جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "عدالت" در نشریات گروه "فقه و حقوق"

This article examines the proportionality of disciplinary sanctions in relation to student offenses in academic misconduct cases. The primary goal of the research is to evaluate the structure and processes of disciplinary committees in universities and to assess the adherence to principles of justice and fair trial in these proceedings. The research method is qualitative, involving content analysis of university disciplinary regulations and a review of real cases of student misconduct. The findings indicatethat, in many instances, there is a lack of proportionality between the offense committed and the imposed punishment, with students facing unjust and disproportionate sanctions. This issue is particularly evident when minor infractions result in severe penalties, leading to dissatisfaction and a sense of injustice among students.Furthermore, the disciplinary process in many universities is opaque and lengthy, which increases psychological stress for the accused students. The lack of adequate communication regarding students' rights and the absence of a full defense opportunity are major violations of fair trial principles. Based on the research findings, several recommendations are proposed for improving the structure and processes of disciplinary actions, including revising regulations, ensuring the independence of disciplinary bodies, and fully adhering to fair trial principles. These suggestions aim to guarantee justice and proportionality in dealing with student misconduct cases. The final conclusion emphasizes that revising disciplinary regulations and increasing transparency in the disciplinary process could help improve fairness and reduce dissatisfaction in universities.

As a supporter of individual and social rights, the judiciary has obligations to protect people's rights, which is within the legal jurisdiction of this branch. Part of the judiciary's obligations in this regard are carried out through the prosecutor. The public prosecutor is a judicial official who officially accuses people of committing a crime and prosecutes them in court. The purpose of this article is to examine the question of what duties and obligations does the prosecutor have in the legal system of Iran and the United States of America in the pursuit of public rights? The present article is theoretical and by using the descriptive-analytical method and in a library form, it has explained the tasks and actions of the prosecutor in the preservation of public rights and citizen's rights. The findings indicate that according to the Constitution of the Judiciary, and accordingly, the prosecutor and the related cyber authorities in this branch should guarantee public rights and deal with the factors that violate these rights in line with their duties. In fact, the feeling of justice and trust in the judicial system is provided to the people as a result of the judicial supervision of the provision and fulfillment of the rights of the citizens. In American law, the prosecutor has important duties in front of public law and civil rights, which must perform these duties fairly and impartially and seek to guarantee justice and the rights of individuals.

There is no doubt that the right to access information is one of the most basic rights of every buyer. This doubles the necessity of the current research in relation to the examination of contracts in this field. The leading article was written with the aim of analyzing the effect of the principle of justice and good faith on the provision of information and warnings in contract law. Therefore, the obligation to provide necessary information is one of the traditional rights of every consumer based on the principle of justice and good faith, which is certainly considered one of the duties of the strong party of the contract. This research has been compiled by content analysis method and in a library form and by referring to the regulations. The results of the research indicate that there is no definition of good faith and contractual justice in the laws of Iran. Also, the lack of strict regulations on the advertising of goods can create many problems in the direction of protection from the weak side of the contract. After conducting the research, it is concluded that in commercial dealings and providing information and warnings about contractual substitutes, it is appropriate to accept the theory of pure responsibility in Iranian law and take a big step in promoting the rights of consumers and all-round compliance. Justice in contracts should be removed.

One of the most important issues that has been raised in international law and at the level of written laws of most countries is the issue of equality between men and women, which is of fundamental importance in the field of employment laws, and in this regard, governments have a very important mission in the field of realizing citizenship rights, justice, the principle of equality, etc. The issue of equality between men and women in the employment debate is a very important principle in Iranian law, unfortunately, there are no comprehensive and complete laws guaranteeing effective implementation in this field, and only a few regulations and international documents are seen, which lead to challenges. According to the explicit text of Article 28 of the Constitution, every person, both men and women, has the right to work, and of course, his work should not be in conflict with the Islamic Sharia and the laws of the country. Therefore, the purpose of writing the following article is to examine the equality of men and women in employment rights in an analytical and descriptive way, and we have found that, due to the acceptance of equality and equality of men and women in employment rights, there are no consistent laws in Iranian law, and this issue compels the executive and legislature to establish regulations and special laws in this regard, and in some ways,

Peacebuilding and transitional justice are the intervention processes that are very important in war-torn societies in the post-conflict period, and their relations with each other are worthy of attention. There has always been the challenge of revenge and forgiveness, that is, criminal justice on the one hand and national reconciliation on the other. Regarding the interaction between Peacebuilding and transitional justice, distinct, conflicting, and even contradictory opinions have been raised. The following lines are intended to comment on the interaction of Peacebuilding and transitional justice in the post-conflict period. Therefore, it is shown that these two are related to each other and work parallel in conflict situations. According to the topic under discussion, the current research is descriptive-analytical and it was done through the library method. The following article has shown that the peace and justice that takes place with the intervention and entry of peacekeepers and foreign forces (so-called top-down peace and justice) is different from the local peace and justice without the entry and intervention of outsiders. (so-called peace and justice from the bottom up) and they do not always have the same results. Therefore, transitional justice and Peacebuilding are not only in conflict with each other. However, the results of the study of the relationship between transitional justice and Peacebuilding indicate that these two processes due to only dealing with past violence, have caused socio-economic justice or normal and social daily behaviors to be marginalized.

