The judiciary in all systems of any civilization has a critical position and can pave the way for the prosperity or decline of a civilization. Among the pillars of the judiciary, the most important one is the manpower, which, regardless of the other pillars of the judiciary, can cause the efficiency or inefficiency of the judiciary. The Alavi Judicial system, as a superior model of the Islamic state, has increased the importance of studying the management of human resources in this system. Implementing a descriptive-analytical method, the results of the present interdisciplinary study, after studying the Judicial tradition of Amir al-Momenin (AS), according to the components of manpower management, provide significant insights into the field of job description, admission and selection of the judges, their training and application as well as their evaluation and supervision. Many of these cases that existed in the Alawite Judicial system at that time, today are considered as advantages and positive points of a Judicial system and organization.

There has been increasing concern in the international law profession about the fragmentation of international law. Although the international legal system has always developed in a fragmented way, the expansion of international law in new areas has created problems of coherence between its different branches, institutions and norm-systems. Normative conflicts and tensions between specialized regimes have emerged between general international law and its specialized branches (trade law, criminal law, human rights law, environmental law etc.). In this article we will analysis the fragmentation of international Judicial system and the ways of resolving the possible contradictions. To do so, we will first consider the possibility of a uniform international Judicial system and then a fragmented (pluralistic) Judicial system.

According to article 159 of the constitution of Iran, the official institution for Judicial settlement of "complaints" and "claims", is judiciary. Explain the nature of "complaint" and "claim" is the first step to explain the exclusive jurisdiction of "Judiciary" in care of "formal" to them. The first attempt in this article is specified up on the nature of the" Judicial affairs" and thus their nature is explained according to the legal regulations. Then the nature duties and responsibilities assigned to the judiciary in terms of article 156 of the constitution studied. The third part of this article focuses on legal basics of the centralization of Judicial fairs in the judiciary. In the last section of this article with adoption pathological approach criticized the lack of centrality.

The Safavid dynasty was the First Iranian Centralized Administration, which Chose Shia’a branch of Islam as the official religion and the Judicial system for Iran. In Safavi Period the State Officially established two Separate and distinct Court system. First the state Courts (the urf Courts) under the supervision of the Secular Minister of Justice (Divan-Begi) and the Secondly the Islamic Court (Shari’ah Courts), Which Functioned under the Supervision of religious Judges (Sadr). A correct understanding of the Contemporary Judicial system, requires proper investigation a boat the development of it in the past time. The current research will Strive to Carry out this investigation in Safavid era.

Introduction: Arbitration has a contractual nature and is subject to the sovereignty of the will of the parties, but in some cases, the legislator imposed the referral of claims to arbitration on the will of the parties and caused the contractual nature of the arbitration clause to disappear or be limited. By doing this, he has placed the arbitration outside the will of the parties. This issue causes some moral conflicts in the discussion of compulsory arbitration. Therefore, this research has been done with the purpose of examining the position of compulsory arbitration in Iran's legal system and the ethical challenges in it with a descriptive-analytical approach. Material and Methods: The research was a review method, in order to achieve the goal of the research, in addition to electronic education books and virtual education in this field, articles related to the research keywords from 2004 to 2022 from the databases of Civilica, Magiran, Sid, Researchgate, Science direct, was reviewed Conclusion: Based on the findings of the research, it can be concluded that compulsory arbitration in Iran has ethical challenges in the field of implementation and interpretation, the most important of which is the issue of the right to action and Judicial justice. In the context of ambiguities in mandatory arbitration, even if the method of arbitration becomes ambiguous, the arbitrator has the duty to find out the will of the legislator with the principles and rules of interpretation, which creates a moral conflict for the arbitrator.

The notion of jurisdiction depends to the nature of Judicial acts; because two powers called Executive and Judicial in each government are administrator body in regard of Legislative power. In Iranian legal system, in the other word, the situation of Adjudication institutes is less discussed and their classifications have not been studied exactly as should be. In this legal system we can see day by day the increase of institutions’ numbers such as Commissions, Councils and Boards between Adjudication institutes but it is not clearly shown that if Legislator seeks to create a Court or Tribunal by they or its intention merely is creation of some institutions for administration of law in strict sense. Many Substantive and Formal criteria have been suggested for distinguishing Judicial acts which foundation of legal system to each one can disorder its supposed order. In this research, after studding and evaluating these criteria, we have endeavored to introduce Adjudication institutes orderly. The result of this article can be summarized in these phrases: “a jurisdiction is a third or an impartial institution that decides about a juridical conflict decisively and certainly by applying substantive and formal rules”.

