فهرست مطالب محمد راسخ

Bioethics is an interdisciplinary approach that deals with ethical issues arising from the application of life sciences and technologies in human and non-human life. However, we often come across analyses and arguments of another nature, in the literature of this discipline. Although law and morality both are situated in the normative disciplines, they examine issues from different angles. Scholars of this field often, confusing “the moral” and “the legal”, use concepts such as moral rights. It could be shown that such kind of conceptual confusion leads to inconsistency in normative discussions on biosciences and technologies. A study of bio law and bioethics, while trying to delimit their boundaries, based on distinguishing features of each field, could prevent those conceptual confusions. In this research, we aim to examine differences between law and ethics, based on discussing four lines of “aim”, “scope”, “rule generation” and “sanction” and bringing in examples of bioethics problems. We then refer to a third kind of normative knowledge, which, has wrongfully entered the scope of bioethics. Ignoring the distinction between law and morality, especially in the legislation and adjudication processes, would amount to a breach of impartiality and inclination of law towards a particular moral outlook. Consequently, instead of bringing about a context for the coexistence of various ethical viewpoints, politics put pressure on those who believe in a different moral view. A system, in which certain ethical outlooks are accommodated while certain others are not, is undoubtedly far away from justice.

The basic pillar of therapeutic simulation is the cells that are provided to scientists to combine and create a simulated embryo. These cells are not capable of planting in the laboratory environment but must be provided by the applicant to the researchers to produce simulated embryo for extracting stem cells. One of the challenges of using the therapeutic simulation process is how scientists reach the above base cells. It also raises the necessity of extracting stem cells from the resulting embryo, the issue of the owners of the decision -making authority towards the embryo. Another challenge is the conscious consent of the cell owners and the role of satisfaction in the owners of the embryo. The evaluation in the present article indicates that non -identification or restriction of decision -making authority to their cell owners and encloses the transfer of basic cells to scientists based on purely kind -hearted donation, benefiting from this modern technology and its valuable achievements with limitations. It makes a lot. In contrast, recognizing cell owners' decision -making authority over those cells and accepting monetary mechanisms and predicting the possibility of paying for cell owners while considering the necessity of their consent in the transfer process, not only increases the motivations of cell donation to simulate therapy. It will also promote the increasing development of scientific processes related to therapeutic simulation, which will be the source of the discovery of the treatment of many illnesses.

Modernity was formed and evolved on the specific context of political and intellectual developments of the late Middle Ages and the Renaissance and beyond, and all manifestations. It affected the individual and collective life of man and led to the emergence of modern law, of which the principles of fair trial are a product. Hence, the main question of this article is about the relationship between having the author elements of modernity and aspects of the legal system. For this purpose, it is necessary to first identify the objective and epistemological / value elements of the phenomenon of modernity as well as the four legal aspects, namely the "purpose" and "source" of law, the legal "method" and the "reference" of legislation. Iran and the United Kingdom and the relationship between these elements and their legal systems were studied using a comparative method and qualitative analysis.The findings of the study indicate the fact that the United Kingdom, due to the presence of most elements of new life (modernity), has a modern legal system and as a result; In the realm of principles and guarantees, the procedural rights of the accused employee are more developed, and the exercise of these rights is documented in human rights documents. In contrast, Iran lacks all the elements of modern law due to its maximum elements of modern life, and therefore, at present, it does not have the principles and guarantees of a complete and developed procedure in accordance with human rights documents.

Considering the functional evolutions of modern legal systems, in our times, some of the Islamic law dictates such as the one-fifth tax (khums) and the alms tax (zakāt), the issue of taxation, or discussions related to the legal equality of men and women have ignited debates, particularly in the field of the Epistemological fundamentals of law. The present research aims to provide a suggestion according to which, it might be possible to reconstruct the rational view onto Islamic legal with a mu‘tazilī approach and, thereby, to achieve more compatibility between Islamic Law and the legal requirements of Public Law in contemporary political communities. With this approach, the authors address the topics of “rationality” and “human will” as two concepts with fundamental importance in the theory of Qāḍī ‘Abd al-Jabbār al-Mu‘tazilī. It seems that, from this point of view, with a legal and positive interpretation of the elements of Qāḍī ‘Abd al-Jabbār’s theory of justice, it would be easier to bring Islamic legal dictates and the secular rules of the modern legal systems to coexistence.

