نشریه پژوهش های تطبیقی فقه، حقوق و سیاست
سال پنجم شماره 4 (زمستان 1402)

Torture is among the most significant crimes against human rights. The basis for the illegitimacy of this act lies in the affront to human dignity. Both the Convention Against Torture and the regulations governing torture in Islamic and Iranian law regard torture as an inhumane act that is contrary to human dignity and honor, and they prohibit its commission. However, there are significant differences in both the definition and the manifestations of torture between Islamic law and international documents. Although the Iranian Constitution prohibits all forms of torture, whether physical or psychological, the Islamic Penal Code only prescribes punishment for physical torture. On the other hand, in Iranian law, certain corporal punishments such as stoning, amputation, and flogging exist, which, according to the Committee Against Torture, are considered forms of torture. In general, any form of oppression, injustice, murder, aggression, violation, torment, harassment, insult, humiliation, degradation, or harm without cause to others or oneself that results in physical or psychological harm or distress is absolutely forbidden in Islam, and the perpetrator is deserving of punishment. Islamic sources such as the Quran, Sunnah, intellect, and consensus clearly indicate the prohibition of torment, torture, and the violation of human dignity.

Over the past decade, the government's reliance on tax revenue has grown significantly, to the extent that disconnecting the general budget from oil revenue and other unstable income sources and replacing them with tax revenue has become a strategic goal of the Islamic Republic of Iran. However, the cumulative effects of more than four decades of a rentier economy reliant on oil revenue, alongside the specific structure of citizen relationships inIran, have raised security concerns regarding the continuation of the current tax policy trajectory. The main question of this article is: In what direction do the current transformations in Iran’s tax system pose security threats? The most important finding of the research is that the increased reliance of the general budget on taxes collected from citizens does not inherently carry a security threat; however, the nature of this process, if accompanied by changes in the structure of citizen-government relationships and structural and discriminatory flaws in the tax system, will lead to security crises for the country in the future. The research method used in this article is analytical-descriptive and based on library studies.

Due to the existence of differences in the validity and invalidity of suspended contracts, the Civil Law has not examined it case by case and has only specified the invalidity of several contracts in a few cases. According to the principle of subrogation, the seller can take any possession of his property, but this principle is limited due to the rule of harmlessness in favor of the primary right of the suspended buyer. The seller may transfer the seller to a third party despite the initial right of the buyer being suspended, and this action of the seller causes a conflict between the two rights, due to the silence of the legislator and the difference in jurisprudence, with descriptive and analytical examination, the results show that by accepting the theory Conveyance as the choice of the will of the parties to the pending transaction, the effect of the conveyance, which refers to the future, causes the shaky ownership of the second buyer to be valid until the realization of the suspension against, but since the realization of the suspension against, the conflicting transaction becomes suspended and irrelevant due to the buyer's preemptive right. The second transaction, the transaction is canceled, and the buyer opposes, in proportion to his ignorance or knowledge of the suspended transaction, in relation to the price and damages (due to the ignorance of the second buyer) to the seller as punitive damages of the seller or only the price (due to the knowledge of the second buyer and the rule of action) refer to the seller as possessing the bad for him.