Nowadays, artificial intelligence (AI), as a new technology, can create improvements and loopholes in the process of Judicial proceedings. Artificial intelligence may create challenges in the field of maintaining civil rights and privacy, transparency, and justice, providing uncertain information and data, and reducing interaction between humans and the court. This research can help improve our understanding of this technology and how it is used in courts, and it can also evaluate the positive and negative effects of artificial intelligence on Judicial proceedings and its effect on justice and Access to proceedings. In this research, using library tools and descriptive-analytical methods, we will better understand the impact of artificial intelligence on the efficiency of the Judicial system, and provide suitable solutions to increase the efficiency of this system on the Judicial system of the courts, one of the most important goals of this research. It is possible to mention the reduction of the time needed to process cases, increase the accuracy and accuracy of decision-making, increase Judicial transparency, and improve the process of handling cases using artificial intelligence technology. This research has shown that by using artificial intelligence, there can be significant improvements in efficiency, accuracy, speed, and access to justice in the Judicial system. But at the same time, one should pay attention to the issues of protecting rights and privacy, algorithms, social acceptance, and security risks and take appropriate measures to deal with these issues.

Background and Aim: Citizenship rights are a part of contemporary concepts that have entered the legal literature of Iran. Also, in Iran's Judicial structure, there is a positive approach towards this concept, and efforts are being made to use this concept practically. Our goal in this article is to know the basics of citizenship rights in Iran's legal system. Method: This article has analyzed the basics of citizenship rights in Iran's Judicial system in a descriptive-analytical way and tried to explain these basics. The research tool is the sampling of library resources. Ethical Considerations: The principles of honesty and trustworthiness have been observed from the beginning to the end of the article. Results: The findings indicate that citizenship rights are accepted as a positive concept in all areas of Iranian society and require the opinion of individuals in the society. The importance of this issue and the need to address it in the scientific texts being published is obvious, and researchers all over the world are seeking to improve the understanding of societies about the rights that are necessary and necessary when facing the Judicial structure. Conclusion: Benefiting from the principle of acquittal, the right to defense, fair trial, the right to protest Judicial decisions, open and non-discriminatory proceedings, the right to access Judicial evidence, the principle of legality of crimes and punishments, the right to compensation for damages caused by Judicial errors, the right to choose a lawyer is one of the most important Judicial rights are considered citizenship. In Iranian law, in Article 34 of the Constitution, litigation is an inalienable right of all people. According to Principle 156, the judiciary is the supporter of individual and social rights and is responsible for realizing justice as well as restoring public rights and expanding justice and legitimate freedoms.

AbstractThe present study was written to investigate the future of the courts in the Iranian Judicial system. In fact, it should be said that the field of law is one of the most important fields of humanities that has the most homogeneity and connection with future research. In this study, we seek to explain what the future courts will be like in the Iranian legal system? And to understand this issue and how to do it, we will use the methods of futures research. In the present study, a closed questionnaire was used and thematically, the scope of this research includes the topics of structure, how to plan and legislate, how to provide resources and access and use. New information technologies in future courts in the Iranian Judicial system. The leading research is of the applied research type and has considered the time domain from December 1397 to December 1399. The obtained data were analyzed through a questionnaire using qualitative content analysis method. The results showed that the priority of all the same indicators of the questionnaire are significantly different in terms of effectiveness and the order of priority of each of the dimensions tested by the statistical community is process reform dimension, regulatory dimension, structural and organizational dimension, innovation and technology dimension, manpower and motivational dimension. Welfare is the legislative dimension and the scientific and research dimension.

The basic principles of human rights such as ‘human dignity’, ‘human equality’, ‘human life’ and ‘human freedom’ are the major concerns in the Islamic Judicial system. Through suggesting common discourse for all human beings as well as rejecting any form of sovereignty, Islam has offered certain universal human rights which can pave the ground for peaceful coexistence. Human rights are characterized as having the following qualities: they are demonstrable, revealed and divine; on the basis of a real anthropology, they are purposeful, truth-oriented and duty-bound; based on human creation and nature, they are realistic, all-embracing, coherent, consistent, having internal and external sanction, being ethical, universal, perfectionist rather than individualistic and socialistic, proportional in term of sexual rights and attentive to human rights in emergencies.