جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « public rights » در نشریات گروه « فقه و حقوق »

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.

On January 23, the Council of the European Union approved the executive regulation proposed by the Commission of the Union and the High Representative of the Union regarding the imposition of restrictions on several Iranian entities and individuals and stipulated that it is applicable in all member states. In this document, several persons and institutions, including the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice headquarters and its secretary, are sanctioned. In this descriptive-analytical note, we are looking for an answer to the question whether this sanction has a justified legal basis. If any loss or damage is caused by this sanction to the headquarters or its secretary or to the people of Iran, what mechanism is there to compensate it? In addition to the indirect attack of this document on the fundamental rights of the Iranian people under the pretext of protecting the people and the ability to demand compensation for the damages caused by this decision of the European Union due to the violation of some international and European human rights documents, considering the gross errors in Regarding the executive position and performance of the headquarters secretary, the legal nature of the headquarters, the legal duties and performance of the headquarters in the past two years, and the great similarity of the literature contained in that document with the literature of the media flow of the rebels and subversives, it seems that the writing of this document It has been entrusted to the agents of the aforementioned organizations, especially the terrorists of the Mojahedin Khalq. This decision, which cannot be unrelated to Europe's adherence to America's policies against Iran, has been approved with gross error by an institution that claims to dominate the rights and decide the fate of other nations.

Judicial review, due to its unique features, including the guarantee of coercive executions, has a decisive role in realizing the rule of law and guaranteeing the rights of citizens. The legal system of the Islamic Republic of Iran clearly recognized the category of public rights and interest in the field of administrative proceedings by approving the amendment of the Administrative Court Law (2023). This is the case that with the passage of more than a century of public rights and interests, these rights are still facing challenges in their birthplace, which is the criminal law. The Constitution, as a document containing the highest legal norms, requires public institutions to follow it. The Constitution of 1358 by establishing the "restore" of public rights and interests anf specifying the "duty" of the "judiciary" has drawn up the framework of proceedings in this field. In this way the question that arises in the meantime is "How is the order of the constitutional legislator to restore public rights and interest matters in the administrative proceedings?" The writing with the analytical method and using library sources especially the review of the opinions of the basic founders comes to the conclusion that the restoration of public rights as the duty of the administrative court is accompanied by foundations, criteria and requirements which are centered on interpretation methods. Verbal and practical oriented is not realized.

The notion of the "Revival of Public Rights" has always been a controversial topic in legal doctrines and judicial practice. Public rights and their instances on one side, and the concept of revival on the other, constitute the core of this divergence. This ambiguity has intensified with the emergence of new social developments, necessitating the anticipation of innovative methods to ensure public interest more prominently. The necessity to sue environmental violations, capital market misconduct, problems related to the quality of automobiles, and over the recent years calamities arising from the COVID-19 pandemic are among the factors that have posed discussions related to the revival of public rights and judicial methods to guarantee public benefit. While discussions on judicial guarantees of public interest in our legal system are of less enrichment, in legal systems of other countries, it has been extensively elaborated. Public interest law and the associated topics, such as public interest lawsuits, position, and rights admissible in these lawsuits, are closely linked to the concept of revival of public rights. This article, by employing a descriptive-analytical method and utilizing library data, along with interviews with most of provincial prosecutors and their practices, aims to remove ambiguities associated with the concept of public rights and its revival through comparative data analysis, with a focus on common law systems. Based on the findings of this research, public rights should be interpreted as rights without any limited beneficiaries, and retrieval, in terms of nature, signifies the concept of supervision and is equivalent to the non-criminal authorities of prosecutors.

Oil, as an economic and strategic commodity, has played an effective and decisive role in the political and economic destiny of the country and its people since the past and because these resources belong to the people, and on the other hand, its management is the responsibility of the government according to the law, entrusted to act according to the interests the people. In order to realize this, it is necessary to comply with the principles and requirements that the theory of enforcement to public rights in Anfal and public wealth in oil and gas sector tries to explain the necessity and manner of realizing these rights and the obstacles to their realization by respecting the property rights of the people. In the regard, the management of exploration, optimal production, the manner and quantity of supply, the income from exports and the manner of spending it are of particular importance. One of the positive and influential factors for the realization of public rights is the key role of the government in implementing good governance and regulation in order to restore and protect these rights, and the effective and reciprocal role of the people in this regard, and the negative factors are the weakness of laws and inefficiency, Management officials pointed out. The main questions raised in this article are: What is the performance of the responsible party to realize peoples, rights in oil and gas natural resources? Are there practical measures and serious determination to solve the problems in the industry and remove the obstacles to the realization of peoples right in natural resources of oil and gas? The evaluation of the performance of officials and law in a descriptive and analytical way has been examined in this article.

