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

Judge’s Fundamental judicial supervision on ordinary laws is one of the most important issues in the last decade. The problem is that the judge, in the position of hearing the case and invoking the rule of law, which may have a dual source in the constitution and the ordinary, can act as the basic supervisor of the ordinary law and set it aside? The new viewpoint is based on the theory of the attainment of the right and jurisdiction of the Judiciary. According to this view, the patterns of fundamental rules are based on the generality and foundations of the legal system and derive from all the effective norms affecting it and protecting the fundamental rights of individuals, and the judge as a selector person, due to the sources of right, selects the justice verified rule and settles the lawsuit. In this view, the legal rules are subject to the basic duty of the Judiciary in such a way that the judge refuses to enforce them in dealing with laws that are contrary to the reference and fundamental norms. This non-enforcement has a negative character and cannot be used to repeal the law. In this view, the dominance of the legal aspect of political supervision is not only in conflict with the theory of separation of powers, but also in line with its goals and the rule of law.

Given the economic developments, we have been witness to the adoption of penal policies to fight against economic crimes. To this end, the heads of Judiciary have compiled the Codes that have been on Correct and Sometimes Wrong path to fight against economic Crimes.The aim of Present Study is to analyze the role of codes issued by heads of Judiciary to fight against economic crimes.

The research method is descriptive and analytical. For data Collection, Visiting the library and using books and articles have been considered.

Ethical Considerations:

 Honesty and trustworthiness have been observed in all stages of writing. this essay while respecting the principle of texts originality.

The findings indicate that the regulations issued have a tendency to punish, which indicates that the criminals are repressive, discriminatory and the formation of special economic courts.

The execution of these circulars has lead to both positive and negative consequences. This indicates that the decisions by made by heads of Judiciary are different. In recent years, The Special Prosecutors' Office for Economic Crimes have been organized which Show that The Judiciary is on the path to fight against these crimes.

If we consider the basics and principles of proceedings in bringing the case to the aggrieved party, speeding it up can be one of the main foundations of judicial and civil justice, and of course, the electronification of judicial and proceedings services can also be defined as the main goal of proceedings in this area. In this regard establishing order in societies requires imposing appropriate laws. Updating the rules in line with the increasing development of information technology is a vital concern; hence the Judiciary Department Chairmanship has considered moving forward to electronic trial and has enacted regulations for the provision of electronic judicial services. According to the mentioned regulations, the offices of judicial services have been established and the lawsuit is necessarily filed through the mentioned offices. Filing a lawsuit by judicial service offices has many advantages and disadvantages; On the other hand, the imposition of regulations by the head of the judiciary department conflicts with the principle of incompetence in public law; However, it is clear that in many cases the requirement to use legally specified authorities has been the enactment of regulations to achieve the codified goals, but this authority should not be a factor in restricting the acquired rights of the people; therefore, an optional choice should replace the obligation of individuals to file a lawsuit through the mentioned offices.

The main duty of the judiciary in any legal system is to fight corruption and monitor the correct implementation of laws. Judiciary, like other powers, has a unique structure and a high management system. The purpose of the current research, which was carried out with a descriptive-analytical method and with library tools, is to investigate and analyze the styles of the management of the judiciary in Iran and Europe. The results of the present research show that there are three styles for managing the judiciary in European countries, and the most important of them is the council and decentralized management in the judiciary. The main style in Europe is to create judicial councils, keeping judges separate from political and external pressures, especially the executive branch. Judicial councils are a means to preserve and enhance judicial independence by taking the authority to appoint judges from the executive branch. But in Iran's legal system, after the implementation of constitutional reforms in 1989, the council management style was dissolved and the centralized management method replaced it. This method is more compatible with the needs of Iran's judicial system by taking into account the jurisprudential foundations of Iran's legal system and the existence of the principle of jurist’s sovereignty.

Justice literally means the administration of justice. In the legal term, justice is an institution that includes all organizations related to handling people's complaints and grievances. This is why the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, in Article 159, introduces the judiciary as the official authority for grievances and complaints. One of the important issues in the realization of justice is how the employees of this institution deal with clients. People who have many problems and sometimes come with inappropriate mental and financial conditions. The purpose of this study was to present a model of honoring the client in Isfahan justice. In order to achieve this goal, a qualitative methodology based on the data theory method was used, including three stages of open, axial and selective coding, using the systematic approach of Strauss and Corbin. In this regard, 33 in-depth and semi-structured interviews were conducted using theoretical sampling and then the snowball technique with staff and clients of Isfahan Justice. In order to assess the validity, the conducted interviews were evaluated several times and then the interview interpretations of the five interviewees were returned to them, which was approved. Also, in the final stages, a general summary of the face pattern. Were presented to several professors of management, culture and psychology separately, and their opinions were obtained for correction and adjustment, and finally the model designed by several professors and interviewees was seen and corrected. It was done on it. The main phenomenon of the research was called "honoring the client". Causal conditions include good manners, organizational structure and staff characteristics, intervening conditions including speed in the process and honoring employees. Optimal referral management, education and culture, and outcomes including social peace, social trust, and advancement were achieved.

