https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/ Journal of Research and Development in Comparative Law en daily 1 Fri, 20 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0330 Fri, 20 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0330 https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_725443.html Ple agreement, as a key tool in managing criminal cases, has become a widely used method to expedite proceedings with the expansion of managerial approaches in criminal justice systems, especially in the United States. However, the prosecutor’s broad discretionary powers in this process may lead to abuses such as violations of defendants’ rights, false confessions, and non-transparent decision-making. In Iran, the lack of a clear separation between prosecution and investigation—which often places the prosecutor in both roles—exacerbates these risks. Using a descriptive-analytical method and a comparative review of library sources, this study, addresses the question of how digital case management can reduce the harms caused by the prosecutor’s unlimited powers if plea agreement is adopted in Iranian criminal justice system. Although plea agreement is not yet provided for in Iranian procedural laws, the growing managerial orientation within the judiciary increases the likelihood of its future acceptance. The findings indicate that the Case Management System (CMS), with its capability to record digital data, offers effective tools to mitigate the harms arising from the prosecutor’s broad powers.Video recording of the bargaining process, documenting justificatory evidence in the electronic file for presentation to the court, and digital screening of crimes based on severity enhance transparency and accountability. Video recording ensures oversight of prosecutorial behavior and the authenticity of agreements, recording justificatory evidence preserves adherence to the presumption of innocence, and digital screening prioritizes cases, allocating judicial resources to serious crimes. This study is the first to propose that digital case management limits prosecutorial abuse and increases public trust in Iranian criminal justice system. For the fair implementation of charge bargaining, it is recommended that: (1) regulations for mandatory video recording with technical standards be codified; (2) recording justificatory evidence in the CMS be required as a prerequisite for bargaining; (3) crime-oriented screening algorithms be designed to prioritize cases; and (4) periodic reports on the CMS performance be published for public oversight. These measures, by combining technology and supervision, will pave the way for the fair and efficient implementation of charge bargaining in Iranian future criminal justice system. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_731751.html The theory of consideration, in English law (as a country whose law governs many letters of credit worldwide) is a key theory that considers the enforceability of a contract to be dependent on its containing a consideration.Given that a letter of credit is essentially a contract under which the issuing bank is obligated to pay the beneficiary upon receiving documents that comply with the letter of credit, the existence or absence of consideration in letters of credit has been the subject of extensive debate and conflicting opinions and the issue has been raised as to in case there is consideration in a letter of credit, who has undertaken this consideration in return for the bank's commitment to pay the letter of credit amount to the beneficiary in return for the presentation of matching documents.Some writes believe that a letter of credit is an enforceable contract. However, basically, it does not require a consideration. Others are of the opinion that a letter of credit is a binding contract in which consideration also exists and is provided by the applicant, and some of them also believe in provision of consideration by the beneficiary of the letter of credit.On the contrary, some courts and authors are of the view that in a letter of credit there is no consideration (from either the applicant or the beneficiary) and therefore it cannot be considered as a binding contract, and accordingly, they deny the contractual nature of the letter of credit.In this article, it was examined in an analytical-descriptive manner that although the conditions of valid consideration and also the effects of the existence of consideration in the Iranian and English law are different, in both legal systems, in a letter of credit as a binding contract, there is need to be "consideration" and this consideration is provided by the beneficiary of the letter of credit and it is the "obligation of the beneficiary to present the corresponding documents to the issuing bank" that is considered valid consideration and provides the basis for the binding nature of the letter of credit. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_728377.html Corrupt interactions pose a serious threat to the integrity of a judicial system. The lack of accountability for corrupt interactions and agreements by judicial officials with individuals involved in cases can lead to a loss of public trust in the justice system, embolden wrongdoers, and result in the widespread prevalence of corruption in all societal sectors. Since corrupt interactions in the criminal proceedings, from preliminary stages to sentencing, can violate fair trials and infringe upon individuals’ rights, the research question of this study is: what penalties are foreseen for judges in the event of violations of fair trial principles and the issuance of illegal rulings due to corrupt interactions? This study, employing a qualitative approach and utilizing content analysis of documents, judicial decisions, in-depth interviews with judicial actors and lawyers (24 individuals), and a comparative study of European countries’ criminal laws, explains the diverse manifestations of judicial corrupt interactions and analyzes the criminal sanctions available in the legal systems of Iran and selected countries. The research findings indicate that while some countries, such as Italy, Spain, Moldova, and Ukraine, have explicitly criminalized the issuance of unjust rulings and have stipulated corresponding punishments with precise definitions of their elements, Iranian criminal law does not explicitly envisage such a crime with this specific title. Instead, only certain behavioral aspects of these interactions, including falsification of content, bribery, and abuse of influence, are subject to general penalties. Issuing an unlawful ruling can only lead to criminal liability for the issuing judicial official if it falls under the scope of Articles 13 and 486 of the Islamic Penal Code, and Article 589 of the Islamic Penal Code (regarding Ta’zir and inhibitory punishments). Therefore, to ensure the integrity of the fair trial system and public trust, this research deems criminal liability for judges in cases of conscious and intentional issuance of illegal rulings, upon proof of corrupt interaction, to be necessary and proposes its inclusion in criminal legislation. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_727205.html Contract simulation is an operation by which the co-contracting parties conceal hide from third parties either a part or the integrity of their true agreement. In the operation of simulation, there are two conflicting contracts: an apparent contract that originates from the simulated volition of the parties and a counter-letter that is the result of their internal volition. In fact, simulation of contract is caused by a deliberate conflict between the simulated volition and the internal volition of the parties to a contract. Reform 2016 of the French law of obligations address this issue in articles 1201 and 1202. However, simulation of contract has not yet been recognized in Iranian law and despite the existence of numerous examples of it in practice, neither in civil law nor in judicial procedure, there is no specific literature about it. Simulation of contract constitutes the roundabout of several legal principles. For example, it can be said that this institution is the meeting point of the principle of relativity of contracts, the opposability of the contract to third parties, deliberate conflict between the simulated volition and the internal volition, fraud to the law, Counter-letter and some other legal principles, and it is not possible to address all of them in this article. In the study of simulation of contract in French law, it can be seen that Article 1201 of civil code, in contrast to the counter-letter and the apparent contract, the counter-letter has been recognized as valid between the parties and inopposable to third parties. In Iranian law, it also seems that, given the superiority of internal volition over simulated volition, in the conflict between these two contracts, the counter-letter between the parties will be valid. Regarding the counter-letter, it also seems that the solution of French law should be accepted in Iranian law and declared that the counter-letter is valid in the relationship between the contracting parties of that contract, but this contract cannot be relied upon to the detriment of third parties and may only be invoked to their benefit. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_728608.html Custody, meaning the maintenance, care, and physical, mental, and emotional upbringing of a child, is one of the most fundamental issues in family law, in which the best interests of the child are considered the most important decision-making criteria. In addition to emotional and human aspects, this legal institution faces numerous legal complexities; especially in cases where parents separate and it is necessary to determine the child's custody status specifically.In such circumstances, parents sometimes try to regulate the method of child care and his upbringing by mutual agreement through a custody agreement. Although this type of agreement is based on the principle of voluntarism in private law, it is accompanied by limitations in practice.Considerations such as compliance with mandatory laws, good morals, public order, and above all, ensuring the best interests of the child, cause the application of this principle in the field of custody to face challenges.In Iranian law and Imami jurisprudence, despite the recognition of the principle of contractual freedom, the priority of the child’s interests is emphasized and parental agreements cannot be contrary to this principle.In Canadian law, although parental agreement is respected, the final supervision of the courts is always reserved to guarantee the interests of the child. This article, with a comparative approach, examines the position of the principle of voluntarism in custody agreements in the Iranian and Canadian legal systems, while analyzing he theoretical foundations, pays attention to the limitations and effects of this principle on the validity and implementation of parental agreements. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_726208.html International commercial arbitration, as one of the primary methods for resolving cross-border commercial disputes, plays a significant role in the development of international trade relations. However, the enforcement of arbitral awards that have been issued in one country and subsequently annulled, but for whose enforcement an application is made in another country, is considered a fundamental challenge in the international arbitration system. This article examines the feasibility of enforcing such awards in the legal systems of Iran and England, analyzing their differences and similarities. In England, a more flexible approach has been adopted towards the enforcement of annulled arbitral awards. English courts, considering the principles governing international arbitration and the 1958 New York Convention, have the capacity, in certain circumstances, to deem arbitral awards annulled in the country of origin as still enforceable. In contrast, the Iranian legal system considers the annulment of an award in the country of origin as one of the primary obstacles to its enforcement within the country. Iranian courts, based on legal doctrine, tend to regard arbitral awards annulled in the country of issuance as unenforceable, citing the concept of public policy and domestic legal principles. On the other hand, they also deem the enforcement of these awards possible. This research has been conducted using a descriptive-analytical method, comparing the two legal systems of Iran while considering their commonalities, differences, strengths, and weaknesses. Furthermore, the research methodology concerning judicial decisions has been field-based, involving the collection of awards from courts. The results of this study indicate that adopting an approach similar to England’s in Iran, including a meticulous examination of the reasons for award annulment and limiting judicial interventions, could facilitate the enforcement of arbitral awards and enhance the credibility of the country’s arbitration system. This could contribute to greater convergence between Iran and international practices and attract foreign investment. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_729088.html Soil, as a fundamental component of the right to a healthy environment, plays a critical role in safeguarding human health, ensuring food security, maintaining ecosystem stability, and advancing sustainable development. Yet, due to pressures arising out of economic growth and development in many countries, including Iran and England, this non-renewable resource is exposed to escalating threats, such as pollution, erosion, and degradation.Using an analytical-comparative methodology, the research deal with a comparison of two legal systems of Iran and England in using non-criminal measures with the aim of examining the extent of efficiency of social preventing policy in preventing crime relating to soil contamination.The central question is to what extent have these social prevention strategies succeeded in mitigating soil pollution, and what legislative, institutional, and enforcement gaps undermine their impact on preventing aims? The focus of this research is on four key pillars: public awareness, mass education, organizing employment and economic position, culture-building.Findings indicate that although both countries emphasize the necessity of using preventive measures as a complementation of penal measures, in Iran, lack of coherent strategy, inadequate systematic specialized education, multiplicity of responsible institutions, and weak monitoring prevent the realization of these policies in practice. On the other hand, England to some extent is successful in performing social prevention by employing interagency organization, designing the multi-level education, linkage of job creation with environmental goals and establishment of system of efficient monitoring.  Analyzing comparative non-penal measures and presenting critique background, this study not only fill the theoretical gap in Iranian literature, but also provide practical solution for making indigenous successful model in England towards promoting efficient strategies relating to social prevention from crime regarding contamination of soil. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_727144.html The rapid evolution in commercial arena and legal relationships—particularly the increasing complexity of long-term economic interactions—has prompted a fundamental reassessment of classical contract theories, culminating in the emergence of the concept of related oriented contracts.These contracts, founded on mutual trust, ongoing cooperation, continuous interactions and flexible structures, depart from traditional obligation-oriented models that rely heavily on instantaneous intent or textual formalism. Instead, they present a dynamic and process-oriented framework for contractual formation and performanceThis article tries to adopt a comparative legal approach to explore the conceptual foundations, governing principles, and legal status of these contracts within the context of Iranian law and Islamic jurisprudence. In this regard, while examining the Macneil’s theory and comparing it with the Islamic jurisprudence such as e’timan (reliance-based entrustment), it demonstrates that norms such as good faith, loyalty, contextual-oriented interpretation, and the presumption that contract remains unchanged is deemed to be fundamental components of contracts.   