نشریه مبانی فقهی حقوق اسلامی
سال ششم شماره 1 (پیاپی 11، بهار و تابستان 1392)

Rule is a proposition having a general subject and a provision that it rules all of its applied meaning. As a general state, rule is dividable to three types: rational, natural and enacted rule. As a category of the enacted rule, the Islamic rule is a general proposition that has been extracted from Al-Shara, containing a provision governing the people behaviors and factual happenings. This rule is basically divided to principle and jurisprudential rule. Islamic rule has three elements: Subject, provision and attribution. Subject is both of fully responsible person and his/her act; provision is the legal description of behaviors and what has named causation condition, hindrance (al-sabab, al-shart, al-manea ) and validity or nullity ( al-sehhah or al-botlan). Finally attribution   is a relation between the subject and the provision. Islamic rule has the same qualities as legal rules. Such as: generality, compulsory and having sanctioned. However, there is some deference between these two rules in regard to their sanctions and scope of jurisdiction.

The place of consensus companions in the knowledge of tradition and jurisprudence is on the basis of famous language “Shiite jurisconsults concord that whatever consensus companions narrated is right” that considered by famous rejalei, Abu Amr Mohammad Ibn Omar Kashi.Some viewpoints produce by religious authorities such as Mirza Hossein Noori, Sheykhe Toosi, Ayatollah Khooei, Mehdi Kalbasi and others; someones are believes whatever receive from consensus companions is concord; It means if from the first of document to consensus companions to be right, also from the consensus companions to innocent Imam is right certainly, other groups are believe that can use it’s phrase as one of praise words.This writing is viewpoints about these phrases:”Shiite Jurisconsults concord that whatever consensus companions narrated is right” and “Not narrate and not said any narration without document if that narration was narrated from assured person.

Journalism as suitable context for reinforcement of freedom of speech has restrictions that are accepted by every legal systems including Shiite jurisprudence. One of these restrictions from Shiite point of view is the prohibition of spreading oblique writings in forms of impure and immoral writings and the prohibition of propagation in favor of the opponents of the Islamic state and also the prohibition of casting doubts on the fundamental principles and necessities of the Islamic religion. The inexistence of special texts proving the prohibition of spreading oblique issues and the use of generalities, also differences in the definitions of obliquity and methods of dealing with oblique writings, has set the stage for disagreements in religious decrees (Fatwas). In this article by critical and analytical method we come to this conclusion that aforementioned disagreements notwithstanding, the press has no right to publish oblique writings by excuses such as "uselessness of the publication ban", "stage-setting for the freedom of choice", "freedom of questioning and doubting", "free distribution of information", and "freedom of political activity".

Spying is a bond of crime that of criminology in both of traditional and computer.by this matter that any social aren’t excepting to use of spying but security of countries necessitating paying more attention to this topic. Sometimes this crime being mixed with treachery to country that make difficult to distinguish them from each other and make difficulty science of low.
This research of dimension Islamic jurisprudence and legal.

The Vienna Convention & Incoterms offer a minimalist concept delivery that the seller can deliver products to buyer in his business location while for exit goods from that country the buyer should pay Customs and Insurance costs and Taxes, Etc. As long as the Fees is not paid can't move his goods to other country. This situation is in contrast with the concept of the Imami Jurists of delivery that Invasion and Superiority is as a condition for the realization of delivery.On the other hand that concept is one of the importances of the international trade and simply can't be passed. This caused the concept seriously be discussed in Jurisprudence and Convention. The result of research showed that delivery of good in trade although the costs are incurred since buyer accept this conditions by himself explicitly or implicitly in order to respect the principle of the rule will the Jurisprudence is also valid.Second the subject of delivery on the assumption is separate of its concept and delivery location is more of a concept rather than the term delivery of the convention is intended to express.

Although "moral damage" is one of the challenging issues necessarily stipulated in present principles, laws and regulations but it is not determined how to compensate and evaluate. Some strategies are considered for moral damage compensation in legal systems of different countries, but there isn't any definite criterion for the methods of moral damage compensation. The writer believes that the capability of moral damage compensation and how to compensate it could be justified and inferred in relation to the law principles in Iran and Islam: the rule of "no-damage" as a jurisprudent certainty is invoked in order to prove the civil liability arising from moral damage and the methods of compensation. In addition to the rule of "no-damage", the other reason is anticipation of blood money about physical hurts which lead to moral damage. The intelligentsia also judge to compensate the moral damage imposed on humans. The moral damage is also compensated in legal law in Iran. There isn’t any definite method to compensate the moral damages but it deems that the common methods in statue, common law and jurisprudence are acceptable because the methods of moral damage compensation are relative and resultant which are derived from legal and social thoughts in every time and then consent and religious law could be understood from the silence and lack of legislator prevention.Therefore, we can say that the acceptance of financial compensation and sorts of non- financial compensation is justifiable and defensible for reparation of moral damage in Islamic jurisprudence