Reduction of generality and absoluteness competence assignment to the courts of general Jurisdiction, based on the authorization (approval) of the legislature in different laws, led to the establishment of the combined judicial authorities (in the form of council and dispute settlements boards). Regardless of the titles and other prevalent forms, these authorities, sometimes despite the membership of non-judicial members, are eligible to have the judicial member (Judge). In this respect, just those authorities are subject to this text which include a judicial member (introduced by the Judiciary), and two or more non-judicial members as the specialists in the profession of a special guild who referred to as the quasi-judicial members. Therefore, we do not investigate the authorities in charge without judicial member, mutually agreed arbitration board, authorities subject to arbitration agreement or similar titles. Accordingly, in this article, our purpose is to present a clear illustration of the legal Role of non-judicial members in quasi-judicial authorities in accordance with a conceptual investigation to assess the ratio of this position with the related goals and effects to the intended specifications. In order to analyze this Role and level, along with a brief introduction to the concepts and examples of the combined judicial authorities in the trial structure of our country, we will pay attention to the principles which considered for these characters. The result which will finally be specified is that the non-judicial members of the concerned authorities should not be limited to the identities such as the counselor (adviser), expert, arbitrator and other similar positions due to the relevant reasons and requirements of these authorities, each of these members is considered as the equal member (and main element) as the judicial member with this difference that they will have different applications and specifications in comparison with a judge in terms of some aspects and considerations which accordingly manifested in the Procedures Laws of these authorities.

The legal-political system of the Islamic Republic of Iran, which is based on the convergence of the Muslims in the world as a single nation (ummah) and is required by the Constitution to base its general policy on the coalition and unity of Islamic nations, is seeking to defend rights of all Muslims and support the rightful struggle of the oppressed against the arrogant everywhere in the world. The judiciary, as one of the high sovereign bodies in this system, is committed to observe these principles and general policies. This important issue has been appropriately emphasized in the Judicial Transformation Document announced in 2021 as legal support for the Resistance Front. Therefore, given the military intervention of the Saudi-led Arab states in Yemen and the violation of the rights of the Yemeni people as a result of ignoring the rules of human rights and humanitarian law, the main question that the present study, through a descriptive-analytic method, seeks to answer is that how can the judiciary of the Islamic Republic of Iran play a role in supporting the Muslims of this country? The result is that the gross violations of human rights and humanitarian law in Yemen are clear examples of war crimes regarding which the acceptance of the principle of universal jurisdiction in the Islamic Penal Code has enabled the judiciary with the capacity to prosecute the perpetrators of these crimes. However, the use of this capacity requires the amendment and enactment of domestic law as well as the use of structural facilities in the judiciary.

Nowadays, right to water, increasingly has recognized in international documents as one of the human rights that is inextricably linked to other instances of human rights, such as the right to life, the right to health, and the right to adequate standard of the living. Recognizing this right in human rights discourse, on the one hand, obliges States not to interfere in the free access of human beings to water, and on the other hand, it rests the responsibility of providing the arrangements of water supply and access to this vital substance for them. Although the main commitment of fulfilling the obligations of the right to water is the executive bodies of a country, but the legislative and judicial institutions also have responsibilities for the full realization of this right. The question that this study has been written in order to answer it, is: what role does the judiciary of the Islamic Republic of Iran play in ensuring the right of Iranian citizens to water? The result of descriptive-analytical studies in this paper, which is obtained using library studies and review of international documents and domestic laws, is that judiciary with the main task of establishing rights and justice and reviving public rights, can guarantee the right to water in three general areas: prevention, monitoring and litigation. However, the lack of explicit recognition of the right to water in domestic law is the most important shortcoming, which has largely limited the scope of action of this body to guarantee of right to water