Many legal scholars consider the ultimate goal of public law to be the establishment of a rule of law state, which is a minimalist state limited to legal structures that are as depoliticized as possible. The emphasis of some thinkers on maximizing rights and minimizing politics in the state stems from a Kantian approach to the concept of the common good, as humans can be more equally accepted before the law, but this equality is largely distorted and compromised in the political sphere. The legal state state has manifested itself in various forms of thought, from ancient Greece to liberalism and even Islam, but its main origin can perhaps be traced back to the liberal tradition, as this tradition has paid more attention to limiting the powers of the state through law.Friedrich von Hayek, as a libertarian from the Austrian school, presents one of the most extreme theories of the rule of law state. He proposes a minimal state limited to judicial oversight, both over the people and over the state's own administrative actions, and denies the need to establish other state institutions, including the legislative branch. In this article, we will examine the fundamental principles of Hayek's thought in order to ultimately be able to criticize the result of these foundations, namely Hayek's conception of the rule of law state.

The concept of public rights is commonly understood as the rights of the general public. However, when scrutinized more closely, this notion becomes somewhat ambiguous, leading to questions and disagreements among legal doctrines and jurists. This ambiguity revolves around the precise definition of the term, its instances, and its scope, such as whether it pertains solely to criminal law or extends to non-criminal law. Examining the scope of public rights reveals numerous and sometimes conflicting interpretations. Legal and judicial opinions on the scope of public rights generally fall into two general yet conflicting approaches, namely narrow and broad. Given the divergent viewpoints, it is crucial to adopt a valid interpretive approach within the legal system to establish a systematic framework aimed at reaching an understanding. Objective consequentialism, as a normative-based interpretive method, serves as a valuable theoretical tool for evaluating these approaches. In this line, the present study sought to address the following research question: Which of the two approaches, narrow or broad, to the scope of public rights is deemed acceptable from the perspective of objective consequentialism?

Legal and judicial opinions concerning public rights can generally be categorized into two competing approaches. On one hand, there are viewpoints advocating for a narrow interpretation, which suggests limiting the scope of public rights in times of uncertainty. On the other hand, there are perspectives that advocate for a broader understanding of public rights, incorporating a wider range of interpretations and instances. Although there is no coherent and methodical discussion on this matter in legal literature thus far, various schools of legal interpretation have debated different methods, such as objective consequentialism. In objective consequentialism, the focus lies on discerning the purpose of the law, so the interpreter, whether a judge or a lawyer, seeks to deduce the purpose of the law from the text itself and other relevant sources. Subsequently, they interpret provisions of the law in light of the general purpose. In this method, justification for interpretation is grounded on the objective purpose behind establishing the rule. The purpose of the law can be inferred from the very text of the law, including its title, preamble, or relevant chapters. Furthermore, the purpose may be predestined or assumed, with implications being inferred through logical or judicious readings of the text of the law—based on the premise that the legislator is judicious. Therefore, it is assumed that the legislator has intended for legal provisions to have meaningful effects rather than being rendered null or futile. Objective consequentialism seeks to uncover the underlying purpose behind a given law or provision.

The present study relied on objective consequentialism, which is an interpretive method based on the normative ground, in order to evaluate the two approaches concerning the scope of pubic rights. The study aimed to address the following research question: Which of the two approaches, narrow or broad, to the scope of public rights is deemed acceptable from the perspective of objective consequentialism?

According to objective consequentialism, fostering a broad understanding of the concept of public rights while maintaining a systematic view of functions of the judiciary body can result in an appropriately balanced understanding aimed at claiming public rights. The present study synthesized the opinions sharing a common essence and overarching direction, discussing the existing legal approaches regarding the scope of public rights. Additionally, considering the principles of the Constitution, a hypothesis (called the conceptual approach derived from purposiveness) was formulated and tested about the distinction between the scope of public rights—as outlined in the Constitution—and the restoration of public rights. The scope of public rights can be either narrowed or expanded, considering the purpose of the law and of justice outlined in each instance, as well as the implications derived from a judicious interpretation of the law.