The Internet has played an important role in securing the right to freedom of expression and by removing the restrictions on publishing, searching and receiving information, it has provided the basis for the use of this fundamental right. There is no doubt that the development and expansion of the Internet, as well as the benefit of this new communication tool, requires a codified and coherent legal system. The legal system in question should be able to ensure the freedom of this new media, prevent possible abuse of freedom of expression and assure people that their access and use of internet media will be cheap, safe and stable. This research has been done with descriptive and analytical method and by using various library sources and texts and legal documents. As a result, monitoring in nature brings transparency and can protect public rights in the future. However, due to the plans known as the protection plan or the new resolution of the parliament that the Supreme Council of Cyberspace is outside the scope of the administrative procedure, this council has been given full authority, so there is no accountability for the violation of the right to cyberspace for the public. The legal authority should not give it, in which case the authority of this council and the supervision of this space will be expanded to an unlimited extent, which will be a gross violation of public rights.

According to paragraph 2 of Article 156 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, "restoring public rights and expanding justice and legitimate freedoms" is one of the duties of the judiciary. Nevertheless, despite the fact that the independent mention of the said duty in a separate paragraph under the said principle means its equal value with other duties of the judiciary, for reasons such as the ambiguity of the terms and the importance and number of cases in the jurisdiction, in comparison with other clauses of the above-mentioned principle do not provide a significant executive mechanism for the aforementioned task. In this regard, the authors in the upcoming research with a critical approach and by using library sources and analysis of laws and regulations, while clarifying the terms and comparative conceptualization of public law and other similar concepts, conclude that despite the importance of the category First, the duty of the judiciary in relation to paragraph 2 of Article 156 of the Constitution, the revival of public rights, in comparison with other duties under the said principle, has been neglected and requires more effort, which will be explained in the following with a view to the general scope of the concept of public rights. It is possible to clearly identify its multiple examples and provide the possibility of guaranteeing it.

The general structure of Imami jurisprudence in the initiative of Mohaghegh Hali in the book Sharia al-Islam is divided into four parts and is classified into orships, contracts, agreements and special rules. In this general structure, which has been a common and accepted model until our time, the family does not have a specific epistemological position and a regular internal structure.In addition, in the structure of Sharia al-Islam, the set of issues of family jurisprudence is limited to private law or inter-family relations and is not dedicated to important issues related to the relationship between the government and the Babi family and its issues have not been studied. Therefore, family jurisprudence is unrecognizable, incomplete and irregular and needs a new plan. The present article is in the position of designing a comprehensive structure and logical explanation of family jurisprudence. In the author's proposal, the general structure of family jurisprudence is divided into two parts; The first part is dedicated to issues related to private law and the second part to issues related to public law of the family and the system of issues of both sections has been identified and codified.