The idea of social investment has transformed and revised approaches to the scope and nature of welfare state interventions, particularly in the field of social security. In the past, the tendency towards privatization and regulation within the framework of neoliberal approaches to the social security system has led the advanced welfare state to reduce social security interventions, protections and benefits. The idea of replacing social security with social investment does not seem to provide all citizens with sufficient protection in the face of poverty and affects access to the right to social security. Providing immediate, sufficient, and comprehensive support that provides universal access to a minimum of resources requires a return to the distributive logic of social security and in continuation the determination of the limits and role of state in this area. In this study, with the aim of achieving the desired model of state interventions in the field of social security by a descriptive-analytical method, looking at the shortcomings of the theory of social investment state and relying on the requirements of justice in two titles "job as an asset" and "difference in internal endowments" the basis for a return to the distributive logic of social security has been identified. Accordingly, present study has concluded the necessity of accompanying social investment with compensatory interventions of the traditional welfare state in the form of benefits of the social security system.Keywords: internal endowments, social investment state, social investment, job as asset, social security system

Filiation is one of the important legal issues which has gone under developments during the history of legal system. Over the modern times, along with the emergence of new methods of reproduction particularly those with the help of a third party, legal regulation of filiation of children resulting from such methods has encountered with new challenges. To whom these children are to be filiated? According to one of the traditions, the mother filiation is based on gestation and the father’s one on gamete. The question, however, is that whether these two criteria can regulate the filiation of such children in a consistent and effective manner. A study of laws and regulations of various countries gives us a negative answer. Laws that merely rely on these two criteria for the determination of filiation of those children would give rise to vagueness, undecidedness and uncertainty in this regard. Therefore, the necessity of a new criterion, i.e. that of intention, has been put forth. In this paper, we intend to study efforts made by legislators and judges of different legal systems so as to reach an effective and consistent criterion in this area.

The present research studies the legal optimal (favorable) tax laws in light of the resistive economy. However, a clear definition of the optimal tax (favorable) has not been provided But at the same time, it can be an important principles such as transparency, using the pivotal justice, respond well to recognition, assessment and analysis, Principles that are the most important and fundamental basis for the formation of an optimal tax system. On the other hand, today the discourse of resistive economy requires special requirements that most of them have to achieve optimal tax system and formation. Resistive Economics, which today is considered as the most important macroeconomic orientation of the country itself, requires principles, indicators and important criteria which all of them have a particular connection with the tax issue and on the other hand, the realization of the optimal tax system, as well as the formation and implementation and realization of resistive economy policies, require clear and distinct requirements, the most important of which are Optimal government formation, Establish Local Taxes, The formation of a real private sector, Prevent tax evasion and … . The present study seeks to analyze, investigate, and evaluate the relationship between optimal (favorable) tax system and economic resistive in the framework of legal system of the Islamic Republic of Iran through descriptive-analytical method.

The public health is undoubtedly one of the instances of public interests the lack of which would impose immense harm on the very existence of the collective life. This becomes more serious in emergency situations. More importantly, if a system of prioritisation of scares resources is not devised for such conditions, numberless lives would be lost and all dimensions of the collective life will be collapsed. The basic question relates to foundations of designing a method of prioritisation and provision of medical and health services in the emergency situation and to a public health system corresponding to these foundations. Translation and transformation of those foundations and this system into legal rules and procedures form the hard core of the “public health law”. In this research, upon referring to presupposition of the current discussions, we shall put forward, respectively, the mentioned foundations and the system. No doubt, the legal system of public health is expected to strike an internal balance in this structure, and also make this consistent with other pillars of the human civic life.

Disciplinary proceedings are one of the new areas of proceedings that, like other areas of proceedings, the fairness is important, requiring special standards of conduct in accordance with the principles of fair trial derived from the Instrument of Human Rights. These principles govern the four stages of litigation/disciplinary litigation, namely Initiating the Case, Processing the Case, Deciding the Case, and the post-judgment stage (to pass a judgment). Accordingly, this article seeks to answer the question of the extent to which the principles of fair trial have been observed in the regulations for dealing with administrative violations in Iran and Britain? For this purpose, the substantive aspect (regulations) of handling administrative violations of Iranian and British employees is studied from the perspective of the principles of a fair trial as of special standards of fair trial governing the above-mentioned four steps, using the method of content analysis and inference from relevant legal texts. The findings of the study indicate the fact that the mentioned principles in the field of administrative violations regulations of the two countries have been provided in different forms; in a way that the British legal system is more developed than Iran in the realm of principles and guarantees of procedural rights of the accused employee due to the elements of Modern life, and in Iran, unlike the United Kingdom, the mechanism for dealing with administrative violations, although in some cases it complies with the principles of a fair trial, human rights instruments containing these principles have not been cited and are not based on the action of the relevant regulatory authorities.

