فهرست مطالب mohammadreza keikha

The issue of the difference in rights between Muslims and infidels is clearly visible in different aspects of jurisprudence and  law. On the other hand, it seems that Islam emphasizes the principle of human dignity in all its principles and rules, so it should be seen whether this difference in rights between Muslims and infidels is compatible with the principle of human dignity. This research, which was carried out with a descriptive-analytical method, shows that the generality of the Qur'anic verses and the non-assignment of dignity to Muslims, the first principle in relations with non-Muslims, the principle of justice in rights, the basis of human rights and the principle of freedom of opinion, reflect the whole view of inherent dignity. It is for all human beings. Therefore, it seems that those proofs of human dignity that are in conflict with the proofs of the difference in rights between Muslims and infidels refer to acquired dignity. Therefore, all human beings, both Muslims and non-Muslims, have inherent dignity, but in the field of acquired dignity, it is the individual's choice that under which rank he can enjoy what rights.

In Khul divorce, which is a legal solution for terminating marriage, the wife due to her hatred of her husband gets free from the bond of marriage for the money she gives to him. According to the well-known jurists in Article 1146 of Civil Code, the legislator considers the absolute of the hatred as the key point of Khul divorce. The purpose of the explanation of this Article is to discover the criterion for realizing the hatred. If the wife just says something indicating her hatred of her husband in the hearing, is it enough? This analytical-documentary research aimed to discover the three groups of jurists who believe in the validity of absolute expression of hatred, the expression of verbal hatred, and the expression of inner hatred. The results demonstrated that the narratives, to which were referred by the believers in the verbal hatred, only show the legitimacy of Khul divorce and there is no proof for the claim, and in lots of cases, the wife due to some reasons uses disgusting words that are against her inner desire, and if she can get divorced only by expressing such words, it will have bad consequences. Therefore, it is better to say that the meaning of hatred from the legislator's perspective is the inner hatred with the mentioned criteria, and it can be identified by exploring couples' relationships.

The dissolution of the relationship between parity only in specific cases, and in the absence of jurisprudence-projected for Pakistan's rights jurisprudence emamieh. cancellation of the mankind in General is divided into three regions. the first batch: fault , category: dissemble, category III: violation of the condition attribute. this study was descriptive analytic with Adaptive approach to pay off the account funds the goal of dating vaftragh causes cancellation of Pakistan's rights jurisprudence emmieh. the findings of this research show the give thatin emamiehjurisprudence for the cancellation of a visit to the Court is not required, except ojanon anen flaw flaw is the only common law couples but in Pakistan In addition to the madness, leprosy are considered worth the couple shared obers also component faults dissolution of the relationship between parity according to the common trait of the otakhlf condition of imperfections that the marriage couples go to court is included is dissemble finally knowledge required and the violation of the condition attribute in emamiehjurisprudence, unlike Pakistan's cancellation of azasbab law .
Termination of nikah is cancellation of spousal relationship one-sidedly which occurs due to lack of emotional relationship between the spouses so much so that it makes living together not only difficult but also harmful for the couple. Solidarity and unity of the family is one of the important issues in every society, however, for preventing occurrence of further losses to an already afflicted spouse as a consequence of problems in married life, sometimes, there is no other solution but divorce or termination of nikah between the couples. Therefore, comparison of juridical rules of religions and legal systems of the countries is important for paving the way for compilation of new laws, solving different law-related consequences of such separations and formation of simpler and more convenient solutions for these problems. With this objective, this survey tries to study the causes for termination of nikah in the Imamia jurisprudence and in Pakistan’s Personal Status Law; and in this way, it tries to present more introduction to Imamia jurisprudence and Pakistan’s Personal Status Law. It tries to find answers for the following questions: 1. What are the causes of termination of nikah according to Imamia jurisprudence and according to Pakistan’s legal system? 2. What are their common points and differences?
This survey has been conducted by the use of descriptive-analytical method with a comparative attitude for compensation of the rights of the afflicted person in the niukah contract. In the light of Islam and revolution in the recent decades in Iran, the Islamic elites and jurisprudents have achieved and improved legislation of the laws of family according to the Islamic rules and regulations. This led to compilation of a rich collection of civil law in Iran by making use of Imamia jurisprudence. However, this has not been studied in details in the legal system of Pakistan, hence, not many sources and books of civil law were accessible in this country to study this issue. By comparing these two systems, this survey tries to achieve commonalities and differences and tries to lay the foundations for further research in this area.


