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

The nature and origin of laws is a topic that has been the subject of serious discussions, especially in the new era, and there are different opinions about it. In the Islamic view, which can be seen in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Sharia is the main source of legislation, and laws that do not conflict with Sharia rules and standards are legitimate. However, in many Islamic countries, despite the existence of religious relations, influenced by secular currents, the confrontation with Sharia has taken a separate path, which has led to serious differences in the field of legislative competence and decision-making regarding Sharia rulings. This paper, tries to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the Sharia monitoring system of Iran's laws and regulations in terms of "the place of Sharia in the constitution", "the investigating institution" and "the review of the monitoring procedure" using a descriptive-analytical method. Guardian Council in Iran and the Supreme Constitutional Court in Egypt are responsible for this type of supervision, in which the Supreme Constitutional Court of Egypt, with a passive and limited approach to the laws, approves the parliament only in order to comply with the general principles of Sharia law. It evaluates specific criteria and in a judicial process

With the tremendous advancements in the field of science and technology and the invention of new electronic technologies, the lifestyle of human society has also undergone a transformation. These changes have been evident in all areas, including the formation of contracts and legal agreements such as the marriage contract, which can now be concluded through modern methods of electronic contracting. Therefore, the legitimacy of modern methods of contracting marriage is of great importance from a jurisprudential and legal perspective. This issue has been examined in various sources, including existing documents and records in this field, as well as jurisprudential and legal texts of both Iran and Egypt. It can be said that from a jurisprudential and legal perspective, the specific terminology used in the marriage contract holds a special position in determining its legitimacy. This is because the intention and volition of the parties involved are expressed through words, rather than actions. However, if written or electronic correspondence is used in the process of contracting, the legitimacy of the contract may be subject to doubt. These key concepts, including legitimacy, methods, contracting, marriage, Iran, and Egypt, have been thoroughly examined and analyzed in the aforementioned sources

Citizens' participation is not a new concept, but it has become much more important during recent decades, due to the occurrence of violations such as administrative corruption crimes. In general, citizens have not only the right but also the duty to participate in decisions that affect their general welfare. This participation, while being a moderator of the ruling power, helps to deal more appropriately with cases of administrative corruption. embezzlement as one of the economic crimes that violates public trust towards the government has been recognized in various domestic and international documents throughout history. The objectives pursued in this research are to identify national bases and international public participation in the prevention of administrative corruption by emphasizing embezzlement and identifying their differences with each other. The results of the present research indicate that there are differences between the domestic and international anti-embezzlement frameworks, such as the lack of criminalization of embezzlement in the private sector, as well as the lack of provision for the mechanism of international judicial assistance in the field of embezzlement, lack of It is worth mentioning the detailed explanation of whistle-blowing regulations regarding the fight against embezzlement in Iran's internal law, in contrast the regional to international nature of anti-embezzlement rights and the lack of guarantee of effective implementation at the international level to fight embezzlement

In this essay it has been studied that from the point of view of Iranian and Egyptian law and Islamic jurisprudence and with an analytical-descriptive method, on what basis and under what circumstances, arises the breach of the contract creates a right to compensation and the right of termination. In Egyptian law, after breaching an obligation, the oblige is free to keep the contract and receive damages or terminate it, while in Iranian law and Islamic jurisprudence, the first right available is the obligation of the obligor to fulfill his obligation. In Iranian law and Islamic jurisprudence, the right to terminate an agreement is the result of the failure of specific performance, not a confrontation of obligations or a fundamental breach. It is based on the rules of Tort, not breach of contract. Also, in Egyptian law, contrary to Iranian law and Islamic jurisprudence, one of the conditions for claiming damages or terminating a contract is to send a notice to the obligor to fulfill the obligation. Against Article 230 Iranian civil code, regarding on agreement on damages in Egyptian legal system courts have authority to adjust the agreed amount. . . . . . . . . . .

With the creation of the Corona crisis (Covid-19), many of the legal systems of the countries regulated matters with necessity and urgency, and the system that was used to deal with this crisis - like other crises - State of Emergency, Which has characteristics such as: being exceptional, being necessary and granting ordinary extra-legal powers. Meanwhile, the experience of some countries in having a legal and partial structure in this field, including the position of creator and terminator of this exceptional system, the conditions of creation and the effects of measures taken during its establishment, can be for our country in this field. The law does not have a specific subject to be useful. In this case, due to the lived experience of Lebanon and Egypt, as well as differences in the type of emergency system, these two countries were selected for study. The present study, through a descriptive-analytical study using library resources, seeks to study the emergency situation caused by the Corona crisis in Lebanon and Egypt and to answer the question that the emergency situation caused by the corona What are the requirements in these countries (creating and terminating authorities, conditions and causes of creation, restrictions) and can the style of the countries in question be applied in the Iranian legal system? Finally, after an analytical study of the state of emergency in these countries - under the review of rules and regulations such as the "Civil Aviation Law" or the "Civil Defense Law" - the present study thus provides a solution to the state of emergency in the Iranian legal system. Due to the lack of legislation in this field - despite the existence of Article (79) of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran in this regard - such a structural necessity is felt.