By recognizing the inherent duality of private law and public law, each domain has been allocated its distinct territory. Despite the relative and interconnected nature of these realms, the application of public law within its designated territory is essential due to its specific role, functions, and methodologies. Throughout history, fundamental rights (public laws) have governed the relationship between the government and its citizens, while private rights (civil laws) have governed the interactions between individuals. This demarcation of territories is not exclusive to Iran; numerous countries worldwide have embraced this division, leading to significant substantive and procedural implications.Notably, in recent years, Iran has witnessed a notable expansion of the public law domain within its legal system, which has raised concerns about its extent. This expansion can be attributed to several underlying reasons. One primary factor is the inadequacy and limitations of existing private law regulations in resolving societal issues. Consequently, legislators are compelled to address private law matters by formulating solutions based on public law principles, inadvertently diverting the core problem into the realm of public law. This practice, however, fails to address the root causes and restricts the available solutions to those provided by public law. As a result, the practical scope of public law expands beyond its intended boundaries. The excessive and multifaceted growth of public law can have far-reaching detrimental effects.Thus, the central question emerges: What potential harm can the development of public law inflict on citizens' rights, and what are the driving forces behind this expansion in Iran? This research posits that the government's inclination towards exercising authority, excessive interventions in social and economic matters, undervaluing of liberal principles, a tendency to resort to public law in ambiguous cases, and the adaptable nature of public law methods are among the contributing factors to the widening scope of public law. Moreover, the duality of influences on Iran's public law system—Western legal traditions and Shia jurisprudence—has led to its distinct development. Some facets of Iran's public law draw inspiration from Western legal systems, while others find their origins in Shia legal doctrines.It is worth noting that Iran's legal system is bound by Article 4 of the Constitution, which mandates the utilization of Sharia rulings and adherence to Islamic standards in all laws and regulations. This requirement, however, diverges from Western legal systems where such a mandate is not observed.The realm of public law has undergone extensive development, permeating even the most intimate legal issues. Notable examples of this expansion include the broadening of public law in labor law, characterized by significant government interventions in the field. Similarly, the realm of public law has made significant strides in business law, and its influence has extended to matters concerning property rights. The objective of this research is to contribute to the advancement of public law in Iran by conducting a comprehensive analysis of its benefits and drawbacks through a systematic examination of its expansion.To fulfill this objective, we delve into the causes and factors behind the development of the public law realm, providing noteworthy examples that illustrate its expansion. The research findings establish the undeniable separation of the realms of private and public rights, despite ongoing debates regarding their differentiation. In practice, even legal systems that advocate for the unity of public and private law demonstrate a distinct educational system for public law. By acknowledging the distinction between public law and private law, while acknowledging the inherent difficulty in delineating these realms in certain cases, each legal field can be allocated its designated sphere.In recent years, there has been a notable surge in the expansion and growth of the public law realm. Numerous issues that were traditionally and conventionally within the purview of private law have now either entirely or to a significant extent fallen under the domain of public law.

Unilateral US sanctions imposed on Iran are an example of hostile policy in interstate relations and disregard for fundamental human rights, including the right to life, health, and development, which are recognized in international law and the fundamental rights of countries, and mechanisms are foreseen to guarantee and support them. In the Iranian legal system, these cases have been identified in the framework of public rights, and the judiciary and the attorney general's office play an inherent mission in restoring these rights. Therefore, the question that arises is how the Attorney General's Office, given the powers specified in the laws and regulations of Iran in restoring public rights, should act in order to restore the rights and interests of the Islamic Republic of Iran deprived of unilateral sanctions. In order to answer this question with a descriptive-analytical method, an attempt has been made to first follow up and monitor the issue of unilateral sanctions, and then the possible ways to pursue and file lawsuits in domestic and international courts have been examined. In this regard, in accordance with the rules and regulations in the system of international responsibility of states, the violation of general and specific obligations of the United States has made it possible to pursue this issue in international courts. Under domestic law, the jurisdiction to hear complaints against persons involved in sanctions in domestic courts has also made it possible for the Attorney General to pursue and supervise in domestic courts

Currently, due to the needs of different strata of society for land and housing, on the one hand, and on the other hand, due to the heterogeneous economic policies of the government in providing housing for different strata of society, land and housing have turned from a consumer commodity into a commodity. Capitalized in such a way that many people who intend to increase their capital invest in this area and in order to earn more profit, they look for solutions with the lowest cost and without obtaining permits. It is necessary for the relevant authorities to proceed with unauthorized construction in the cities and its outskirts; Of course, some others even went beyond this and attempted to seize national lands, natural resources, river beds, etc., considering the high volume of violations and seizures, as well as the lack of timely action in dealing with such violations. From the relevant authorities, in the last two decades, we have witnessed the spread of phenomena such as land-grabbing, mountain-grabbing, river-grabbing and extensive conversion of agricultural lands to villa gardens in different parts of our country. An action that today not only affects the environment of the country, but also for the lack of support and the lack of effective and sufficient incentives for farmers by the government; It has affected the food security of the society. Based on this, it is necessary for the judicial system to enter into the issue of defending public rights in the field of preventing the seizure of national lands and preventing unauthorized changes of agricultural land uses in order to protect the environment and food security of the people, which can only be achieved with the correct and firm implementation of the laws. And regulations and quick and effective dealing with the wrongdoers will be possible; Otherwise, in the not too distant future, we will have to witness a major environmental and human disaster in our country. In this article, in two paragraphs, firstly, the pathology of the current situation in the field of protection and protection of national lands and natural resources is discussed, and then practical strategies for the correction and prevention of the seizure of national lands and preventing the change of unauthorized uses. Agricultural lands will be provided in order to preserve national lands and natural resources.

