Public Law
mohammad najafi kalyani; Mehdi Hadavand; alimohammad fallahzadeh
Abstract
One of the most controversial legal and political issues in recent decades - especially since the 1990s - is the recognition of welfare rights in the constitutions of different countries and how to recognize them. Although it seems that most constitutions have recognized these rights, the status of them ...
Read More
One of the most controversial legal and political issues in recent decades - especially since the 1990s - is the recognition of welfare rights in the constitutions of different countries and how to recognize them. Although it seems that most constitutions have recognized these rights, the status of them in the constitutions does not follow a single pattern, and unlike the first generation of rights, the very existence of these rights is seriously questionable. Despite the diminishing challenges at the international level, internal disagreements persist, and these rights continue to be criticized by various thinkers, especially right-wing thinkers. This issue has led to the inconsistent recognition of these rights in the constitutions of different countries. In this article, we seek to examine the models for identifying welfare rights in constitutions. Given the wide impact of the theories of various thinkers on the current state of these rights, it is necessary to examine the objections to them. The results of the research show that the general principle in identifying these rights is their acceptance as "aspirational goals" in the constitution, and their recognition as a "justiciable right" is an exception.
Criminal Law
SayedHamid Hoseyni; Firouz Mahmoudi Janaki
Abstract
he mental disposition of individualism and natural law advocates is the main trough of the "right not to be punished". This right is an innovative and great disputable issue among the law philosophers of Criminal Law. Multidimensionality and ambiguity of "right" and "punishment" have caused a wider area ...
Read More
he mental disposition of individualism and natural law advocates is the main trough of the "right not to be punished". This right is an innovative and great disputable issue among the law philosophers of Criminal Law. Multidimensionality and ambiguity of "right" and "punishment" have caused a wider area of the aforementioned challenge. This article presents the meaning of the "right to not be punished" besides doing some studies on its main philosophical and criminological foundations through the descriptive-analytic method. The findings of the study indicate that the "right to not be punished" is in the category of a priori, natural and fundamental human rights and is of the type of "conditional negative claim-right". Human dignity, philosophical principles of avoiding harm and harassment as philosophical theories of pressure, radical (critical) and labelling are among the criminological foundations of the formation of this right, which has made its philosophical underpinnings more understandable and acceptable by referring to other researches in social sciences. It is obvious that paying attention to the concept and foundations of the aforesaid right, results in reasonable saving on both criminalization and sentencing in criminal law.
Amir Khajehzadeh; Seyed Rohollah Hoseini Mighan
Abstract
Marriage creates different rights for woman, including the right to receive dowry, alimony, etc. But in some cases it is possible that the man be unable to pay it due to some new issues that have been arisen, for example insolvency. So it can be said that receiving dowry and alimony is the woman's right, ...
Read More
Marriage creates different rights for woman, including the right to receive dowry, alimony, etc. But in some cases it is possible that the man be unable to pay it due to some new issues that have been arisen, for example insolvency. So it can be said that receiving dowry and alimony is the woman's right, but law has provided some solutions for the woman in the case of inability to pay each of them. For example, in the case of failure to pay the dowry she has the right to do the particular submission and even she can split the dowry and do not comply the husband until receiving the last installment (as it has been mentioned in the judicial precedent). The supreme court by the judicial precedent number 708 dated 22.5.1387 announced that the dowry split do not conflict the right of judicial precedent and consequently sentencing the 718 dating to 13.2.1390 expanded the realm of lien to the absolute couple duties. Although these views seem to finish the conflicts, but correctness, effects, and the legal consequences of applying it needs to be analyzed and reviewed. This study which have been done by library and analytical approach analyzes the lien wife in the judicial procedure and beside analyzing the principle number 1058 of the civil law, it has been found that if both the man and woman have applied the lien, what should be done, and also it has been clarified that if a part of the dowry was not paid the woman has the lien until the time that the rest is paid and in the case of insolvency this is not set aside.
rashid ghadiri bahram abadi
Abstract
One of the most fundamental philosophical issues, which is examined in political philosophy and philosophy of law, is confrontation of right and expediency. One side of this confrontation are people and their rights who expect the recognition of minimum fundamental rights, like the right to a fair trial, ...
