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

The use of data and computer systems as the subject and means of committing a crime is one of the manifestations of the negative link between these technologies and criminal law. The purpose of this research is to identify the challenges of the Iranian police in the search and seizure of data and the system in the prevention and detection of crime. The current research is applied in terms of its purpose, and descriptive-analytical in terms of its type and in the category of qualitative research. By using library resources and interviews with university experts, data has been collected and analyzed by qualitative content analysis method. The findings indicate that the police faces challenges in the search and seizure of data and the system with two types of challenges including: The The challenges are in the field of protecting the privacy of individuals and in the field of legislative limitations and loopholes. Therefore, the elimination of legislative gaps in the field of privacy and police powers and their access to databases for the prevention and detection of crime are effective in solving the challenges of the police in inspecting and confiscating data and systems in Iran.

Exercising the jurisdiction of states in different maritime areas is a subject that has always been a source of controversy throughout the history of the international law of the seas. The efforts that have been made to increase these qualifications and the restrictions that have been applied to regulate them. However, on what basis such an increase and limitation of jurisdiction is done, it has caused many disputes. On the one hand, states emphasize the unquestionable principle of freedom of navigation contained in the UNCLOS, and on the other hand, by entering into some agreements to inspect and seize ships, they limit and, as a result, interfere with navigation. Today, in addition to the traditional interventions and restrictions on navigation that are stated in article110 of UNCLOS, we are facing emerging issues in the field of seas, which can be the reason for the intervention of ships in order to maintain international peace and security, interests and internal laws of states. Providing and implementing sanctions is an important part of this position. The main question is how to justify the intervention of international navigation in the implementation of cross border sanctions? In the present article, which is written with a descriptive analytical method and using library sources, by examining the legal bases of intervention in shipping and the implementation of economic sanctions in this regard, it can be concluded that today the acceptance and implementation of international agreements that it is considered as one of the main policies of governments, it it has been able to remove the interventions towards the ships from the framework of the Convention on the Law of the Sea and puts the implementation of unilateral policies of the governments such as the application of cross border sanctions, which is a sign of deviation from important principles such as the principle of freedom of navigation.

The management of economic affairs is an integral part of any political system, which is entrusted to certain institutions or individuals according to the legal, cultural and managerial conditions in each society. In the Islamic society, this procedure is entrusted to the legal guardian as the highest authority, and in this research, the jurisprudential foundations of the legal guardian in economic affairs will be discussed. 

The method of this article is analytical and descriptive using library tools.Ethical Considerations: In writing this article, the principle of accurate and trustworthy referencing has been taken into account.

There are many jurisprudential foundations such as the management of hasbiya affairs, the management of anfal, khums and zakat, and the organization of economic affairs in Islamic society, which, due to the prevention of chaos and being placed in a certain institution, is considered as the guardian of jurisprudence. Continuity of government in the era of absence of Masum (AS) has been entrusted. 

The jurisprudential foundations of the guardianship of the jurist in economic affairs are due to the need of the Islamic society to entrust matters to an authority that is aware of the rules of religion and to organize economic affairs, which exist in different forms in different societies. But in the Islamic society, it has long been considered among the powers of the jurist.

On Tuesday, 19 April 2022, the Greek Coast Guard seized a Russian-owned oil tanker named Pegasus in the waters off the Euboea Island.  It had adopted the Iranian flag and changed its name to Lana just before the Greek action. The seizure of the ship was initially carried out under European Union sanctions against Russia in connection with the attack on Ukraine. However, pursuant to a request by the US Department of Justice - which claimed the tanker’s oil cargo was Iranian and subject to US sanctions- the seizure was continued and a part of the cargo was delivered to the United States. After the seizure of Luna/Pegasus, Iran tried to release the ship through diplomatic and legal measures, but these measures were unsuccessful due to Greece’s refusal. Thereupon, on 27 May, Iran seized two Greek oil tankers in the Persian Gulf called Prudent Warrior and Delta Poseidon. The purpose of this paper is to examine the legality of Iran's seizure of the Greek oil tankers from the point of view of international law, specifically in terms of the law of countermeasures. Using a descriptive-analytical method and collecting information from library and documentary sources, the paper finds that in response to the actions by Greece and the United States, Iran had the right to take countermeasures within the framework of international law, and its seizure and detention of the two Greek tankers did not entail international responsibility.

In article 774 of the civil code following the well-known opinion in fiqh, the void of the pledge of intangible assets has been specified. The important bases of the void of the pledge of intangible assets have been codified the inalienability of the seizure of the pledged intangible assets and the lack of providing trust and the failure of the payment or settlement of the debt. However, all these cases in fiqh have been questioned. In the legal system of Iran, many regulations have been enacted latter to the civil code that they have no consistency with the traditional rules of the pledge. Some of them have excluded the seizure of the pledged intangible assets from the provisions of the validity of the pledge and some others have recognized the definite nontangible assets such as credits and stocks of guarantee are collateralizable. On the other side, the voidance of the pledge of intangible assets makes such assets to some extent go out of the economic cycle of the society and it causes losses in the business cycle and deprives the property’s owner from the complete benefit of his asset. All these factors make an endeavor for knowing intangible assets be necessary. There are five important approaches have been assessed in this paper which are: utilization of agreement with a no-name, utilization of the Agreement of Pledge utilization of transactions with the right of redemption, acceptance of the implied abrogation (implied appeal) of articles 774 and 772 of the civil code and their exclusion of jus cogens (compelling law -peremptory-).