Public rights can be re-evaluated with an eye to the purpose of the law, hence interpreted as rights and interests arising from the objective goal of the law. In this light, the scope of public rights becomes meaningful considering the purpose of the law, the justice it guarantees in each instance, and the implications stemming from the judicious interpretation of the law. Therefore, there two central points here: rights (the conceptual standpoint) and the negation of oppression and injustice (the functional standpoint). From the conceptual standpoint, public rights extend to legal rights. Yet the functional standpoint would include those instances of rights that have been or are about to be unjustly taken away from their rightful owners, making it impossible for the beneficiaries (whether individuals or groups) to reclaim them.

The ominous phenomenon of poverty has always had destructive effects on society and is one of the major obstacles to the happiness of human societies. The Holy Quran has provided ways to solve this social scourge and has dealt with it with negative and positive methods. On the one hand, banning usury and prohibiting the reproduction of wealth, and on the other hand, by establishing important and influential social institutions, such as khums, zakat, loans, endowment, endowment, and advice to work and effort, in order to solve this scourge of burning women. has taken care Despite the fact that all Muslims agree on the sanctity of riba in Islam, there is no exact definition of riba among Muslims. In the past, the majority of Islamic scholars, like Christians, considered all kinds of interest on money as equivalent to usury, but today, most Islamic scholars consider riba not just any kind of interest, but equivalent to cruel interest. The subject of the research requires to be investigated at a deep level. therefore; The in-depth research plan of the subject has been investigated by means of a case study plan of library technology, due to the reference to the Holy Quran and authentic interpretations and documentary technology, and it has come to the conclusion that banning riba is one of the ways to deal with Poverty and support for the poor.

The present article seeks to analyze in an analytical way by referring to library sources and based on the methodology of legal knowledge, in addition to paying attention to the results of the efforts of jurists, the effect of the issue of chastity with the focus on the observance and non-observance of hijab by the mother in the matter of child custody. Especially for the girl, report on the legal aspect and explain its role in enjoying the condition of moral health of the mother who is responsible for custody and explain the relationship that he finds with titles such as justice, depravity and trustworthiness of the guardian in the issue of moral degeneration and deprivation of custody. Articles achievement indicates that, from the jurisprudential-legal aspect, a level of mother's hijab is effective in ensuring the child's moral health and the mother's possession of the necessary moral conditions in the matter of child custody, and it can play a role in his chastity under description of chastity. ; Even if his righteousness and non-debauchery cannot be considered a condition of custody. Based on this, if the non-observance of the mother's hijab is enough to put the chaste upbringing of the child in serious danger according to the prevailing Sharia and customs; He is no longer a guardian in the matter of custody of the child, and the continuation of such custody leads to harm to the child, and therefore custody can be taken away from him. It should be noted that despite the passage of more than half a century since the sexual revolution in the West and the occurrence of nudity pests in these societies, today we are witnessing efforts, especially by families, to treat the aforementioned complications.

Since Epicurus is known as a philosopher who generally advocates hedonism, it is believed that he cannot have a political or social theory. Few traces of him have remained. The difficulty of researching about him increases when we want to go beyond the essence of his philosophy and discuss its tangible legal and social dimensions. Although the importance of Epicurus's philosophy is due to the fact that the study of the philosophy of this period in the post-Renaissance centuries, with the formation of utilitarian schools and subsequently public law and government theory, seems to prove this point. Epicurean philosophy, based on its approach to the philosophy of life and encouraging people to live a life away from suffering and by limiting themselves to less troublesome pleasures, also in the social field, calls people to stay away from the political field and define their own happiness, beyond the reach of the government. The Epicurean state is a small, minimal state formed under the contract of individuals not to harm them, and these institutions are made by human beings who pursue tangible goals.

The fracture between developed and developing states, emerged by unequal distribution of the riches of the earth in the last century, reflects the specifics of international development law. International development law is a means of regulating which allows  states to choose their political, social and economic organization within the legal framework of sovereign equality and independence, and takestep towards development. International development law has played a key role in shaping and strengthening main concepts of international law. Each of these concepts deals with the highest human values on its own. What is logically considered is that power in international community must be shifted in favor of justice. It is obvious that in some cases this movement has paved the way for the realization of such an ideal, and in other cases it stopped in the middle of the road due to the special structure of the international society or has changed its path to power again and failed to reach global solidarity. This paper focuses on clarifying the image of justice as a failed issue in international relations, then by considering the declaration of the right to development conclude that the international community is determined to center development on human being while making the content of this development evolve law according to the altering status of international society.

