in divorce proceedings.

This study aims to explore the role of community justice mechanisms in promoting social repair, trust reconstruction, and reconciliation in the context of post-conflict reconstruction in Tehran, Iran. A qualitative research design was employed, utilizing semi-structured interviews with 23 purposively selected participants, including community leaders, NGO workers, local residents, and informal justice facilitators based in Tehran. The data collection continued until theoretical saturation was achieved. All interviews were transcribed and thematically analyzed using NVivo software. The analytical process followed open, axial, and selective coding procedures grounded in principles of grounded theory, with a focus on identifying emergent patterns and categories relevant to community justice in a post-conflict urban environment. Four overarching themes emerged from the data: restorative justice mechanisms, community participation and ownership, institutional and legal interfaces, and psychosocial healing and social cohesion. Participants emphasized the importance of truth-telling, cultural rituals, and symbolic reparations in facilitating relational repair. Community justice practices were deeply embedded in local values and often functioned through collective ownership, with significant involvement from women and youth. The interface between formal institutions and community mechanisms revealed both collaboration and tensions, highlighting legal pluralism. Community-led justice was also associated with trauma processing, rebuilding trust, and reestablishing collective identity after conflict. Community justice plays a vital and multifaceted role in post-conflict reconstruction by offering culturally embedded, participatory, and restorative alternatives to formal legal processes. These mechanisms contribute not only to dispute resolution but also to long-term social healing, trust building, and moral reintegration. Supporting and integrating such grassroots initiatives can enhance the legitimacy, inclusivity, and sustainability of post-conflict recovery efforts, especially in contexts where formal transitional justice systems are absent or limited.

This study aims to explore the challenges and enabling factors associated with the implementation of international human rights treaties at the local level in Tehran. This qualitative study employed semi-structured interviews with 19 participants, including municipal officials, legal professionals, civil society actors, and academic experts involved in human rights governance in Tehran. Participants were selected through purposive sampling, and interviews continued until theoretical saturation was achieved. Data were analyzed thematically using NVivo software, following Braun and Clarke’s six-phase model of thematic analysis. Thematic analysis revealed four main categories influencing treaty implementation: (1) legal and institutional frameworks, (2) capacity and knowledge gaps, (3) political and cultural constraints, and (4) strategies and enablers of implementation. Key barriers included the absence of enabling legislation, institutional fragmentation, judicial resistance, limited awareness among local actors, politicization of rights discourse, and cultural conflicts with international norms. Despite these challenges, the study identified promising strategies such as the role of human rights champions, use of soft law instruments, cross-sectoral partnerships, legal empowerment initiatives, community-based approaches, and digital advocacy tools. These enablers highlighted the importance of contextual adaptation and bottom-up initiatives in operationalizing treaty commitments at the local level. The findings underscore that treaty ratification alone does not ensure local compliance. Legal ambiguities, institutional weaknesses, and sociopolitical dynamics significantly shape how international human rights norms are interpreted and implemented at the municipal level. However, context-sensitive strategies rooted in collaboration, empowerment, and cultural legitimacy offer viable pathways to enhance local-level human rights realization. Strengthening subnational capacities and fostering inclusive networks is essential for the effective localization of international human rights treaties.

This study aimed to explore the pathways, mechanisms, and barriers of democratic norm internalization among citizens in a transitional democratic context, using Tehran as a case study. A qualitative research design was employed to investigate how individuals internalize democratic norms in a semi-authoritarian setting. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 24 participants residing in Tehran, selected through purposive sampling to ensure diversity in age, gender, and professional background. Interviews focused on participants’ exposure to democratic values, their cognitive and emotional responses, and the social and structural factors influencing norm adoption. Data collection continued until theoretical saturation was achieved. All interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using thematic analysis in NVivo software, following an open, axial, and selective coding process to identify key themes and subthemes. Three main themes emerged: (1) Pathways of Norm Exposure, including civic education, media, family, religion, and transnational exchanges; (2) Mechanisms of Internalization, such as critical reflection, emotional engagement, behavioral adoption, and peer validation; and (3) Barriers to Norm Consolidation, encompassing authoritarian legacies, political cynicism, structural constraints, elite manipulation, and cultural resistance. Participants displayed varied degrees of norm internalization, shaped by personal experiences, social context, and perceived legitimacy of democratic principles. Emotional resonance and social affirmation were particularly influential in sustaining democratic commitments. The internalization of democratic norms in transitional democracies is a complex, negotiated, and context-dependent process. While formal institutions matter, the cultural, emotional, and relational dimensions play a decisive role in shaping how democratic values become meaningful to individuals. These findings highlight the importance of culturally grounded, bottom-up approaches to democratic development in hybrid regimes.

This study aimed to explore how civil society organizations (CSOs) in Tehran engage in monitoring state compliance with international human rights treaties, focusing on their mechanisms, challenges, and strategic adaptations. This qualitative study employed a case study approach involving 17 participants from various civil society organizations based in Tehran. Participants were selected through purposive sampling based on their involvement in treaty monitoring and human rights advocacy. Data were collected using semi-structured interviews conducted until theoretical saturation was reached. Interviews focused on participants' experiences with shadow reporting, legal advocacy, and transnational engagement. Transcribed data were analyzed thematically using NVivo software, following open, axial, and selective coding procedures to identify core themes and subthemes. The analysis revealed three overarching themes: (1) mechanisms of treaty monitoring, including shadow reporting, digital data collection, participation in review sessions, and legal advisory roles; (2) challenges to effective monitoring, such as legal restrictions, data inaccessibility, intimidation, internal fragmentation, and donor dependency; and (3) strategies for enhancing impact, including capacity building, localization of treaty norms, coalition-building, and media engagement. Participants described innovative responses to structural barriers and emphasized the importance of transnational networks and legal literacy in sustaining their monitoring activities. Civil society organizations in Tehran play a critical yet constrained role in promoting treaty compliance under restrictive political conditions. Despite facing systemic obstacles, they utilize a range of adaptive strategies to engage with international mechanisms, influence public opinion, and advocate for rights-based reforms. These findings underscore the importance of supporting localized, knowledge-based, and coalition-driven approaches to human rights monitoring, especially in semi-authoritarian contexts.

This study aimed to explore how users in Tehran perceive digital privacy, interact with online consent mechanisms, and understand the legal protections governing their personal data. A qualitative research design was employed, using semi-structured interviews to collect data from 22 adult participants residing in Tehran, Iran. Participants were selected through purposive and snowball sampling to capture diverse digital experiences. Interviews were conducted until theoretical saturation was reached. Data were transcribed and analyzed thematically using NVivo software, following a coding process involving open, axial, and selective coding. Ethical guidelines were strictly observed, with informed consent obtained from all participants. Three major themes emerged from the analysis: perceived understanding of digital privacy, experiences with consent mechanisms, and attitudes toward legal protections. Participants demonstrated limited awareness of how their data is used or what legal rights they possess. Most reported bypassing privacy policies due to their length and complexity and described consent as a habitual, often meaningless act. Trust was higher in international platforms than in local ones, but legal literacy across the board was low. Emotional reactions such as confusion, fatigue, and helplessness were common when navigating privacy interfaces. Participants expressed skepticism about the existence or enforcement of relevant laws and indicated a lack of knowledge regarding complaint mechanisms or recourse for data misuse. The findings reveal a significant gap between digital behavior and legal awareness among users in Tehran. Inadequate digital literacy, complex consent interfaces, and distrust in legal institutions hinder meaningful user agency. Interventions should include simplified legal communication, user-centered interface design, and privacy education initiatives tailored to local contexts.