In recent years, piracy activities have increased significantly. In some areas, including the coasts of Somalia and the waters of Southeast Asia and South America, this incident is widely seen and has become a safe haven for pirates. The economic losses caused by piracy amount to billions of dollars annually; So that the world community has faced many problems. The rules of international law enacted in this regard by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, adopted in 1982, have remained unchanged for many years, covering many issues, such as the precise description of the elements that make up piracy. And the arrest and trial of pirates are undeniable shortcomings. Therefore, this issue has been reviewed in the present article by examining the shortcomings of the existing law in relation to how to effectively dispute this incident and how to organize the legal shortcomings of the issue.

The legislature for confiscation and the government seizure of property as the crime devices has not observed the principle of transparency and minimal substantive and procedural guarantees. This research with descriptive-analytic method has examined the current situation in the national laws and compared it with the laws of other systems and determines reformative policies. In the current laws not only the definite instances and criteria for the confiscation and ownership of assets have not been mentioned but also have been neglected the discourse of the expropriation based on the fictional supposition of the guilty property and with justification of the prevention of the repeated crime, the principles of necessity, the proportionality, damages, independence and impartiality of the judiciary, the identity of the party and the necessity of speeding up proceedings and the right to property has faced with major risk. As a result of the study It can be said that the evidences such as the criminal aims of the seizure of property, the fundamental characteristics of the punishment in this sanction and the legitimate possession of the owner until the commitment of the crime show that the government seizure of property as instrument of crime is financial penalty. The reformative suggestions are: the domestic legal system for the enforcement of confiscation orders, besides considering substantiative guarantees including the principle of minimizing, the principle of legality, the necessity of mens rea of the abetting offence, the individualization of the criminal liability and prohibition of inhuman punishment, it should respect the procedural criminal guarantees such as the supposition of innocent and the other defendant’s rights.

The goodwill and the right business or profession or trade, of legal common topic of rights is the history of the last few decades simply ends and the jurisprudence of emerging issues and considered. That the unity or duality of both doctrine and jurisprudence in there and it seems that this is due to the lack of explanation of the legal nature of this right. Although jurisprudence and legal resources, more or less about these two theories have been proposed, according to evolution rules and evolving attitudes Landlord and Tenant legislation In this case and different views on this issue remains to be seen is the car space also, because the issue of goodwill and businesses to trade and its consequences have been less studied and economic and social matters and the matters relating to the jurisdiction of the courts of the current public and opinions of the courts and procedures in case of very different and in this regard has caused so many problems in the study were motivated selection And tried to investigate the problems in different ways and different opinions arrest and detention and auction sales of goodwill and the businesses investigated. In this paper, analytical approach to explore the topic of the rights established in the law and jurisprudence discussed and the similarities and differences of these two words, we try to explain the legal nature of these two rights. It also examines its wealth and its position in the division of movable and immovable property described above. Third ˝brrsy legal theories and practices are discussed and analyzed. Also, due process and the principles of seizure and sale of both the right to consider the bid. The method used to collect data in this thesis is a descriptive analysis and library computers have been used in the articles. In addition, we have tried to study jurisprudence and legal texts, as well as civil law and civil law enforcement experience jurisdictional colleagues also used After researching and exploring and extracting results showed both the right to classify rights (rights), are entitled to financial and economic and ratable value for money and portability are both right, of course.

In accordance with Article 30 of the Civil Code, any owner may seize any property in his property. The article, which is based on the rule of law, is not absolute. The legislator has limited it to maintaining order and justice, therefore, the following article stipulates that "unless the possessions that the law exempts", social justice and the necessity of preventing a conflict between people require that no one, by taking possession of his own property, Unless harmful to seizure, as much as is customary and in order to eliminate harm or harm. According to the basic principle that no one has the right to seize other property, with the permission and permission of the owner. The primary obligation to seize and hold on the property is in addition to the removal of the seizure of the owner against the owner and, in the event of the loss or entry of the damage or defect, must be liable to be liable. In other words, the landlord must be compensated. The limitation of collective ownership prevents the owner from exploiting and seizing it, and makes his relation to rubbing subject to certain principles, in which the action outside of these principles lacks credibility and sometimes warrants and liability. The purpose of the "Associate Asset Acquisition" is to explore the extent to which the aforementioned principles of ownership are applicable and with what bottlenecks.

Contract of Guarantee in Emamiyeh jurisprudence and Iranian Civil Code transfers the debt from the debtor to the surety and does not create solidarity of debtors between debtor and surety. So, if the surety does not have a better financial position than the debtor, contract of guarantee may not provide the creditor a more and better bond to the bond-holder: by contract of guarantee he faces with another person and the risk of non-performance of the debt survives yet. One of the mechanisms for deceasing the risk is to relate the contract of guarantee to a definite property, that is to provide that the debt should be paid from a specified property. Such a provision, that can be treated as a private seizure, is valid according to the most Emamiyeh jurisprudents. It has various important consequences which are discussed in this article. For example, such provision endows the bond-holder with a real right as to the property.

In this article it has been tried to consider the general rules and provisions of options as one of the common traditions of Islamic jurists. Therefore, in order to reach to that general rule, the profound viewpoint of Sheikh Ansari and some of the contemporary Shii jurists and some highly qualified jurists have been analyzed critically, specially matters such as "criterion and nature of the revocation option", "type of right in options", "the principle of necessity in optional contracts", "cancellation of revocation option with the deliberate act of option holder" and "waste in the option period" have been considered and in each case after analyzing the subject and setting the context of the debate and eliciting the rationales and principles of each viewpoint, the selected view of the authors has been offered and explained