نشریه قضاوت
پیاپی 115 (پاییز 1402)

Prevention of security violations of information exchange networks is something that has always been the concern of legislators. This issue is important because in today's era, as an electronic era, breaching the security of information exchange networks leads to information leakage and creating grounds for abuse, which misuse of people's personal information can, sometimes even have destructive effects on biological security or cause the personal assassination of the nationals of a country. The legal system of the European Union in this field includes detailed regulations, among which we can refer to the General Data Protection Regulations approved in 2016. These regulations contain detailed rules in the field of maintaining and preventing information security violations. The main question that this research seeks to answer is, what mechanisms does Article 32 of these regulations contain in order to prevent security violations of information exchange networks? In order to answer the above question, the present research, in a documentary way, by presenting the provisions of the above-mentioned article and analyzing its clauses, the mechanisms determined in this article in the four categories of anonymizing and encrypting personal data, ensuring confidentiality, integrity, availability, and flexibility. processing systems and services, risks (risk) related to information processing and compliance with formal requirements, and in the conclusion part, he tried to provide some policy recommendations, including how to amend the laws and regulations approved in Iran's legal system, informing the people through Mass communication media and systematizing the granting of licenses to the activities of transnational companies as the results of the review of Article 32 of the European Union regulations approved in 2016.

In the criminal law of Iran, in the topic of "crimes" in paragraph (c) of Article 292 of the Islamic Penal Code approved in 1392, the mistake in person has been examined as an effective factor on the psychological element of the crime. In common law, there is also a mistake in the person in the topic of murder, and according to the view that "the target follows the bullet", they believe that this mistake has no effect on the intentionality of the crime committed on the victim of the unintentional crime. The question that is raised is that in Iranian law, is this mistake only limited to crimes against physical integrity or is it effective for other crimes, especially crimes against spiritual integrity? The findings of the research indicate that, contrary to the theory of transferred malice in common law, in Iranian law, a mistake in a person is effective in forming the absolute malice of intentional crimes as a kind of mistake in the subject of the victim (that is, a certain person). In such a way that the effect of the intended behavior on the unintended purpose, in principle, in terms of the lack of the subject's intention, causes the deterioration of the intentional psychological element. Except that in case of lack of intention, knowledge is a substitute for definite and certain intention. As a result, in crimes against the spiritual integrity of persons, according to Article 144 of the Islamic Penal Code approved in 2012, two assumptions can be considered; First, the fact that the perpetrator unintentionally made the unintended crime victim the subject of crimes against dignity or spiritual personality and also had no knowledge of the behavior. (Lack of intention and knowledge) Second, despite the lack of intention, the perpetrator knew or should have known that his behavior leading to a crime against the spiritual personality of the victim is unintentional. It is innocent, and it has no effect on the second hypothesis in terms of verifying the scientific, criminal and wrong element of psychology.

Marriage is one of the fundamental social institutions and falls within the scope of inherent human rights, playing a crucial role in the physical and psychological well-being of individuals. However, child and adolescent marriages, due to their irreparable consequences—particularly for the health of girls—have become a significant challenge. According to international legal instruments, the minimum accepted age for marriage is eighteen years, and marriages below this age are prohibited. In Iran, following the predominant view of Shia jurisprudence, the minimum marriage age is set at thirteen for girls and fifteen for boys, with marriages below this age permitted under specific conditions. Given the physical and psychological harms associated with early marriage, this study, using a library-based method and a descriptive-analytical approach, aims to identify the capacities of the Iranian legal system—including Islamic jurisprudence, domestic laws and regulations, international instruments, and judicial opinions—to prohibit marriages for individuals under eighteen years of age. The study demonstrates the necessity of distinguishing the age of religious responsibility from the age of entitlement to social and civil rights, ultimately proposing the age of eighteen as the legal marriage age, due to the attainment of maturity by minors at this age.

The modern government is subject to the rule of law. Compliance with the law also requires acceptance of supervision. Judicial contorol of the government's actions is the most important and effective type of supervision that is applied to the actions and decisions of the government. The formation and development of this supervision is the result of concern about the need for the administration to comply with the law. This compliance is guaranteed in various ways, the most significant guarantee of which is the contorol of administrative actions and decisions by courts and judicial institutions. The judicial description of this kind of contorol separates it from other political and parliamentary, financial, administrative and quasi-judicial supervisions. The content of supervision is to match the actions and decisions of the administration (Facts) with laws, principles and rules (Acts). Monitoring the legality of government actions is divided into two categories: monitoring formal legality (jurisdiction and observance of formalities) and monitoring substantive legality (abuse of jurisdiction and mistakes). In the Islamic Republic of Iran, judicial contorol of the administration is carried out in three ways, two of which are objectionable and exceptional through the judges of the courts and the country's inspection organization, and one of which is the filing of a lawsuit and specifically through the Administrative Court of Justice. Accepts. We will examine each of these issues and evaluate them below.

In Chapter Two of the Landlord and Tenant Law of 1997, the legislator, in an effort to legitimize the institution of goodwill and drawing from Imam Khomeini's Tahrir al-Wasilah, has recognized this right. Accordingly, the tenant may negotiate with the landlord to gain privileges such as the right of priority in leasing. Just as the acquisition of these privileges, known as goodwill, is based on mutual agreement, its transfer and waiver must also be agreed upon. Article 6, Note 2 of the said law states: "If the landlord transfers the goodwill to the tenant through legitimate Sharia means, the tenant is entitled to demand the goodwill at its fair market value upon vacating the premises." In this regard, the authors, based on substantial reasoning, believe that unlike the previous law, the creation, transfer, and waiver of legitimate goodwill are solely based on the agreement of the parties. Demanding the goodwill value as a legal obligation at a fair market rate is unjust and leads to the infringement of both landlord and tenant rights.

In Amartya sen's theory of human development, development means freedom. One of the five types of freedom in this view is economic freedom and one of its most important indicators is the rule of law. From this point of view, the criterion for evaluating various social institutions, including the criminal justice system, is its contribution to strengthening, guaranteeing and the degree of commitment to protecting economic freedom. One of the indicators of the rule of law is the "Constraint on Government Powers ". The main issue of this article is how effectively the government's economic power has been limited in Iran's legislative and judicial discourse. For this purpose, analytical-descriptive methods and content analysis of legal texts and interviews with ten judges handling economic cases (from march to July 2024 ) have been used as information gathering tools. Empirical findings do not positively evaluate the performance of Iran's criminal justice system from the perspective of Constraint on Government Powers.