Principles governing restorative justice and criminal mediation as new principles in restorative criminal justice, officially entered the realm of legislative criminal policy in 2002 with the adoption of the UN Economic and Social Council resolution. One of the criminal cases in the family court is custody, which requires criminal mediation in the custody institution in order to protect the foundation of the family and the parent-child relationship, with emphasis on the said resolution. In this regard, recognizing the principles of criminal mediation and observing them will lead to a significant reduction in the volume of incoming cases to the courts. This research has been written with the aim of policy-making by collecting information in a documentary method in a descriptive-analytical method. Finally, according to the principle of reducing criminal intervention in the field of family, a text can be proposed as a legal provision: Respect for the interests of children in custody is mandatory: the principle of referring family disputes to restorative processes at all stages of criminal proceedings, the principle of admission of guilt, the principle of prohibition of invoking the defendant's statements, the principle of mutual agreement, the principle of validity of agreements, the principle of immediate intervention, "The principle of neutrality and the principle of collective responsibility, the principle of the right to express the opinion of children in custody."

Judicial security can be understood as the existence of a judicial organization that guarantees a fair trial for the general public so that people do not have to worry about their rights being violated in court. The realization of this concept depends on the existence of many elements within the judicial organization, the most important of which is judicial independence. Judicial independence must also be achieved in two areas; The first is the independence of the judiciary and the second is the independence of the judge. The present article examines for the first time the relationship between the realization of judicial security and the structural and administrative independence of the judiciary from the perspective of Islamic law. This study shows that the independence of the judiciary as one of the basic indicators of judicial security, although due to the absence of the issue in the age of the Innocents has not been explicitly the subject of Islamic law, but the goals of Islamic law in our time are appropriate to achieve independence. It is the judiciary.

Evidence of guilt is a fundamental issue in different legal systems, and it varies depending on whether the approach to proving a claim is a system of legal evidence or convincing a judge's conscience, but in both systems the basic issue is the legitimacy of reason; That is, the mere fact that it is legal is not enough, but it is necessary to study it with legitimate tools and methods.From the jurisprudential point of view, obtaining evidence through illegitimate means is forbidden, and the judicial system should not use any illegal method to prove a crime, but the validity of illegal evidence in proving a crime should be elaborated. In some cases, the method of education certainly destroys the reason for its validity, such as confessions obtained through torture, but in cases where this does not interfere with its discovery, due to the existence of different views, the subject is accurate and debatable. In Iranian law, despite the defensible legal developments that have taken place in the field of evidence and criminal proceedings, there is no explicit and decisive provision in this regard. In this research, in a descriptive-analytical method, we examine the effect of obtaining evidence through illegitimacy in the detection of crime, and in this regard, the arguments of the discussion are examined separately and finally, an independent view is expressed from a jurisprudential point of view. From a legal point of view, while explaining the existing laws, the approach of judicial procedure in this regard is evaluated.

In recent years, the necessity of the accountability of public institutions has become a key issue under the influence of New Public Management (NPM). The basic principle is that being responsible and possessing power makes the person accountable. Accordingly, the judiciary, as well as other public institutions, must be held accountable for its performance at various levels, in particular, the procedures, decision-making process and implementation of decisions. However, accountability in the judicial system has always been faced many opposite views to guarantee judicial independence and other considerations such as sensitivity and specific function of the judiciary. In this paper, with emphasizing the necessity of creating a balance between the two competing values, namely 'independence' and 'accountability', the available capacities of the Iranian legal system are examined specifically regarding the accountability of the judiciary to the legislature and its members. The research method is descriptive-analytical and by utilizing library resources, this article while explaining why the judiciary is accountable to parliament, attempts to analyze and critique opposite views in this regard. The results of this study show that although the accountability of the judiciary has some differences and limitations compared to other institutions, undoubtedly judicial independence never means impunity or exemption from accountability. The examination of the available capacities in the constitution, including the right of parliament members to express comment and investigate, as well as the mechanism for dealing with complaints and reports submitted to the commission of the ninety principle, illustrates the fact that can be achieved to a degree of accountability of the judiciary to the parliament -especially with regard to judicial processes- while guarantee and respecting the judicial independence.

In our country, the Organization of Registration of Deeds and Real Estates is affiliated with the independent judiciary. This has led to disagreements and suggestions about changing the position of the Organization of Registration of Deeds and Real Estates in the structure of the government and the three powers, and raises the question of what factors cause that organization to be a separate or integral part of the judiciary, and what effect will this issue have on the independence of the judiciary as well as the performance of the Registration Organization? This study has reached the conclusion, using a descriptive - analytical method, focusing on the study of the duties of the Organization and matters of a judicial nature, that in the light of the nature of the various duties and powers of the departments of the Organization, the separation of enforceable official documents departments to the structure of the judiciary, separation of real estate registries as part of the legislature, Separation of notaries, marriage and divorce offices and registration of companies to the executive branch, and annexation of patents and industrial property to the Civil Registry Office, are in line with judicial independence and legal principles.