The main focus of this research is on the nature and origin of rights. Jeremy Bentham totally rejects the notion of extra-legal rights. For him, it is only legal rights that are valid and imply a benefit for its holders. Sayyid Abu al-Qasim al-Khoei's believed that rights’ validity derives from the religious lawmaker. He authenticates rights for reasons which seem to be individuals’ interests. In this paper, it will be shown that Bentham and Khoei, at least on the formation basis of rights, have similar analysis of the concept of rights: they both consider rights as valid due to the lawmaker’s authentication to the benefits of individuals, legally sanctioned in the form of duties. Accordingly, it shall be emphasized that the mentioned writers think along similar lines on the relationship between rights and law. Nevertheless, differences and also consequences of these two analytical theories of rights are too serious to be overshadowed by their mentioned similarity.

In the present study, a novel method has been introduced to estimate the hydrodynamic coefficients of an axisymmetric submersible prolate spheroid. In this heuristic procedure which is based on combination of the nonlinear Hybrid Extended Kalman Filter (HEKF) observer and Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD), all of the hydrodynamic derivatives of a prolate spheroid in horizontal plane are estimated to simulate the Three Degrees of Freedom (3DoF) equations of motion. For this purpose, first, a CFD-based numerical model has been developed for an axisymmetric prolate spheroid by the commercial code ANSYS CFX software using the remeshing algorithm in dynamic mesh method. In this algorithm, the grid around objects deform locally using the Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian (ALE) form of the governing fluid equations. When this deformation reduces the mesh resolution, significantly, the grid is re-meshes and improved. By performing the corresponding calculations along with the simulation, some hydrodynamic derivatives were obtained. Then, utilizing the hybrid kalman filter simulation code based on the parameter identification, other unknown derivatives were estimated in the MATLAB software environment by applying the equations of motion governing an ellipsoidal body shape. It should be noted that, for deriving the remaining hydrodynamic coefficients of the mentioned prolate spheroid using HEKF, positions and velocities of the object in each time step are needed. So, the dynamic motion of the vehicle in the fluid is simulated using the transient tool of the ANSYS CFX software while benefiting from the remeshing algorithm. Furthermore, the hybrid form of the Extended Kalman Filter (EKF) is chosen as the equations governing the 3DoF motion of the ellipsoid is continuous and the measurements are discrete. Results obtained from the proposed method indicate a good agreement for estimated added mass derivatives in comparison with the available analytical ones. The following study is an effort made to introduce an innovative strategy to investigate the hydrodynamic coefficients of submersible platforms like submarines, torpedoes and AUVs.

The discourse of global justice at transnational levels has given rise to important challenges . The impact of this theory on nationally discussed concepts forms an important part of such theoretical challenges. Law, which has been so far understood as a state-made concept, is now in need of a new theoretical pattern due to its relationship with theory of global justice. Accordingly, the main question of this research is whether global justice theory can change our conception of law at both national and global levels. To answer this question, upon a brief explanation of the issue of global justice and providing a short picture of law, we will examine the impact of integrated and non-integrated approaches to global justice on this brief picture. While non-integrated perspectives do not seem to be sufficient, integrated perspectives seem unrealizable in the current power structure of the world. Accordingly, given diverse human identities and relationships, relational and non-relational grounds of justice, and insufficiency of international morality, we may only come up with a moderate outlook on global justice; under which, law is bound to be defined somewhere between two poles of certainty and responsiveness. The limited but inevitable competence of states in the contemporary world and the balanced spectrum of integrated approach to justice are, respectively, embodiments of the two mentioned poles.