The institution of public rights is mentioned in Article 156 of the Constitution as one of the major goals of the judiciary in order to realize the rights of the people. There are various aspects to this legal institution including the principles, definition and nature of dissent. The views of Islamic scholars are among the theoretical foundations of the institution of public law. On the other hand, one of the ways to reach a consensus on the institution of public rights is to explain the legal institution similar to collective rights in the sense of "public rights" in international as well as Western views and doctrine. Employing a descriptive-analytical method, the present study draws on the explanation of the views of Islamic and Western thinkers, and seeks to pinpoint the extent of quality and quantity to which the two public rights-collective rights institutions are similar. In this research and in each section, the nature, definition and principles of each of the legal institutions of public rights and collective rights from the perspective of Islamic and Western thinkers have been studied and analyzed. Based on these analyses, it has been determined that based on the reading of the beliefs and ethics of the Islamic Foundation, public rights encompasses a wide range of individual and socialized rights and is more in line with collective rights than the readings of Sharia and jurisprudence based on public rights- which, of course, contains only the socialized individual rights.

With the approval of the Budget Law of 1398, the provisions of paragraph "y" of Note 6, which obliges the owners of medical, paramedical, pharmaceutical and veterinary professions to use store terminals within the framework of Note 2 of Article 169 of the Direct Taxes Law, have been considered. Many prosecutors' offices are located across the country, and they have issued orders to force those responsible to enforce the law. The involvement of prosecutors in this issue is related to the revival of public rights in terms of the excessive importance of taxes in the public interest and the creation of potential problems arising from the transfer of cash to pay for medical services. With an analytical approach, this article seeks to critique and evaluate the legal aspects of prosecutors' involvement in the issue of requiring health care centers to use store terminals from the perspective of public law. Lack of communication network between prosecutors at the national level and the need for similar action in joint national and regional cases, the vacuum of the legal system in the field of guaranteeing the implementation of actions and orders of the prosecutor's office and the need to strengthen it, lack of comprehensiveness of orders, The use of the store terminal is not merely the obligation to install it and the necessity of documenting, reasoning and transparency of this type of orders in order to spread some works and the results of judgments and rulings on them, is one of the findings of the present analysis.

The controversy among jurists in the way a car purchase is registered and the lack of a clear and unambiguous law created a challenge for the Juristic and Executive system of the country. The Juristic system, earlier, defended registering car purchases in official notary publics. However, now, in many cases it contradicts previous arguments by believing that changing the car plate and issuing the "green paper" license is enough. In this regard, the consultations and votes issued in courts and general assemblies often supported the necessity of registering official notary publics. Nonetheless, some provincial prosecuting attorneys and the Prosecutor-General of the country believe that changing the car plate and issuing the "green paper" license is enough and have issued orders and circulars to protect the public rights. In this research, using a descriptive-analytical method and studying the law, regulations and necessary documents, we are trying to answer the questions: How registering (or not registering) a car purchase in official notary publics can save and revive the public rights? As well as: What is the role of prosecuting attorneys in protecting the public rights? Can changing the car plate and issuing the "green paper" license alone serve as an official document and represent the transmission of ownership? Finally, after different discussions we concluded that the prosecutor, in support of public rights, cannot order that changing the car plate is enough instead of officially registering the purchase.

One of the measures and decisions taken by prosecutors in order to restore public rights is related to preventing the activity of miners to extract various types of cryptocurrencies. The reason for these measures should be sought in the frequent power outages that due to the consumption of electricity by miners, municipal electricity, including homes, offices, hospitals, etc., suffer from continuous and long-term power outages. Because electricity is a public good to provide services to citizens, prosecutors are cracking down on currency extractors to prevent the misuse of this public good so that electricity can be properly available to the public. One of these valuable measures is the orders issued by the Arak Prosecutor's Office, which in its letters and orders addressed to judicial officers and provincial officials, has emphasized on identifying and collecting minor devices and introducing violators to the judicial authorities. This issue is important in terms of restoring public rights, guaranteeing freedoms, especially freedom of business, respecting the principle of legitimate expectation, privacy and the competence of judicial and quasi-judicial authorities.