Reforming the judicial processes in the judicial system of the Islamic Republic of Iran is one of the essential issues to improve and increase the efficiency of this system. To this end, the judiciary has always strived to ensure maximum efficiency in handling cases. In order to shorten the time of the trial and expedite the decisions, the delay of the trial due to the defectiveness of the proceedings should also be eliminated.

This research is of theoretical type and the research method is descriptive-analytical and the method of data collection is library and has been done by referring to documents, books and articles.

Ethical Considerations: 

In order to organize this research, while observing the authenticity of the texts, honesty and fidelity have been observed.

In general, the actions of the judiciary in reforming the judicial process can be divided into two categories. First, the actions that oversee the proper filing of lawsuits in the courts and the scope of their action before filing lawsuits; And second, the actions that oversee judicial management and are used during trials.

The jurisdiction of the courts has begun since the filing of the complaint or the filing of the petition, and before that they have no specific duty relating to the adjournment of the proceedings. The complaint and the declaration of the crime and the petition are the starting point of the trial; Therefore, the correct formulation and observance of the principles of this action, which are mentioned in the rules of procedure, can prevent delays in the proceedings to some extent.

Individual and social rights and freedoms have always been one of the issues that the rulers, due to the extent of their powers and rights, seek to limit the scope of freedoms and thus violate the rights of the people. The structure of the public law in a legal system is formed in the form of the constitution and is considered as the basis of public law. In this regard, the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, believing that all facilities and planning should be used to ensure the rights of the nation, has recognized, guaranteed and protected the rights and freedoms of the nation and in the third chapter entitled " The rights of the nation " has dealt with it. On the other hand, the mere declaration of rights and freedoms in the constitution and ordinary law alone cannot be sufficient to achieve it. Mechanisms and tools to ensure the implementation of citizens' rights and the protection of legitimate freedoms are needed. Therefore, paragraph 2. Article 156 of the Constitution enumerates the restoration of the public rights and the promotion of justice and legitimate freedoms as one of the duties of the judiciary. It has various mechanisms, including the Courts of Justice, the Court of Administrative Justice, the General Inspection Organization, etc. to perform the above-mentioned function as well as possible. But despite the constitution stating that the judiciary's duty to restore the public rights has not been properly restored. Therefore, the main question of the present article is to review the mentioned mechanisms in order to guarantee the public rights and the obstacles to the realization of the revival of the public rights, and then solutions to remove the existing obstacles are presented.

One of the important effects of the fight against terrorist crimes is the dominance of security over fair judgment, which in the light of this prevailing approach, governments prefer to prosecute perpetrators of terrorist acts outside the rules of international law and at their own discretion. The response of governments to dealing with terrorist offenses is not limited to rigorous initial investigations, but most criminal laws provide for the trial of terrorist offenses in special or exceptional courts, and even in states where terrorist offenses are tried in ordinary courts. Take; Their executive laws specify the existence of special rules for these trials. In this article, with the method of description and analysis, we examine this confrontation comparatively in the legal system of Iran and the United Kingdom, and the result is that the differential trial in terrorist crimes under the pretext of maintaining security, has led to violations of civil rights. However, the observance of the citizenship rights of the accused in all necessary crimes and in accordance with the rules of human rights is guaranteed in the constitution.

Based on the theory of the separation of powers, the judiciary is considered a part of government’s three main sections with certain functions, but in some Islamic countries, more duties have been assigned to this power. The comparative study of this power in the Islamic countries of Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Egypt can show its strengths and weaknesses and, therefore, propose an effective judicial power. The shortcomings in the Afghan judiciary power include the lack of some organizations such as the Administrative Violations Court and the National Inspectorate aa well as the absence of a supervisory organization in the judicial power. On the other hand, the task of interpreting the constitution and adjusting the laws with it is beyond the competence of this power. The Egyptian judiciary power has a systematic structure, and there are many institutions to oversee the judiciary power in this country, but its main challenge concerns its presidential affiliation. The main challenge for the Pakistani judiciary is the lack of independence; the president of the judiciary and the judges are all appointed by the president. The judiciary power in Iran has a systematic organization. It is independent, and one of its strengths is that it is supervised by a just and mujtahid jurisprudent.