In the Arab Republic of Egypt, the Supreme Constitutional Court is established to protect the constitution. Granting this jurisdiction to the Supreme Constitutional Court, requires adequate provision of institutional independence of the Court and individual independence of the judges of this court. In a descriptive-analytical way, this paper seeks to answer the question of whether the Supreme Constitutional Court's independence has been secured. The legal measures taken to ensure the institutional independence of the Supreme Constitutional Court of Egypt are: determine the court judges by the General Board, examination of the responsibility of the court judges by the general board, the financial independence of the court and the administrative independence of the court; whereas the irremovability of judges, their long-term membership in the court, the maintenance of their jobs, the prohibition of more than one occupation and the provision of adequate salaries for judges, provides the individual independence of the Supreme Constitutional Court judges. By defining these rules in the Egyptian constitution and ordinary laws, the independence of the court is guaranteed in order to perform its duties and powers correctly and impartially.

The Egyptian Constitution of 1971 addressed the issue of the necessity of protecting the Constitution and established the Supreme Constitutional Court for this task. This body is currently is protecting the Constitution of 2014, as stipulated in Article 192 of the Constitution and Article 25 of the Supreme Constitutional Court of Egypt, as the task of "monitoring the constitutionality of statutes and regulations". While the laws in the Egyptian legal system are diverse, the effectiveness of the constitutional review system requires the adoption of ordinances to expand the scope of the Supreme Constitutional Court. One of these ordinances is that all laws are subject to the constitutional review of the Court. Accordingly, ordinary laws, Supplementary Constitutional Laws, laws approved by the referendum, abolished laws, parliamentary internal regulations, international treaties, and decisions of the president are subject to the constitutional review of the Supreme Constitutional Court. This is a mark of the effective and genuine constitutional review system in Egypt. However, the Constitutional Amendment rule is out of the constitutional review scope of the Supreme Constitutional Court. In this article, the efficiency of the constitutional review of statutes in the law of Egypt has been investigated.

This study was conducted by reviewing the laws and regulations of Iran and Egypt concerning children and adolescents, and also international standards such as the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Beijing Rules as well to compare and analyze issues including children and adolescents protection rules in Iran and Egypt, the minimum and maximum age of criminal responsibility, type and extent of criminal responsibility in different age groups in both Iran and Egypt. Then, the extent of compliance of two countries rules with international rules was assessed. Our results revealed that Iran has not complied with the principles of legislation in drafting the protection laws for children and adolescents. The adoption of numerous and dispersed laws in the pre and post revolution has undermined the principle of accessibility of the law, then these circumstances make it difficult to protect children and adolescents with It is a problem and finally prevent the realization of access to justice. In Egypt, the minimum and maximum age for criminal responsibility is 12 and 18 years, respectively, also the minimum age of civilian custody is 21 years, while in Iran’s law, there is not the same approach regarding minimum and maximum age of criminal responsibility due to punishments of crimes are classified into discretionary, retaliate. This result has controversy with international regulations.

The visibility of political systems based on Islamic ideals in the contemporary era has led the minds of the searchers to explain how these systems are treated with Islamic principles. In the current era, there are few countries that have a majority Muslim population and the ruling political system even seems to have its own adjective of Islam in face, but in the legal system of these countries there is no trace of Islamic law. However, regardless of the various types of communication between religion and government, one of the most important and most sensitive positions that reflect the behavior of countries with Islamic laws is current laws in countries, especially criminal and penal laws. The present article examines the legal systems of the four countries of Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Egypt, focusing on the models of communication between the Sharia and the legal system, so that the entry or non-entry of Islamic rulings into the criminal law of each one is clarified. In this article have been considered Iran and Iraq as two main sites of the Shias of the world with different legal systems, as well as Saudi Arabia and Egypt, as two powerful and influential Sunni stances, though distinctly different from each other.

The Supreme Constitutional Court of Egypt was established as constitutional supervisor and a court out of hierarchical structure of ordinary courts in 1971. This court is responsible for multiple tasks to protect the constitution 2014. Some of the most important of these powers are: controlling the constitutionality of statutes and regulations, interpretation of legal texts, resolve positive and negative dispute in competence between courts and judicial organizations, and resolve claims about execution of contradictory final verdicts. Controlling the constitutionality of unilateral administrative acts by the Supreme Constitutional Court doesn't include all of them. Regulations governing the private sector and personal unilateral administrative acts are out of control by the court; while executive regulations, public service arrangement regulations, discipline regulations and emergency regulations are under the control of constitutionality by this court.

Nowadays, international private relations are increasing quickly and almost all legal systems consider applying the foreign law and enforcing foreign judgement as an indisputable issue. Nevertheless, the states don’t consider foreign judgements like domestic judgements. They try to control foreign judgements and so set certain requirements for enforcing these judgements. Whenever the requirements are satisfied enforcing of foreign judgements is possible. The legal system of Iran and Egypt are not excluded following this model. Some writings have been done about requirements of foreign judgements in Iranian and Egyptian law separately but there is an important question, “Are the requirements in the enforcement of foreign judgements in these states similar?” and considering international trade law problems which state’s regulations are appropriate? The essay surveys and compares Iran and Egypt’s regulations to enforce foreign judgements and eliminates some ambiguities in this subject and also shows clear overlook in requirements for enforcement of foreign judgements in Iranian and Egyptian Law.

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.