Pathology of Using the Term "Mainland" in the Laws of Free Trade-Industrial Zones (with Emphasis on Iran's Interests in Maintaining its Territorial Integrity)

The use of terms in the law must be in accordance with the geographical and political realities of each country. Territorial integrity is defined in six principles of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran and is considered as one of the main elements forming the ninth principle of this law. This principle has remained in force since the first version of the constitution after the Islamic Revolution in 1171. Territorial integrity based on religious rules and regulations, including; the obligation to preserve the Islamic system and the negation of the “Pagans dominance over the Muslims”, and from the perspective of sciences such as international law and political geography, indicate the need to maintain territorial solidarity and the duties of the nation-state in relation to it. Accordingly, the principle of respect for the territorial integrity of countries was formed as one of the principles governing international law, which itself indicates the importance of the issue. Therefore, this research tries to answer the following question by descriptive-analytical method and library and documentary studies; Is the use of the term "mainland" in the laws related to the free trade-industrial zones of the Islamic Republic of Iran, which implicitly excludes these zones from the main (motherland) land both in form and in nature, with the mechanisms governing Sharia? And do the principles of the constitution apply? The results indicate that the use of words in laws that have binding and citation power should be in a way that does not violate the principles of the Constitution in the same way as the term mainland is used in the separation of free trade-industrial zones. Is materially and spiritually incompatible with the mechanisms governing the enactment of laws that derive from the constitution and Sharia?