Right is of great significance in political, moral and legal realms. Authors belonging to various schools have dealt with different aspects of rights and have attempted to put forward an intellectual system in this regard. Among such endeavors, we can point to studies and intellectual efforts made by Professor Hillel Steiner, a contemporary political philosopher, who emphasizes the existence of a particular correlation and relationship between “rights” and “justice”, in such a way that he includes his views and arguments under the category of “right as a building element of justice” so that he ultimately considers right as an indivisible part of justice. Of course, the relationship between right and justice is derived from the “co-existence” relationship between rights.
The aforementioned theory is based on a “libertarian” foundation and therefore set justice on the assumption of the basic value of liberty. In this research, we shall delineate Professor Hillel Steiner’s theory, and then subject it to analyses and criticism.

Modern infertility treatment methods, along with favorable results, sometimes bring about unfavorable consequences. Multiple pregnancy is one of those consequences that puts the health of mother and life of fetus in danger. Fetal reduction, namely removing one or more fetuses with aim of preserving pregnancy and also certain preventive measures such as transfer of fewer fetuses into uterus of mother in each cycle of In Vitro Fertilizations (IVF), is one of solutions to tackle this unfavorable consequence. In a number of legal systems, along with a permission to conduct fetal reduction, precise provisions on the number of transferable fetuses are enacted. A comparative study of fetal reduction in countries in which there is an experience of legal encounter with this issue shall open a horizon for the legislator and policy makers in the field of health in Iran, where there is no consistent laws or regulations in this context, so that they adopt an appropriate approach to the problem. It seems that a fetal reduction permission, limiting regulations on the number of transferable fetuses, and proper insurance coverage embody an appropriate legal system in the context of fetal reduction.

Rights are among the most important fundamental normative claims that have played a pivotal role in the development of individual and social lives of human beings over the last centuries. This concept and institution, the same as any other normative concept and institution, is in need of justification. However, justification of rights, due to their particular nature, seems to be too hard. Are rights established on the basis of morality? In order to answer this question, it is first imperative to inquire into the nature of the moral and also that of rights. Inquiring into the nature of them, in particular that of morality, shall inevitably lead the discussion towards the common and distinguishing features of them from similar fields. This paper is, however, focused on the differentiating dimensions of the moral and rights. Having introduced distinguishing features of “the moral” and “rights”, we shall investigate and conclude on the logical relationship between the mentioned two in the context of justification or theoretical defence of rights. Such investigation and conclusion will pave the way for a more precise understanding and application of the aforesaid concepts.

Today, one of the most important challenges of tax system is tax evasion of the taxpayers, which is an obstacle to the proper administration of the country. There are many ways to prevent tax evasion, one of which is the legal remedy for issuance under Article 161 of the Direct Taxes Terms and Conditions. This important legal entity can prevent tax evasion and prevent tax fraud by seizing the property of taxpayers. This article examines the conditions of the mentioned entity with some similar institutions in the legal system and therefore, by looking at its strengths and weaknesses, seeks to provide a more favorable model.

Because to the changed management approaches of the modern states and outsourcing the non-sovereign activities to the private sector, the role of the state in economy switched from direct interference in market through taking over various functions including employment, ownership, producing and distribution of the goods to regulating the relationship and behaviour of the private interested entities. In this regard,commercial port, as one of the important national and international economic centres, concurs with the modern management evolution.In this descriptive-analytical article, we are to firstly discuss and find out characteristics of the joint interference of state and private sector in regulating the port activities; the concept which is going to find its role and significant place in Iranian commercial ports, and secondly show that, to what extent, the current  structure of public and private joint interference have had the positive effect on this subject.In response, the result shows that, there are adequate legislations that have been adopted in recent years, authorizing the joint state and private interference in providing the port and maritime services. However, due to the lack of precise drawing line in the field of regulating activities in ports and therefore, continuous unexpected involvement of the government in this field, no expected achievement reached. As a result, there is a need to witness changes in this field by using the joint interference pattern, regulating port and maritime activities.

Legal pluralism, in broad terms, refers to the coexistence of two or more legal systems under the one and same state. In narrower terms, legal pluralism implies plural state-made laws and the reflection of social and cultural plurality in a legal system of a state. The concept, in its broad sense, embodies this outlook that law is not limited to the institution of the state, and that the state is only one of the authorities that make legal rules in the society. Accordingly, the concept of legal pluralism gives rise to diverse and important discussions on the scope and meaning of the concept of law. In addition to the conceptual controversies with which legal pluralism is encountered, the significant methodological criticism is that legal pluralist theories lack a clear and precise criterion for distinguishing law from other social phenomena. Considering all normative orders as legal will lead to certain conceptual confusions, which undermines main claims of legal pluralism and make them unjustified.