The possibility of equal use of the city's resources for all its inhabitants is an issue that has now become an important demand and the main reason for this is the human and environmental problems that have arisen for the cities. One of the requirements for solving these problems is the recognition of local citizenship and the right to the city. As many cities in the world have also documented this. Is it possible for the cities of Iran to draft right to the cityAct?It needs to investigate and identify the legal nature of the right to the city. In this article, while defining and clarifying the nature of the right to the city, the most important documents, including international and domestic documents, have been investigated in this regard, and then the damage to the cities of Iran that requires identification of the right to the city is necessary. And finally, the case will be provided for the provision of this right.

The future of human life depends upon preserving a healthy environment free of any pollution (contaminants) and the environmental destruction could eventually bring about the destruction of humanity. Therefore, the environmental degradation and pollution is not only despicable, but hazardous and costly as well and the public has a duty to protect it. In this regard, to have the environment protected from pollution and degradation due to reasons such as urban high population growth and the necessity to devise a settlement, urban and industrial wastes, destruction of forests and other natural resources, air pollution in large cities, many countries have enacted environmental laws and regulations in their legal systems and have established organizations, institutions and agencies devoted to the environmental protection. On the other hand, as the right to a healthy environment is one of citizenship rights linked integrally to the sustainable development, the enactment of legislation should, at a minimum, be in relation to the principles of sustainable development. The present research is an analytic and descriptive study using library resources including articles, books and other materials about the subject area. This study indicated that many laws have been approved in order to protect the environment, but they didn’t fully respect the foundations and principles of sustainable environmental development; so that some of these principles are considered at the standard-level by legislator, some have not been mentioned, and some others remained implicit by the legislator.

This article has drawn various kinds of conflict in implementation of punishments in jurisprudential (fiqhi) approach and from Iranian penal code’s point of view. Since the crimes and punishments have not been classified based on the seriousness and weakness of crimes it is complicated to find the ways of conflict resolution in case of conflict in implementation of punishment. The article emphasizes that one decisive criterion for conflict resolution in implementation of punishments in Islamic jurisprudence is the priority of those relating to God’s rights over those containing people’s rights. The article has shed light on the nature of God’s rights (Hagh Allah) punishments and people rights (Hagh al-Nas) punishments and the examples of each category. The article explains evidences in favor of priority of people rights over God’s rights and criticizes the position taken by Iranian penal code over the issue. At the end, the article suggests proposals for improvement of the related articles and regulations in Iranian criminal law

One of the important features of modern political systems is the existence of legalopposition. The conditions of establishment and the way in which they operate andoperate are an integral part of modern fundamental laws. On the other hand, animportant part of public law as a discipline that regulates relations betweenindividuals and the state focuses on the fundamental rights of individuals and groupsin a political system. It is obvious, however, that the most important discussions arerelated to the legal opposition that challenges the deployed state. Therefore, it isessential to examine their position in understanding the functioning of any politicalsystem. This issue is becoming increasingly important as far as the Alawitegovernment is concerned. On the one hand, there has been a great deal of doubtabout the rights of political opponents during the Alawite period, and on the otherhand, the Islamic Republic of Iran is seeking to follow the rules and teachings of theAlawite government. The present research seeks to answer this question. What arethe rights and freedoms for this group of opponents and the legal system of theIslamic Republic of Iran, what are the solutions to guarantee these rights andfreedoms? This research has tried to prove that political opponents enjoyedindividual and social freedoms during the rule of Imam Ali, and the legal system ofthe Islamic Republic of Iran has also introduced the Alawite regime in this regard.

The achievements of the legal system of the Islamic Republic of Iran were that in the text of the constitution, the rights of the nation and its revival were explicitly mentioned in terms of words and expressions. Specifically, the judiciary as one of its key responsibilities is to support individual rights and restore public rights, so that any device that does not fulfill its obligations to citizens and causes Violations or shortcomings in the provision of their rights, judicial review should be applied to revive the rights of the deceased or rights that they are not sufficiently, effectively and timely to take, and with judicial remedies, compensate and protect Provide. As a consequence of this judicial review, people will feel the sense of justice and trust in the judiciary, which has also been repeatedly referred to by the judiciary, and it seems that demanding a radical change in the system of norms and structures for the revival of citizenship, the requirements of this revival, and Evolution So, in this article, the main question is: "What normative-structural model of the judiciary can lead to reviving the rights of the nation (the public) in the legal system of the Islamic Republic of Iran?" To answer this question, while analyzing the experience of the norms of the field of human rights in the nation and the public, we examine the effectiveness of existing structures in this field and the need for them to evolve during documentary and field studies.