پژوهشنامه حقوق اسلامی
پیاپی 45 (بهار و تابستان 1396)

One of the most controversial topics in Endowment is stipulation of termination clause and dissolving condition fettered by "generation of endower subsequent need to endowed property" within it. It is provided in 61 civil law article: [endower cannot revoke the Endowmen] and generate this ambiguity that does this not- permitted returnability include stipulation of termination clause and dissolving condition fettered by "generation of endower subsequent need to endowed property" within Endowment? This important issue is remained silent in civil law and caused judge confusion in reaching of correct verdict and law scientists in approaching precise analysis, in addition there are dissentions between Islamic consults in this topic. Accordingly a comprehensive essay in this field is needed. it is considered that stipulation of termination clause and dissolving condition within Endowment does not confront with any obstacle and in addition to criticism of dissenter reasons about such stipulation in Endowment, reasons of accordants will be implied. The method which is applied in this essay is method based on analysis and In order to approach to this purpose, information collection method will be in library (Documents study).

In contrary to current imagination and Imam Khomeini s Thoughts, privacy is also considered for vehicle. However, such privacy is on physical and material aspect and the part of vehicle which can be visible from outside the car is seen inside privacy concept in terms of immaterial privacy since it can be seen in public and is not a scope in which other people are prevented from entering. This lack of entrance, however, covers only glance or immaterial privacy and does not apply in material and physical aspect. It means that a part of vehicle which can be observable trough glasses is not vehicle privacy in which someone cannot wear out his/her clothes or conducts a behavior permissible in privacy. In fact, this visible extent has no immaterial privacy. Respecting vehicle privacy necessitates to prevent any kind of defamation except than by rule of law including vehicle inspection in which UK lawmaker’s approach is to address details and the necessity to annul an illegitimate reason compared to Iran where there is an ambiguous approach so UK approach is more proper in terms of respecting privacy. Another form of defamation is unauthorized entrance into vehicle not supported by penal law in both countries; also, installing detector is not negating privacy.

The law is the main center of modern legal system. Iranians were acquainted with the law in constitutional era. Entering this concept in iran created different views. The ideas created range of views, which For his part cause actual events in the Constitutional Revolution and the writing of the constitution. In fact, this views about modernity. This opinions effected on writing Qajar constitution . This developer comments are divided into three categories: progressive, eclectic and against modernity. The first group wanted western law, the second group also wanted western law and islamic jurisprudence and the third group opposed to Western law and only wanted Islamic law. Understanding the law leads to a deeper knowledge of the identity of the Iranian legal system. Also, any talk about rule of law and legislation after reaching a clear idea of the law will occur. This research was performed with descriptive and historical approach.

According to Islamic jurisprudence, "Tazir"(discretionary punishment) and "forbidding the evil" are two answers to sin and two strategies for confronting with it. This article seeks for a relationship between this two institutions. Based on the results of this article, there are some commonalities and similarities between them. However, each of them has special features and provisions that necessarily they do not share. The Interpretations of "forbidding the evil", may be broad or narrow and the differences between different interpretations would be effective on the relationship between: ta’zir” and “forbidding the evil”. According to Islamic jurisprudence, the Interpretation of "forbidding the evil" is narrow and does not include "tazir" and there is a substantive difference between them. In the terms of Islamic jurisprudence, "Forbidding the evil" is the stage followed by sin, while "Tazir" is a kind of punishment and a stage proceeding sin. Absolutely, a behavior can be considered as “forbidding the evil" while it can be taken as "tazir" from another perspective. This means that, a behavior is "tazir" if its purpose is to deal with the sin committed in the past, and it can be "Forbidding the evil" if the purpose is to prevent the person from repeating the same sin or another sin in the future.

In the Iranian legal source of law the judiciary is the sole official reference for adjudication, and there is no place in this regard for Taghas. In the other source of law in Iran, including valid jurisprudential sources, custom and doctrine, the Taghas declared and is the non-judicial ways for adjudication. Some of the law system like the UK and USA (self-help) declared as a one of the extrajudicial remedy. So, the first issue in the current study is: (The study for possibility of permit of Taghas on the base of costume, valid jurisprudential and Doctrine). Second issue is opting out the correct equivalent for Taghas in legal systems studied. In the based on this study though although the legal source of Iranian law is the prohibition of invalidity of Taghs but due to its function and justifiability in the jurisprudence and doctrine appropriate action should be taken by policy-makers to legislate to allow Taghs, and current equivalent for Taghas in the legal system studied is (self-help).

Just as judges are independent and parties to a dispute cannot refuse to comply with their verdict due to dissatisfaction, arbiter or arbitrator is independent and the future satisfaction of the parties is not a condition for arbiter’s verdict to be operative. This resulted by the judgmental nature of arbitration because in arbitration nature arbitrator is not considered as attorney to the parties. Another reason is that according to more accurate jurisprudential opinion, arbiter becomes independent just as parties grant him with qualification. Parties cannot refuse to recourse to arbiter and arbitrator or incapacitate him not only after verdict is issued but also in the course of procedure. As well, arbitration like judgment, follows “the authority of judged res “rule and even the arbiter cannot violate or modify his decision after it is issued.

The purpose of this article is to answer the questions: What is psychic fight and its operations? Doesitsexamplesreasoning originate from the legal reasoning and is it acceptable by Islam and EmamyeFaghihs’ viewpoints? Or its acceptance is limited by the proper situations and conditions?
The research method of this article is a library based one and processing the data is of analytic descriptive one. With a short glance at the history of psychic fight and operations. it is revealed that from the beginning of man’s creation such fight and operations exist and the farther the history, the more its complexity and extend while approaching the communication era. In this paper psychic fight and its operations, its essence, and its examples are analyzed and explainedbased on a Feghhi opinion. Although the examples are many, some are used in todays’ world are of man’s concerns.
The findings of this research reveals that psychic fight and operations is a normal phenomenon like the other phenomena existing in the start of Islam while its use and application is lawful to weaken the enemy’s spirit or to protect the ethical Islamic principles.