Considering the religious, cultural and legal commonalities between the two countries of Iran and Pakistan, family law is significantly important in Islam and in these two countries. On the other hand, the legal system in Pakistan is common law; in this sense, it is one of the non-compiled legal systems; and when passing the sentence, the judge pays attention to the judicial attitudes and tradition more than to the law. This has made the civil laws of these two countries look at this issue differently, although they share many common points as well. The common causes for termination of nikah in the Imamia jurisprudence and the law of Pakistan are: 1. redhibition, 2. deception, 3. violation of quality term. Of course, there are some disagreements between them in the number of the common defects. Unlike Imamia jurisprudence, in Pakistan’s Personal Status Law, in addition to insanity, leprosy is also one of the common defects. In the case of deception, the husband cannot terminate nikah although divorce is controlled by him; and he has the right to terminate nikah only when a term specified in the nikah contract is violated; and unlike Imamia jurisprudence, the unconsent wife or husband has to go to the court so that termination of nikah can take place.


Considering the stated issues above, we conclude that the causes of termination of nikah in Imamia jurisprudence and in the civil law of Pakistan are different from one another,

In the Imamia jurisprudence, termination of nikah does not require jurisdiction of the case in the court except for the case of husband’s sexual inability (enan), and in this case too, the role of the court is only to approve correctness of the conditions of termination not terminating the nikah contract itself. However, in Pakistan’s Personal Status Law, it is the contrary; and under any circumstances, by occurrence of the causes of termination of nikah, termination does not take place unless the judge passes the sentence. For termination of nikah to take place, it is required that either one of the parties with the right of termination had been unaware of the violation of the agreed term and be unconsented to it; otherwise, his/her right of termination is invalid.
The common defects in the civil laws of Pakistan that give the spouses the right to terminate nikah are insanity, leprosy (according to the famous opinions of Hanafi scholars), and in the famous opinion of Imamia jurisprudence, it is only insanity.
The defects specific to men in Pakistan’s Personal Status Law are man’s sexual inability (enan), leave (jobb), khasaa, insanity and leprosy (common defects) which give the wife the right to terminate nikah provided that the husband had any of them in the time of nikah and she was unaware of it or has not announced her consent to it. In the Imamia jurisprudence, the defects specific to men are only those mentioned defects (enan, jobb and khasaa) in addition to insanity.
The defects specific to wife in the Imamia jurisprudence are: gharn, ratgh, efza, afl, leprosy, disability and blindness of both eyes which give the husband the right to terminate nikah; but in the civil law of Pakistan, these defects do not give the husband the right to terminate nikah because divorce is controlled by him.
There are some differences between Imamia jurisprudence and Pakistan’s Personal Status Law in the issue of deception. According to Pakistan’s law, in the case of deception, the husband does not have the right to terminate nikah, but in the Imamia jurisprudence, he has the right to do so, and in addition to that, he can demand compensation from the wife or the third deceiving party.
In the case of violation of the quality term, whether it has been mentioned in the nikah contract or specified later, according to Imamia jurisprudence, it gives the other party the right to terminate nikah. However, in the law of Pakistan, the right to termination is only given if that term has been mentioned in the nikah contract.

Testimony testifying to voluntary and unpardoned martyrdom, if it is sought to prove the right to claim, acceptance of that position is contrary to jurisprudents. Famous jurists have absolutely rejected this testimony. Considering that testimony is one of the most practical proofs of proof, and considering that there is actually a lot of evidence that it is evidence of the process of ignorance, and in this way it is testifying in a way that the testimony is to be ignored, Many cases are related to judicial justice and a factor for justifying the right of the claimant. Therefore, the present study is descriptive-analytic to criticize and review the well-known evidence of rejection of martyrdom. The findings show that the well-known reason is not qualified to prove their claims. On the other hand, the rejection of martyrdom is completely absurd, and on the other hand, accepting martyrdom.

Following recent theories and studies on management, organizational spirit has gained a growing significance and has been a central and fundamental topic in management. Anthropologists, sociologists and recently psychologists and even economists, have paid due attention to these new topics and have made lots of research and hypotheses in order to comprehend them and have used their findings in solving management issues. The study aims at perceiving the relation between organizational spirit and aspects of qualitative comprehensive management. The data was celestial through two questioners, the team work spirit question are specially prepared for the staff, consisted of two main sections, the first part included personal credentials asking for the person's age, education, sex, work experience, employment status, and the second part consisted of 28 questions, administered based on the objectives of the study and the question are to the aspects of comprehensive qualitative management consisting of 49 questions filled out by people in change of different department statistic analysis was carried out using Spearman and freedman’s correlation tests and SPSS software, the findings showed there was a relation between organizational spirit and aspects of qualitative comprehensive management.