The inherent complexities of financial market contracts, including those made within the money and capital markets, and the effect of the financial market on the totality of the economic system of a country by providing financial resources motivate governments to use various instruments to secure finances and uphold public interests in these markets. The necessity to ensure the private interests of investors while minimizing and managing risks and the dual nature of regulation, which restricts market agents on one hand and constrains governmental intervention on the other, creates a vast continuum of regulatory instruments which are used in more or less all countries around the world in some manner. Regulation has transitioned through market crashes, government failures and the shortcomings of private law in attaining public and private interests, and has risen to the status of a government theory; it provides instruments and devices through which governments may select and deploy regulatory policies. In the present paper, Iran and the United Kingdom have been selected with respect to their differing points of departure on the regulation of financial markets and comparisons have been made regarding the strategies, methods, sanctions, resources and bodies which systematically facilitate one or many governmental policies which make up the regulatory mechanisms governing the financial markets in both countries.

More than a century ago, a great revolution occurred in Iran, the fundamental aim of which was to establish a rule of law system. Accordingly, the concept of law has been one of the most essential though challenging concepts of the constitutionalist movement in the country. This issue is so significant that we may seek the root of the Iranian constitutional crisis in the failure of providing a clear and workable concept of law. A serious impediment in this regard was the old concept and system of Shar`, which prima facie left no room for law. Shari`atist thinkers took two approaches to the relationship between law and Shar`: compatibility and incompatibility. Not only did the compatibility approach believe in the possibility of combination and sometimes identity of Shar`i and legal rules, it finally gave the upper hand to law and its requirements. One of the fundamental disputes related to the legislating authority. Shari`atists ultimately embraced legislation by the human being. Nevertheless, this brought about controversies and debates on the last prophet-hoodness of Muhammad (pbuh), religious innovation, and rational preference. This paper shall analyse the concept of law from the perspective of Shari`atist thinkers living during the Iranian Constitutional Revolution era, on the basis of their works and the related documents. This analysis will lay the historical and theoretical ground for the similar and still unresolved problem under the legal system established after the Islamic Revolution in the Country.

Development of new methods of treatments for infertility has given rise to a serious question as to the access to such methods. Determination of the ones who can access the mentioned treatments and the limits of this access, depends to the definition of infertility. The Law of the method for Embryo Donation to Infertile Couples according to Iranian legislature considers the infertile couple who “cannot reproduce in accordance with credible medical certificate” as eligible to receive the donated embryo. However, applicants for modern infertility treatment methods have gone beyond infertile couples and include those couples who wish, based on credible medical evidence, to avoid having unhealthy children, especially by using donation methods or surrogacy. Accordingly, having supported a preventive approach to ARTs, a new concept of infertility will appear on the horizon. Expanding this concept to couples who are considered fertile from a common medical perspective but give birth to seriously unhealthy children shall inevitably lead us to revise the common legal concept of infertility. Therefore, by resorting to ethical reasoning, laws, and regulations of various legal systems and Fiqhi opinions we can develop another interpretation of Embryo Donation Law and argue for the access of the “perceived as infertile” couples to the infertility treatment with the help of third parties.

Science considers using technologies for treatment of infertility as the important cause of multifetal pregnancies. Fetal reduction is a clinical procedure developed for reducing the number of fetuses in multifetal pregnancies in order to avoid their common complications. Three aims may be offered for fetal reduction: (1) pregnancy preservation, and prevention of and decreasing risks of multifetal pregnancy to the mother and the remaining fetuses (high-end multifetal reduction); (2) eliminating fetuses bearing certain kind of illnesses (selective reduction); and (3) just preventing multiple birth where no considerable risk threatens the mother or the fetuses (elective reduction). Moral evaluation on fetal reduction techniques varies depending on which of the mentioned aims is followed. However, in many cases this is “medical necessity” that morally justifies the reduction. Nevertheless, given the difficulty of reaching a decision on this issue, risks involved in fetal reduction procedure, and its psychological implications for the mother and the father, it is seriously recommended to avoid such an action by methods that prevent multifetal pregnancy.