نشریه دین و قانون
سال هشتم شماره 28 (تابستان 1399)

One of the issues raised about those sentenced to death is the issue of execution through organ transfer. In this way, the life of the convicted person is ended by dismembering the transferable organs of body. In this article, the mentioned issue has been studied from two perspectives. First, what necessaries must be observed by the legislature if it intends to issue a legal permit for execution through the transfer of an organ and What issues should be clarified? Therefore, determining the nature of the transfer[1], voluntariness, determining the boundaries of recipients and beneficiaries, the condition of execution, regulatory mechanisms and how to reprimand breaches of legal obligation, are discussed under the legislative requirements. In the second part, the human rights considerations of "execution through donation" are examined under the headings of respect for human dignity, the issue of commercialization, discrimination, condition of age and the issue of citizenship. According to the findings of this paper, due to the high probability of deviation of the execution process through organ donation or sale, the legislator or judges must strongly avoid this issue. In case of non-acceptance of this opinion, it is necessary to pay attention to the requirements examined in this article and to have a strict and multi-layered supervision over their proper implementation and application.

Maintaining security is one of the important goals of all political systems in the world. Actions that undermine the security of society and, more broadly, the security of the government are criminalized in all legal systems. Although all crimes harm security in some way, crimes against security are directly related to concepts such as national security and public welfare. In Iran, a limited number of these crimes are mentioned in the section hudud[1], and most of the cases are mentioned in the section ta’zirat[2] in the first chapter of the Islamic Penal Code. The present study aims at finding the answer to the questions that what the principles of punishment in these crimes are, and which of these principles are used in the field of crimes against security. In this regard, four models of ‘severity and certainty’, ‘severity and uncertainty’, ‘leniency [lack of severity] and certainty’, and ‘leniency and uncertainty’ are proposed by law theorists, each of which is discussed and explained.

Founded by West, political crime is recognized as an assisting element to those who commit crimes either for political motives or against the political rights of citizens or against the political rights of the state. The penal codes of most Islamic countries do not recognize a specific class of crimes being distinct from public offences under the heading of a political crime as an independent system. However, few countries adopting one of the mental, objective, or mixed criteria have identified these offences.  From among these countries, our country's legislature has identified the most limited scope for these crimes, with the most legal implications. Compared to other legal systems, the Islamic legal system basically considers the greatest tolerance for political offenders so much so that it can be said that these behaviors have been decriminalized. In the present article, in a comparative format and with a view to its religious principles, the status of political crime in the criminal justice system of Muslim countries has been studied with a descriptive analytical method.

During drafting and codifying the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran in 1979, there were several discussions among members of the parliament (MPs) about the position of the legislative power and the review and approval of this law. At that time, Martyr Beheshti played a very important role in shaping the current structure of the legislative power in the Constitution. The feedback of these debates can be seen in the impact of his theory of Ummah and Imamate in such matters as the meaning of the legislation in Majlis (the Islamic Consultative Assembly), the limits of the powers of Majlis, delegated legislation, the position of the Guardian Council in relation to the Majlis, parliamentary immunity and the position of MPs. In this article, an attempt has been made to address some issues related to the Legislature of Iran in the thought and view of Martyr Beheshti during drafting, reviewing and codifying the Constitution. Accordingly, we will first deal with the general position of legislation and the legislature in Martyr Beheshti’s thought, and then we will review the issues related to the legislature in his views. The basic premise of this article is based on the fact that the idea of Martyr Beheshti in terms of his real and legal status has been effective in establishing some components of Majlis in its current form.

The fiqhi and legal nature of the law is one of the fundamental issues in the framework of the legal system of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Unlike non-religious systems, the law in the Islamic Republic of Iran’s system is fundamentally based on Sharia and Islamic standards and in line with their implementation and realization. It may be argued that the law is not the result of social custom or the merely material demands of citizens, but the law applies what share’[1] wants. The researchers of the current study aim to analyze the various dimensions of the legislator's attitude to law and legislation and his goals, especially, in the ​​authority scope of law-making high-ranking officials and institutions, including the Supreme Leader and the Islamic Consultative Assembly, each of which enjoy their legal authority and special effects. Moreover, through looking at religious doctrine of the Islamic school and system, the study aims to distinguish between the fiqhi and legal nature of law and that of other similar concepts in Islamic jurisprudence and provide a relatively comprehensive explanation of it.

The state/government is one of the most essential concepts that the constitution of every countrys is based on it. For various reasons, in Iranian legal texts, this concept has gained four different but intervowen meanings and this concept with its quadruple meanings have been used in the Islamic Republic of Iran’s Constitution causing ambiguity in the concept of state/government in the constitution. In this research, first, we consider the degree of ambiguity in using the concept of state/government in the different articles of constitution and then survey its ambiguity effects in the constitution. The findings of the research display that out of forty-one articles of the constitution wherein the word state/government has been used, due to the ambiguity of the concept of government or the possibility of presenting miscellaneous interpretations, eighteen articles of the constitution have caused ambiguity in the concept of state/government or the possibility of different interpretations cause ambiguity in powers, responsibilities or duties and limitations of some governing bodies in the system of the Islamic Republic of Iran. It is obvious that the effects of such a situation have appeared both in theory and in practice resulting in some complicated situations disturbing the rule of law.