Justice is a prevailing reality in all dimensions of human life, conceptualized in different fields of knowledge including jurisprudence. Jurisconsults have presented various definitions of justice, the most importance of which is the definition of justice as a second nature (malakih). The present study clarifies the definitions of justice provided in jurisprudence, and follows the hypothesis that none of these definitions truly capture the meaning of justice. Some of the definitions indicate and discover the existence of justice, and second nature cannot be accepted as a definition of justice either, due to some shortcomings. In fact, justice is an existential reality derived from Right (ḥaq), both of which are parts of innate human necessities and can be proven by reference to human nature. Performing the obligatory acts (vājibāt) and avoiding prohibited acts (muḥarramāt) leads to the realization of justice. It is not that justice is a second nature that emerges from performing obligatory acts and avoiding prohibited ones. This study is necessary, because elucidating the reality of jurisprudential justice yields scientific benefits in the least.

Following the genocide in Rwanda that killed one million people, the Rwandan government turned to Gacaca courts, which are rooted in the culture of all the people of Rwanda, in order to expedite the prosecution of those involved in this humanitarian catastrophe and reduce the prison population. In order to adapt these courts to the conditions of the crimes committed, the Rwandan government made several changes in these courts, which according to many, changed its traditional and informal nature and brought it closer to the criminal courts. This intermediate mechanism, in addition to having gains and advantages as an alternative judicial response, has also caused concern and criticism from a human rights perspective. The present article examines this intermediate mechanism and its positive and negative aspects from a human rights perspective.

Justice is one of the most common concepts in all disciplines and contemporary criminal justice systems. However, this common concept at the stage of implementation, in each particular discourse, is the subject of special controversies and arguments based on good and evil. The present study has chosen Laclau and Mouffe's approach for the critical, inclusive, and historical Features in analyzing these dualisms of discourse analysis. The results of the analysis show that the concept of justice as a central signifier of competing discourses has been influenced by unique political and social conditions, which has led to different dualisms in the representations of the pre-reform and post-reform era. Before 1997 cinematic courts have been represented in such a way as to counter the evil, which is an anti-Islamic element in this period, as an obstacle to justice. In this regard, the concept of crime and violation of justice has been patched up by the judicial system itself. After 1997, a social barrier, the patriarchal atmosphere, impedes achieving justice. In this period, good and evil are reduced to the dualities of men and women and In this regard, the function of the court is to reproduce the patriarchal atmosphere in a formal way And the concept of crime and violation of justice is linked to masculinity. As a result, post-revolutionary cinema criminal courts, under the influence of discursive constructions, have been incapable of achieving justice, and the expectation of justice has largely been introduced outside of the court.

The present study aims at examining the family laws in the field of judicial divorce, especially the one based on 'osr wa haraj principle in order to clarify its flaws and shortcomings. Most of the cases that are mentioned in the note of Article 1130 of the Civil Code as examples of 'osr wa haraj, besides the fact that they do not reach the level of such 'osr wa haraj making the continuation of life difficult for women, they cannot be considered as examples of 'osr wa haraj; It may be placed under another title such as mo'asherat bi ma'rouf. Also, mentioning these cases as examples of 'osr wa haraj is against the principle of the negation of 'osr wa haraj, and thus causes an increase in the number of divorces in the society. In family life, the husband must either fulfill all his rights and duties well or divorce the wife. A husband's inappropriate treatment of his wife and failure to fulfill his duties regarding her on the one hand, and not divorcing the wife on the other hand, is injustice against the wife. In this case, the ruler or judge issues a decree on the divorce of the woman on the basis of justice and the need to remove oppression and due to establishing justice in the society.

Justice is the main concern of philosophers and thinkers, has left its most important impact on the science of law. Along with the development of human societies from ancient times to the formation of modern governments, philosophers have offered various definitions of justice. The concept of justice is considered by Greek philosophers as the basis for the formation of this concept in the structure of political societies. Coinciding with the developments of the Middle Ages and the beginning of the Renaissance, law was mixed with another form of justice. Concepts such as just war led to the notion of justice as the most fundamental goal of law. Has enjoyed. In particular, this development has been well reflected in the distributional justice that governs state sovereignty. In this article, the concept of justice among philosophers and its developments from ancient times to the era of modern governments have been studied and concepts such as equality and justice have been considered as alternatives to justice.

While most research focuses on the issue of humanitarian aid from an ethical and not mandatory viewpoint, this paper seeks to study humanitarian aid from the perspective of Islamic. In the international human rights system, with the extensive interpretation of these rights and adopting a positive approach, the only obligation to accept humanitarian aid has been proven. From a different perspective, this research seeks to examine the duty to provide humanitarian aid from in Islamic jurisprudence. The paper argues that the religion of Islam  provides a positive approach to humanitarian aid. In this regard, the pre-Islamic principles of human dignity and justice and the Islamic obligation to preserve human life and the principle of “taliif al-qulub” (winning hearts) by using “zakat” (religious tax), prove the obligation to provide humanitarian aid to all people exposed to natural and unnatural disasters, especially to non-Muslims.