seyed mahmood majidi

Mahdur-Al-Dam is one of the important legal jurisprudence topics that has always been the subject of discussion and criticism. Determining the example of Mahdur-Al-Dam is one of the challenging issues that needs to be discussed. In Article 320 of the Islamic Penal Code of 2012, the legislator addressed Mahdvaldam. The purpose of this article is to examine Mahdur-Al-Dam, the subject of Article 302 of the Islamic Penal Code 2013 from a jurisprudential point of view. This article has analyzed the mentioned topic using a descriptive, analytical and library method. The findings indicate that, from the jurisprudential point of view, the punishment of Mehdur al-Dam is the only duty of the imam and the deputy imam and at the present time, the guardian of jurisprudence has delegated this authority to the courts of justice and is within the scope of their duties. No one is authorized and empowered to enforce the limits and punishments and to commit suicide of people with the belief such as retribution and Ta'zir. On the other hand, one of the most important challenges of acquitting Mahdur-Al-Dam’s murderer and his non-retribution is that it is difficult to prove that the victim was Mahdur-Al-Dam. By proving the apostasy of the victim, he will be punished because killing the apostate is one of the duties of the government, but if he cannot prove the apostasy of the victim or prove his mistake in this regard, he will be punished.

One of the aspects of the synthesis between religious freedom and freedom of teaching is the correct description of the legal system of religious education in schools. The aim of the research is the explanation of this system in the Council of Europe member States, especially in consideration of respect for the teachings of minorities, focusing on the situation of Turkish Alevis. These descriptions will help us to answer the following question i.e. what are the parameters of the European Court of Human Rights in outlining a legal system of religious education that requires States to respect the faith of minorities and whythe Turkish government does notrecognize Alevis as an independent minority. The result of our research is that from the point of view of European Court, a State can teach a particular religion in its education system, but these teachings must not affect the rights of Alevis. Ankara wants to strengthen its national and religious unity; hence it does not recognize Alevis as an autonomous community. All this is in contrast with the jurisprudence of the European Court and against Turkish secular system.

Increasing punishment is the main strategy which has been applied by governments against growth of serious crimes. Evolution of criminal law with regard to such serious crimes as crimes against security and public order in recent decades shows that strategies has been taken by States in making coercive criminal policy in this regard. The strategies focus on the internal capacities of criminal law when fighting against such categories of crimes. This paper sheds lights on the strategies relating to triple elements of crimes which widen the scope of criminalizing and a major part of research has been devoted to it. Thus the solution such as using certain terms and connecting it to the scope of criminalization, clauses with limited scope, ambiguous and controversial terms, changing the subject matter of the crimes, objective without considering the result, criminalization by general malicious intent as well as accepting unintentional crimes in this regard. Noting the solution can attract the attentions to the capacities of criminal law and reduces the importance of increasing punishment as a way of dealing with serious crimes

Provisions of Islamic Penal Code of 1392 on retaliation indicate the lawmaker’s new approaches. It seems that filling legal gaps of previous law is among the approaches. Thus, provisions of the Code on the issues such as minors’ next of kin’s powers, relevance of superior order to murder as well as criminal sanction for abortion in its maturity are less ambiguous. Safeguarding public order is another approach of the lawmaker which is indicated by the provisions regarding, inter alia, protection of all the victims of murder and granting power to next of kin for receiving blood money without consent of murderer. In addition to this, new view of lawmaker to self-defense and to defendant’s knowledge of fatal nature of his/her act show the assessed utilization of existence capacities of different approaches of Islamic Law (“figh”) in resolving legal and judicial problems.

Taking a decision about a compassionate penal policy or the other way in the case of political criminal is one of the most difficult tests for governments in the field of making criminal law's internal and external (formal) disciplines. Examining historical changes demonstrates different positions and polices adopted by states in this concern. As many countries the new French penal law didn't show a complete definition of political crime  and its features .The lack of a legislative definition of the criminal act is one of the most important reasons for the existence of  many ambiguities in the lawyer's judgments and French judicial policy. Despite that, French Supreme Court has tried to eliminate these ambiguities and legislative methods bravely during recent years. These methods can be considered by all countries which their legislative ambiguities in defining the notion of political crime have deprived political offenders from certain formal and substantive legal privileges.