Read More
One of the most fundamental philosophical issues, which is examined in political philosophy and philosophy of law, is confrontation of right and expediency. One side of this confrontation are people and their rights who expect the recognition of minimum fundamental rights, like the right to a fair trial, which belongs them under the humans dignity and personality. On the other side, society by the aid of its representatives, while trying to produce minimum resources for people and securing their welfare, has also a glance to its maintainance and continuance, by complying with some interests. This confrontation between humans rights and community interests, arrives its summit in terrorist offences and this, forms the most important philosophical base of differential criminal proceeding in terrorist offences. On one hand, suspects of terrorist activities want a fair trial as an undeniable right for human kind and on the other hand, political and judicial authorities seek to retain security of society, and see suspending and ignoring terrorist suspects’ rights, as one of resorts for achieving this aim. They regard suspension and ignorance of this group’s rights, as securing security. After explanation of this confrontation and its quality in terrorist offences, in this essay, is tried to produce logical resorts for its resolution.
Hamed Esmaeil Por; Mohammad Javad Shariat Bagheri
Abstract
Liberty and security of person are the main concerns of individual human beings after life. Importance of these rights caused to come right to liberty and security of person in international and regional Human Rights instruments. Right to liberty and security of person is the oldest and the most fundamental ...
Read More
Liberty and security of person are the main concerns of individual human beings after life. Importance of these rights caused to come right to liberty and security of person in international and regional Human Rights instruments. Right to liberty and security of person is the oldest and the most fundamental human right which should be regarded as one of the most important issues of judicial justice. Join of Right to liberty of person and Right to security of person is as Right to liberty and security of person in Human Rights instruments that exploration of each of them could help to recognize the borders of Right to liberty and security of person. This Article deals with the concept of Right to liberty of person and Right to security of Person, as well as their applicability. It focuses on the judicial process of Human Rights Committee and European Court of Human Rights.
Zeynab Esmati; Hassan Kolivand
Abstract
The shift from "identify the right" to the "rights enforcement", About concepts related to human rights in the twentieth century it reached its full. Social security rights of the categories that have been in the process, has played a mportant role. Social Security is a fundamental human right. So in ...
Read More
The shift from "identify the right" to the "rights enforcement", About concepts related to human rights in the twentieth century it reached its full. Social security rights of the categories that have been in the process, has played a mportant role. Social Security is a fundamental human right. So in this respect for the rights of individuals, need mechanisms to be predicted. This research focus on the concept of the social security right and And that social security, are both human rights and part of the civil rights, in the light of international human rights instruments such as the European Convention on Human Rights and the Court of Human Rights in Europe have important contributions to the Human Rights evolution and grant these rights are guaranteed and pays the right to social security hearing ability. The results of this comparative study, the right to social security in the UK shows that the right to social trial in the legal system of the Islamic Republic of Iran has been the failure such as there is not specific forums to address claims that is social security.For this reason Insured persons in social organization and other organizations and funds about competent authority to deal with complaints in the insurance and protection are confused and Today many countries have witnessed a change in the nature of the right to social assistance, a reflection of a right or legitimate claim to a personal right or legal right. Social assistance is not considered legal in our country. Article 29 of the constitution, which, like other human rights instruments “Benefit from social security" as "the right of everyone" knows, largely not realized it needs serious review of laws and regulations related to it.
Majid Nikouei
Abstract
The main purpose of this paper is to provide a justifying approach to rights embedded in international documents in light of Rawls’ Global Theory of Rights and, then, evaluating them from the said approach. Indeed, it is endeavored to distinguish justified rights from unjustified claims under the ...
Read More
The main purpose of this paper is to provide a justifying approach to rights embedded in international documents in light of Rawls’ Global Theory of Rights and, then, evaluating them from the said approach. Indeed, it is endeavored to distinguish justified rights from unjustified claims under the rubric of rights. In this regards, John Rawls in his book, Law of Peoples, characterizes human rights as non-dependent on a particular ideology and religion, necessary, global and minimalistic. This paper, by evaluating human rights on the basis of the afore-said criteria, concludes that some of the alleged rights by international documents are unjustified and indefensible. Rather, they are ideals which, in any society and based on their common comprehensive doctrines and understanding of justice, are to be alleged and pursued. In the end, a reference shall be made to the necessity of formal and substantive criteria for the use of human rights concept and also to negative consequences of “rights inflation”.
Amirmahdi Ghourban Pour
Volume 67, Issue 44 , September 2003, , Pages 141-164