Also, by analyzing doctrines, legal texts, and judicial precedent of European and American legal systems, it is determined that relation-oriented contracts have the potentiality to comply with institutions such as fiduciary and partnership-based arrangements. However, in terms of the rationale for their existence and purposive position they occupy a more advanced level. Examination of jurisprudential samples confirms that Islamic jurisprudence has the admissibility of these contracts with concepts such as e’timan, especially where contractual reliance serves as the foundation of contract.  Relation-oriented contracts possess the potentiality of compliance with many current contracts and they must employ appropriate requirements in formation, performance, and interpretation, based on their existence of conditions and circumstances. With this perception, contracts include wide range of agreements that in certain examples have the highest level of relation-oriented. This article aims to provide appropriate context for development of efficient theories in the Iranian law of contracts by recognition of these capacities. Ultimately, delineating the principles of interpretation governing the relation-oriented contracts, the study concludes that reviewing in traditional legal interpretive and embracing the fluid and interactive nature of modern contracts can provide the ground for development and more efficient in the system of law of contract in Iran. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_720289.html Considering the cross-border activities of multinational corporations, their aggressive tax planning represents a global challenge requiring a comprehensive solution. Recognizing that multinational corporations play a crucial role in financing governments, states have consistently sought to ensure compliance with tax regulations through improved governance and the establishment of various mechanisms. However, multinational corporations, moving beyond tax evasion and avoidance, have increasingly engaged in aggressive tax planning. By exploiting discrepancies in the tax systems of different countries, they aim to minimize or evade their tax obligations entirely. In today's globalized economy, alongside the significant and fundamental changes in international tax law, addressing aggressive tax planning has become a critical priority for many nations. Effective tax governance in combating this issue hinges on enhancing tax transparency through the exchange of tax information. The European Union has taken a leading role in countering the aggressive tax planning of multinational corporations by implementing innovative mechanisms for exchange of tax information while safeguarding professional and commercial confidentiality and ensuring respect for corporate privacy. This study, using a descriptive-analytical method and data collection through documentary (library) research, seeks to address the following question: What mechanisms have the European Union and Iran implemented to promote tax transparency in combating aggressive tax planning by multinational corporations, and what measures can Iran take to improve these mechanisms? The research findings indicate that the European Union has implemented various tax transparency measures, including on-demand, automatic, and spontaneous tax information exchange, as well as country-by-country reporting specifically for multinational corporations. In contrast, Iran's sole tool for cross-border tax transparency is the on-demand exchange of tax information, as outlined in its double taxation agreements. Consequently, the study recommends that Iran adopt automatic and spontaneous exchange methods, implement country-by-country reporting, and negotiate tax information exchange agreements, particularly with tax havens, to strengthen its tax transparency framework. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_723362.html The right of free access to information plays a crucial role in enhancing public awareness regarding the information held by public institutions and, in specific cases, non-public institutions. This right fosters greater public participation in public affairs, prevents administrative corruption, promotes governmental accountability, strengthens freedom of expression and the press, ensures equality and non-discrimination, upholds the rule of law, and particularly supports transparency. Thus, this freedom plays a significant role in protecting individuals’ rights and interests against unfavorable decisions made by administrative authorities. Over the years, Iran and France have sought to regulate and facilitate the exercise of the right to freedom of information through the enactment of laws and regulations. In this context, a comparative study of this subject identifies the strengths, vulnerabilities, and challenges faced by both countries in legislating and implementing the right to freedom of information. Accordingly, this article, using a descriptive-analytical method and a library-based data collection technique, aims to conduct a comparative study on the recognition and application of this right within the legal systems of Iran and France. It seeks to answer the following questions: What are the similarities and differences between Iran and France in terms of legal and executive structures governing the right to free access to information? To what extent do the legal rules and regulations in both countries permit the free flow of information, and how effectively do the existing executive processes and legal guarantees ensure free access to information for entitled individuals?Ultimately, after examining and analyzing existing legal sources and texts, the authors conclude that although there is no substantial difference between the two legal systems in terms of legislation and rule-making, the French legal system—owing to its longer history and deeper experience in legislating and implementing freedom of information regulations and conducting profound research—can serve as a source and model for enhancing the effectiveness of Iran’s laws, regulations, and enforcement mechanisms related to freedom of information. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_723947.html Air freight refers to the transportation of goods by aircraft to various destinations worldwide. This method is the fastest way to move goods over long distances and is highly suitable for perishable, high-value, or time-sensitive cargo. However, regarding the air transport of dangerous goods, it is important to note that such cargo can pose significant risks to human health, property, and flight safety. These risks necessitate strict adherence not only to general regulations but also to specific rules established for the safe transport of hazardous materials, in order to prevent human, environmental, and financial losses. In terms of safety, it is essential to assess factors such as types of hazards, contributing risk factors, their potential consequences, and the extent of possible human, financial, and environmental damages before an incident occurs. Some cargo in air freight may be hazardous to the aircraft itself or to passengers. Goods such as uranium, dangerous gases and liquids (e.g., strong acids), etc., are classified by the IATA (International Air Transport Association) as dangerous goods for air transport, subject to restrictions or even outright bans in some cases. To enhance safety standards, IATA has established specific guidelines for the air transport of such goods, including packaging requirements, placement within the aircraft, permissible shapes and volumes, and in some cases, even the types of aircraft suitable for their transport. Additionally, IATA provides training programs for air cargo and freight companies through its IATA Training and Development Institute, focusing on proper packaging and handling procedures. Although safety obligations are widely considered a contractual responsibility in legal terms, extending them to non-contractual liability is also justified. This is because, in many cases, third parties and the environment may also be exposed to risks and damages. Regarding the transport of dangerous goods, despite the acceptance of fault-based liability under Article 1 of the Civil Liability Act, the extensive and severe potential damages—along with the difficulty (or impossibility) of proving fault—make strict liability (no-fault liability) a more reasonable approach. This research aims to examine the issue through a descriptive-analytical method, exploring its implications in Iranian law, Islamic jurisprudence (Fiqh), and international regulations. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_724212.html The Iranian Code of Criminal Procedure (ICCP) mandates the compulsory presence of the prosecutor or their representative in first-instance criminal courts (Court of Criminal 1), whereas it allows their participation to be discretionary in second-instance courts (Court of Criminal 2). However, the law fails to offer explicit and comprehensive guidelines on the specific role, scope, and manner of the prosecutor's involvement in these proceedings. This legal ambiguity has led to a situation where the prosecutor assumes a largely passive position, primarily focusing on appeals and cassation after the judgment has been rendered, rather than playing an active role in the trial phase. Such a limited engagement undermines the prosecutor's essential functions, including their supervisory role and active involvement in the fact-finding process, thereby restricting their influence to appellate stages alone.In contrast, under French criminal procedural law, the prosecutor holds a more robust and active role in the judicial process. French law mandates the prosecutor's consistent and proactive presence in both trial and appellate phases of criminal cases. Furthermore, the prosecutor in France is not only involved in hearings but also plays a pivotal role in shaping criminal policy, engaging in close collaborations with judges, and providing guidance throughout the proceedings. The prosecutor’s involvement extends beyond merely representing the state’s interest; they are integral to the development of case law, the implementation of justice, and the formulation of public criminal policy. In this sense, the prosecutor is considered an essential figure in steering the criminal justice process and ensuring its alignment with the principles of fairness and legal integrity.This article offers a comparative analysis of the role of the prosecutor in Iran and France, focusing on the disparities between the two systems in terms of prosecutorial engagement during criminal trials. It explores how the lack of continuous prosecutor involvement in Iranian trials, coupled with an overemphasis on post-verdict appeals, has resulted in a diminished role for the prosecutor in guiding the trial process. The article also examines the broader consequences of this limited role, particularly its impact on judicial independence and the effective administration of criminal justice. In conclusion, the article provides several recommendations for reforming the Iranian criminal justice system, with a specific focus on strengthening the prosecutor's role in the trial phase, in order to enhance the overall fairness, transparency, and efficiency of criminal proceedings. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_724552.html Judicial supervision is the adoption of supervision by court judges or independent expert judges outside of the prosecution institution on the actions and decisions of the prosecution institution, including the investigator, and especially overseeing the actions that limit the rights and freedoms of individuals in the pre-trial stage of criminal proceedings.Achieving the desired pattern of judicial supervision over the matter of prosecution and investigation is not achieved simply by observing and predicting legal and judicial guarantees; Rather, in addition to these guarantees, implementation requirements and conditions are necessary.The present research is conducted in a qualitative way, while using in-depth interviews (19 people) and document analysis, only by checking on the necessary executive guarantees to promote and strengthen judicial supervision over the actions of those in charge of prosecution and investigation in Iran and Syria. The existing literature in Iran and Syria on judicial oversight suffers from significant backwardness compared to Western countries and needs serious reforms in this area. The legislator's failure to provide guarantees for the implementation of judicial oversight of prosecution and investigation in the Iranian and Syrian Criminal Procedure Code has led to significant abuses. The findings of the research indicate the necessity of using a number of executive mechanisms in the judicial supervision of investigative and prosecution measures in order to achieve a suitable supervisory model in the criminal justice system of Iran and Syria. These guarantees include the need to increase monitoring mechanisms for visible crimes in comparison with invisible crimes, using new technologies to increase the accuracy of monitoring, applying performance guarantees for the violations of the monitoring and supervised institutions, holding continuous training courses and promoting the culture of monitoring, maintaining the independence of the institution. The trustee is responsible for researching the relationship between hierarchy and institutional control, continuity and continuity in supervision. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_724860.html This article employs a comparative and descriptive-analytical research method to examine the approaches to minimizing imprisonment in three legal systems: Islamic jurisprudence, Iran's criminal justice system, and the U.S. criminal justice system. The primary objective of this study is to analyze the theoretical and practical foundations for reducing the use of imprisonment and to evaluate its impacts on the efficiency of judicial systems and social structures. In Islamic jurisprudence, principles such as human dignity, restorative justice, and the rehabilitative purpose of punishments have minimized the use of imprisonment and introduced suitable alternatives such as fines, community service, and rehabilitation programs. This perspective aligns perfectly with Islam's philosophy of punishment, which emphasizes the rehabilitation of offenders .Although Iran's criminal justice system still considers imprisonment as one of its primary sanctions, it has taken significant steps toward reducing prison populations through legislation such as the "Reduction of Discretionary Imprisonment Act" (2019). This law aims to reduce the heavy costs of maintaining prisons and improve prison conditions, though it faces challenges such as insufficient implementation infrastructure. In contrast, the U.S. criminal justice system, through strict policies like the "War on Drugs" and "Three Strikes Law" has achieved one of the highest incarceration rates in the world. However, in recent years, numerous federal and state laws have been enacted to reduce federal prison populations by expanding alternative sanctions and rehabilitation programs. The comparative study reveals that both Iran and the U.S. recognize the necessity of reducing imprisonment, but there are significant differences in their levels of success and implementation methods. To improve Iran's criminal justice system, it is recommended to adopt measures such as developing community-based sanctions, strengthening prison rehabilitation programs, reducing long-term sentences, and increasing civil society participation. These reforms could simultaneously lower economic costs, enhance the efficiency of the justice system, and reduce recidivism rates. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_725093.html Following the growing attention of the international community to environmental issue in the 1970s and its inclusion in the constitution, the practical realization of the environmental capacities of constitutions and realize the Constitutionalisation of the environmental law became a fundamental issue. Since the main custodians of ensuring the implementation of the constitution are the constitutional guardians, the role of these institutions and their performance in the development of the Constitutionalisation of the environmental law became of great importance. Because, the way these institutions operate can largely reflect the extent to which a legal system has the necessary capacities for the Constitutionalisation of the environmental law. This research adopts a descriptive-analytical and legal approach to examine the role of constitutional guardians in France and Colombia in realizing the environmental capacities constitutions, and in developing the Constitutionalisation of the environmental law in these two countries. this research indicate that despite both countries having acceptable environmental capacities in their constitutions, the constitutional guardian's performance in these two countries has led to a greater integration of environmental considerations into the legal system of Colombia compared to that of France. This is also largely due to the traditional approach taken by the Constitutional Council of France in contrast to the modern approach adopted by the Constitutional Court of Colombia. the French Constitutional Council considers its mission to be solely to control the compliance of laws and regulations with the environmental provisions contained in the Charter for the environment and has always tried to play a controlling role in order to Constitutionalisation of the environmental law in the French legal system. In contrast, the Colombian Constitutional Court has always tried to play a facilitating and developmental role in the process of Constitutionalisation of the environmental law in the Colombian legal system, while maintaining a controlling role. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_725316.html Pride is one of the important causes of coercive liability, which includes a wide range of deception, fraud, and deceit. This means that if someone deceives another and as a result, a loss or damage is incurred, then the deceiver is liable and liable. The condition for the realization of pride and its actions requires loss or damage. This rule is one of the jurisprudential rules, and jurists have discussed it under the rule of “the arrogant person returns to someone else.” In Iranian legal books, this issue has not been examined independently and coherently, and its criteria are not clear. Therefore, what is stated in these books is incomprehensible and shows the legal vacuum resulting from it, which has led to challenges in this field. However, it is necessary to mention that in comparison to French law, it seems to be more progressive. In French law, deception and arrogance have a personal aspect and are included in the scope of defects of will and consent. Accordingly, Article 1116 of the French Civil Code provides a definition of deception and arrogance, which itself does not cover all cases of deception; it is incomplete and in some cases ambiguous. However, English law has been more comprehensive than Iranian and French law. In English law, arrogance and arrogance are referred to as fraud and false statements and are realized when a two-sided concept is used without sufficient clarity and the person describing it intentionally makes untrue statements with the intention of deceiving or is careless about the truthfulness of his statements. However, a study of the legal rules of the aforementioned countries shows that fraud is considered a cause of civil liability and the basis of the warranty ruling resulting from it is deception and arrogance that causes damage and compensation to be borne by the deceived person. Each of them tries to prevent its occurrence within their society with their own methods, and in some cases, it is mainly based on the existence of omission or non-omission of the act. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_725317.html Résumé«Les cas difficiles» en droit pénal mettent en évidence l’insuffisance de la règle juridique à fournir une réponse correcte et directe; notamment dans les cas de conflit des droits. Dans ces cas, le législateur s’abstient généralement de fournir une solution concrète et le juge assume donc la tâche ardue de trouver la solution désirable. Les cas les plus courants et les plus difficiles dans les procédures pénales sont liés à la production de preuves par les parties privées au procès pénal, y compris l'accusé et la victime, en violant la vie privée de l'autre partie; parce que le principe de la loyauté de la preuve pénale à l’égard des parties privées à procès pénal en droit français et relativement en droit iranien ne prévoit pas une telle situation, et le juge est confronté à un dilemme du conflit du droit à la preuve et le droit à la vie privée. En principe, la résolution des cas difficiles par les juges est confrontée à des critiques et à des défis tels que l’atteinte au principe de sécurité judiciaire des citoyens et la violation du principe de légalité de la procédure pénale. Les résultats de la présente étude, menée à l'aide d'une méthode descriptive-analytique et d'outils de collecte de documents en bibliothèque, indiquent que dans la Jurisprudence judiciaire française, les preuves illégitimes obtenues par des parties privées du procès pénal par violation de la vie privée de l'autre partie sont généralement recevabiles. Actuellement, l'Assemblée Plénière de la Cour de cassation française, afin d'équilibrer les droits concurrents, a reconnu le droit à la preuve, à la condition que cette production des preuves soit nécessaire à l'exercice des droits de la défense des parties et et que l'atteinte soit proportionnée au but poursuivi. Au contraire, dans la Jurisprudence judiciaire iranienne, il n'existe pas d'approche explicite et claire à cet égard, ce qui a conduit à une divergence d'opinions. En fin de compte, la résolution de ce conflit est laissée à l'intime conviction du juge et à sa libre appréciation des preuves, ceci afin qu'un droit prévale sur l'autre sans base légale. Il ne fait aucun doute que les stratégies utilisées dans le droit et la Jurisprudence judiciaire français et iraniens n’empêcheront ni l’affaiblissement du principe de sécurité judiciaire des citoyens ni la violation du principe de légalité la procédure pénale, et aussi ne fourniront pas non plus une stratégie globale pour surmonter le conflit entre ces deux droits. Par conséquent, la stratégie de cohérence de la décision prise avec la structure du système juridique, proposé par M. Ronald Dworkin, peut guider le juge vers la décision idéale. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_725487.html International arbitration, as one of the key methods for resolving commercial and investment disputes, has long attracted significant attention. Its fundamental advantages such as flexibility, greater speed, confidentiality, and the possibility of selecting specialized arbitrators have made it an appealing option. However, over time, especially with the increasing complexity and evolving nature of disputes and the growing involvement of states, rules and procedures have developed in ways that have somewhat diminished some of arbitration’s key advantages. This evolution has brought the international arbitration system despite its established status face-to-face with structural and functional challenges that call into question its effectiveness and legitimacy, particularly in disputes involving states and public interests. This paper adopts an analytical-comparative and critical perspective to identify and examine several major challenges in the development of international commercial and investment arbitration, particularly in disputes involving a state, while reflecting on the ongoing reform efforts and proposals. Specifically, it addresses issues such as rising arbitration costs, prolonged proceedings, limited access to qualified arbitrators, disparities in parties’ capabilities, lack of transparency, absence of binding precedent, and difficulties in obtaining and presenting evidence as key shortcomings of arbitration. On the other hand, the paper demonstrates how new rules and procedural innovations have sought to restore previously diminished advantages or to prevent their further erosion. Drawing on practical experience, comparative analysis of rules, and theoretical discussions, the authors offer reform proposals aimed at improving the structure of arbitration in international commercial and investment disputes and enhancing both public and professional trust in the system. The paper concludes that the sustainable development of arbitration requires the continuous reform of processes, procedures, and regulations, grounded in past experiences. It presents concrete suggestions for addressing the aforementioned challenges to ensure the continued effectiveness and legitimacy of arbitration as a dispute resolution method in major international commercial and investment contexts. This research emphasizes the need for ongoing reconsideration of international arbitration frameworks, especially to preserve its desirability and utility in complex commercial and investment disputes. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_726639.html Technological advancements in recent decades have transformed digital platforms into one of the most influential tools in the global economy, social interactions, and national security. In the absence of appropriate regulatory frameworks, these platforms can pose significant challenges to national sovereignty, privacy, combating fake news, and monopolistic practices. This article, employing library-based research and an analytical-descriptive method with a comparative approach, examines the regulation of digital platforms in the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran. The United States, as a technological pioneer and home to many major platforms, has implemented stringent and structured policies concerning foreign platforms such as TikTok and Huawei, as well as domestic platforms. These policies are based on laws such as the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) and the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), granting the U.S. government extensive regulatory authority over the digital space. In contrast, despite facing more extensive threats, Iran has more limited tools for regulating digital platforms. Policies such as the blocking of Telegram and restrictions on Instagram, although aimed at preserving national sovereignty, have faced challenges due to external pressures, lack of public support, the absence of comprehensive regulatory frameworks, and weak institutional coordination, resulting in limited effectiveness. A comparative analysis of these two countries reveals that, despite facing fewer direct threats, the United States has adopted a far more stringent approach to regulating foreign platforms. Meanwhile, its support for domestic platforms and the application of double standards in dealing with other countries indicate the use of digital platforms as instruments for advancing geopolitical policies. In Iran, the inability to effectively engage with platform owners, weaknesses in developing domestic infrastructure, and frequent changes in regulatory policies have exposed user rights, national sovereignty, and cybersecurity to significant risks. In the concluding section, recommendations are provided to improve the regulation of digital platforms in Iran, including strengthening legal frameworks, enhancing cyber diplomacy, and developing domestic infrastructures. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_727492.html Feasibility study on the correlation between the presence of schizophrenia and insanity as grounds for removal of criminal liability, Comparative study in criminal law and medical science AbstractObjective: Schizophrenia is one of the most confusing and debilitating mental disorders in the world. Some researchers in international research centers have done a lot of research and participated for years, gathering information. In some cases, this disease has a perfect fit with the insanity concept, and there are different types of this mental disorder, and the amount of punishment for the criminals who have committed the crimes depending on the level of the disease, is different. The present study aims to investigate the responsibility of these people according to Iranian laws and in the light of psychological findings. Background: Schizophrenia is a mental disorder that can have different types. Many researchers and scientists have studied this disease for many years and have gathered a lot of information on this disease. In some cases, this disease has a good match with the concept of insanity.Methods: The research was concluded using an analytical-descriptive method, using library sources; furthermore, we collected documentation through documentary methods, using laws and reliable citizens. Findings: The legislator in the Islamic Penal Code has used the term ‘mental disorder’ in defining insanity, it has paved the way for a role for medical science in criminal law and has provided for cases of mental disorder as a complete defense, i.e., cases in which a defendant lacks free will, in the offense of insanity and lack of criminal responsibility.Results: Schizophrenia as a disease has different forms, and in some forms, such as catatonia, which is more significant, people lose their free will in most cases, and due to Article 149 of the Islamic Penal Code, they do not have criminal responsibility. Keywords: Schizophrenia, insanity, criminal responsibility, free will https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_727687.html The early foundations of fiduciary duties can be found in Roman law, where the principles of trust and obligation were established.Ancient Greek philosophical thought also provided the basis for understanding the necessity of trust, with its emphasis on trust-based relationships and, of course, moral responsibility. The theory of trust in English law is rooted in the common legal traditions and customs of fairness and equity that have evolved over the centuries. In the early days of common law, in the mid-first millennium AD, trust was an unknown concept and the potential of trust-based relationships was neglected due to the strict application of rigid laws. Fiduciary duties in common law serve as a legal framework governing relationships based on trust and reliance. In addition to imposing high standards of care and protection on fiduciaries, these duties require them to act in the interests of their beneficiaries and to ensure the principle of loyalty in various aspects of this relationship. Although fiduciary principles in common law jurisprudence generally referenced as the first English law was about three hundred years ago, but the historical concepts of fiduciary duties origins even older and has roots in ancient Roman law and Old Testament; therefore, does not seem to be a new concept. Despite the extensive application of the principles of fiduciary duties by judges and lawyers, there has been no correct and comprehensive explanation of the concept of fiduciary duties. Notwithstanding, fiduciary duties are not explicitly mentioned in Iranian jurisprudence, their manifestations in various forms, such as ragarding interest of client's for trustee, and the obligation to inform the broker in the event that he is a participant or beneficiary in the transaction, reinforce the view that Iranian law is not so outsider (or odd) into the concept of fiduciaries. The present study aims to introduce fiduciary relationships and duties, introduces the basic elements of a fiduciary relationship, while providing approaches to justify the nature of these relationships, will examine the scope of fiduciaries' duties. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_728687.html In the oil and gas industry of many countries, one of the most common methods used for exploration, drilling, production, exploitation or increasing the exploitation rate, as well as partial investment, is the farmout of all or part of the benefits of the main contract operation to a third party (usually specialized oil companies or domestic or foreign retail investors). The farmout of interests in exchange for performing operations or activities specified in an upstream oil and gas contract, or providing capital, is in the form of an agreement between the farmor (main contractor or owner of interests) and the farmee (sub-contractor or investor). Although this type of farmout is common in most oil-rich countries, in Iran, despite the oil and gas industry's urgent need for it to provide financial resources and related technology, it has not been popular with the industry due to its cultural, historical-political background, and the existence of legal obstacles in the upstream area of the oil and gas industry. While the method of farmout of interests has features that make it more suitable and more acceptable compared to other conventional methods of transferring rights and contracts, such as outsourcing, sale, lease, partnership, shareholding, or assignment of contract that may be considered. However, examining the laws and patterns of upstream oil contracts reveals Traditionally challenges such as impossibility of farmout the exploitation sector due to the prohibition of obtaining the possession of oil fields and their reserves, The legislator's approach in the recent oil industry law (Law on Duties and Authorities of the Ministry of Petroleum, approved in 2012) as well as the decree of General Conditions, Structure and Model of Upstream Oil and Gas Contracts approved by the Council of Ministers in 2016 (IPC) and its amendment approved in 2023, has made the acceptance of farmout agreements clearer and easier by observing certain considerations, and this attitude is considered a positive development and evolution.Accordingly, this article examines the possibility and manner of farmout the benefits and activities of an upstream oil and gas contract to the farmee through a farmout agreement. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_728926.html Ex-ante evaluation of laws, as one of the new tools of rule-based governance, is an attempt to move from the traditional “pass and then implement” approach to evidence-based and forward-looking legislative rationality. This mechanism estimates the economic, social, legal, and institutional consequences of a legal text before it is enacted, thereby enabling the amendment or redesign of plans and bills. The present comparative study shows that in recent decades, the German and French legal systems, by utilizing institutions such as the Legislative Oversight Council and the State Council, have been able to create a binding mechanism for assessing the effects of laws before they are enacted; a mechanism that has not only contributed to the transparency and accountability of the legislative process, but has also enhanced executive efficiency and public trust in the law. In contrast, the Iranian legal system, despite the stipulations in the “General Policies of Legislation” (2019) and some articles of the Internal Regulations of the Parliament, still lacks enforcement guarantees and a specialized institution to conduct ex ante evaluation. The result is the approval of laws that enter the legislative cycle without a detailed analysis of the consequences and in practice are faced with legislative inflation, institutional conflict, and inefficiency. The transition from the current situation in Iran requires institutional design, a legal requirement to prepare multidimensional analytical annexes, and the definition of a periodic review process in the internal regulations of the Majlis. Thus, ex ante evaluation will not be merely a technical mechanism, but a tool for strengthening the democratic legitimacy and efficiency of the legislative system. The path to reform does not lie through costly constitutional changes, but rather through a minimal and effective package: first, transforming existing formal requirements into a precise and measurable content standard for the impact statement. Second, establishing an independent methodological control unit in the parliament. Third, the development of bills and plans subject to the provision of legislative effects from "financial burden" to "executive burdens and distributional effects". https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_729089.html State Liability for Compensation of Damages Arising from Riots: A Comparative Study in Iranian and English LawIn recent decades, with the significant rise in protests and urban riots, the issue of compensating damages to individuals and property has become one of the fundamental challenges for legal systems in ensuring citizens’ rights and maintaining public order. Precisely determining the scope of the government’s civil liability and the related legal and institutional requirements for compensating damages arising from urban unrest is among the crucial matters requiring attention in the field of public law and civil liability.The Iranian legal system, relying on its rich legal heritage and dynamic jurisprudence, possesses extensive theoretical and practical capacities to define and implement effective mechanisms for compensating damages resulting from urban disturbances and, through the enactment of specialized regulations and improvement of executive processes, can present a comprehensive and effective model in this field. The legal system of England, through the enactment and update of the Riot Compensation Act 2016, has provided a framework for compensating such damages, yet it still faces limitations in scope and ambiguity in its criteria. This study, by thoroughly examining the legal and institutional requirements of both legal systems and comparing their strengths and weaknesses, offers practical and legislative solutions to improve Iran’s legal framework.Using an analytical–comparative method, this article examines the legal foundations of governmental liability in Iran and analyzes the evolution of laws and theoretical foundations governing the English legal system. Based on the research findings, and drawing on the capacities of Imamiyyah jurisprudence and the principles of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, a comprehensive and effective framework for ensuring compensation of damages caused by riots in Iran has been designed. This proposed framework includes enacting a specific law, establishing a national compensation fund, reforming insurance and judicial policies, and strengthening preventive approaches.Keywords:RIOT,StateLiability,Damages,compensatio,Comparative law https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_729258.html In today's world, e-commerce and the widespread use of virtual platforms have become one of the most significant economic and commercial tools. This digital transformation, while facilitating the buying and selling process, reducing transaction costs, and expanding market access, has created valuable opportunities for economic actors and consumers. However, the rapid growth of this sector has also brought challenges, one of the most critical being the proliferation of counterfeit goods and services offered through virtual platforms. This issue not only risks violating the rights of consumers and other stakeholders but also undermines public trust in these platforms, ultimately harming the legitimate economy. Given that digital platforms play a pivotal role in online transactions, the question of the scope and basis of their liability regarding the sale of counterfeit goods and services has become a fundamental issue in contemporary law. This article, adopting a comparative approach and employing an analytical-descriptive method, examines the civil liability of virtual platforms for the sale of counterfeit goods and services within the framework of the legal system of the Islamic Republic of Iran, with references to judicial decisions from the United States, the European Union, Canada, and India. The analysis relies on jurisprudential foundations, general legal principles, a comparative study of international legal systems, and an examination of relevant judicial rulings, aiming to provide a clear picture of the legal status of platforms concerning consumers. Furthermore, by identifying existing legal gaps in Iran’s legal system, the article proposes suggestions for reforming and strengthening regulatory and legal frameworks. The study also explores the legal obligations and responsibilities of virtual platforms and offers recommendations for improving and reinforcing supervisory and legal structures. This research seeks to provide effective and practical solutions to address the issue of counterfeit goods and services in the virtual space, ultimately contributing to enhancing public trust and protecting consumer rights in this modern platform. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_729434.html During the suspension period of the contract, the intervention of the parties regarding the suspensive condition is effective in the fate of the contract, whether it concerns the suspension of the original contract or its dissolution, which is called a resolutive condition. If one of the parties to the contract fails to fulfill its contractual obligations during the suspension period and prevents the fulfillment of the suspensive condition against good faith, what is the legal status of the contract and its effects in Iranian law compared to PECL? In PECL, since this action is against good faith and fair dealing, the rule is that the suspensive condition is presumed to be fulfilled and the contract has consequenses. The same ruling applies to a resolutive condition, and the party to the contract can consider it fulfilled and the contract terminated. Such a termination is equivalent to the effect of nullity of the contract. However, this guarantee of performance is assignable in some cases, and such a right is not envisaged for the beneficiary. According to the estoppel rule and the theory of waiver of rights and similar cases, the interference of a third party will not be a guarantee of the above-mentioned performance. In Iranian law, according to the no-harm rule, the principle of the necessity of fulfilling the promise and the theory of the implied terms, the guarantee of the execution of the decree can be considered a suspensive condition in the event of the undue interference of the other party to the current contract, and in some cases, the right to claim damages for delay in the performance of the obligation is also open.This article examines the intervention of each party using a descriptive-analytical method and library-type tools. However, there is no provision in Iranian law on this matter. There is no explicit text in Iranian law and the court procedures are not the same, but considering the rules governing contracts, the assumption in PECL can be extended to Iranian law. However, considering the spirit of the laws and legal doctrine, citing the collusive and implied terms of the contract and the common expectation that is assumed for the parties, and considering the recent ruling as valid, the wrongdoer must also bear the losses incurred. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_729473.html Tarikh Beyhaqi is one of the prominent texts in the field of Persian history and literature; which narrates real literary and social historical events. Beyond the narrative of "Afshin and Budelf", Bayhaghi explains a specific structure of the criminal atmosphere of the Ghaznavid era in the form of a documentary story, focusing on the institutions of criminal justice. Through its study, one can get new criminological theories about crime and its etiology. In these theories, the crime and the recognition of the effective factors in it do not take place independently of values and interests, and the element of power is used against people. In addition, crime does not necessarily exist in the world of reality; Rather, it is these influential and powerful people who build it. Crime is the product of the use of power by the ruling classes to constrain the behavior of those excluded from power. Postmodern criminology questions the classical and traditional monolithic readings of crime. It believes that law and law itself are reflections of the discourse, dominant language, and ideology of the ruling political group, which are used to suppress groups that are politically inferior. Accordingly, in addition to the element of power, subjectivism, rather than objectivism, plays an important role in explaining crime. There is no objective truth, and interpretations and meanings of behavior are merely the product of a linguistic, abstract, and mental game that has no reality in the outside world. Linguistic systems are always organized in a way that supports certain groups and ideas and marginalizes other groups. In this article, using the method of content analysis, the author tries to explain the story of "Afshin and Budelf" from the point of view of post-modern criminology by referring to the valuable and great work of Beyhaqi history. This study shows that in this historical event, the manifestations of this theory such as structural factors of delinquency, power, racism, ethnic discrimination and peaceful discourses have been emphasized. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_729474.html The transformation of asset structures in the digital age has posed fundamental and unprecedented legal questions, among which the fate of individuals’ digital assets after death stands out as a particularly complex issue. Digital assets—such as user accounts, cloud-stored content, emails, images, and other forms of personal data—while bearing economic, emotional, and even cultural value, present significant legal challenges for post-mortem succession due to their intangible nature, complex contractual frameworks, and the direct or indirect involvement of multiple actors, including digital service providers. The interests of the main stakeholders involved in managing these assets—namely, the deceased user’s intent, the rights of legal successors (including heirs, legatees, or executors), the privacy expectations of other users, the commercial interests of service providers, and broader public interests—are often misaligned and, in some instances, fundamentally conflicting. Against this backdrop, the core issue lies in identifying and legally analyzing these conflicting interests and assessing viable legal solutions within the broader framework of private and public law. Employing a descriptive-analytical methodology with a comparative lens, this article first outlines the legal concept of digital assets and then critically examines the post-mortem management of such assets. By identifying the primary stakeholders—including the deceased user, legal representatives, service providers, other affected users, and the general public—the article elucidates the nature of potential conflicts arising from their overlapping rights and interests. The study further analyzes the innovations introduced by the Revised Uniform Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets Act (RUFADAA) in the United States, exploring its capacity as a model of comparative law for resolving such conflicts. The findings suggest that an effective resolution requires the design of a multilayered legal regime, grounded in prioritizing the user’s intent, safeguarding privacy rights, protecting inheritance claims, and simultaneously addressing public interest concerns. Drawing upon the RUFADAA framework, the article concludes with a series of legislative recommendations aimed at establishing a coherent and future-proof legal structure for digital asset succession within the Iranian legal system. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_729476.html The use of insider information in the stock market—commonly referred to as insider trading—is a clear violation of informational fairness and undermines public trust in the integrity of capital markets. In addition to criminal and disciplinary sanctions, one of the most effective tools in combating this phenomenon is the issuance of disgorgement orders by adjudicative bodies, compelling the return of illicit gains derived from insider trading. The implementation of such a mechanism, however, requires the existence or enactment of robust and deterrent legal provisions. From an Islamic jurisprudential perspective, and based on Quranic principles, Prophetic tradition (Sunnah), and rational reasoning, there is no doubt among jurists regarding the obligation to return assets acquired through illegitimate or unlawful means. In statutory law, although some general or case-specific provisions exist, the realm of capital market law lacks explicit and comprehensive regulations addressing this issue. This legislative gap can result in the neglect of a crucial legal mechanism and consequently diminish its effectiveness and deterrent impact. In contrast, U.S. securities law places significant emphasis on the disgorgement of unlawful proceeds obtained through insider trading. Over time, this concept has been repeatedly addressed through both legislative action and judicial rulings, with each iteration reinforcing its effectiveness and authority. Accordingly, this article aims to examine the topic in depth—drawing on both domestic and international sources and literature—to underscore the necessity of establishing clear and comprehensive regulations regarding the mandatory disgorgement of illicit gains from insider trading in Iran’s capital market. Whether through the enactment of new provisions or the amendment of existing laws, such reform is essential. The vitality and efficiency of the capital market ultimately hinge on public confidence that the investment environment is under vigilant oversight, and that any individual who unlawfully enriches themselves through misconduct or criminal activity is obligated to return the resulting gains. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_729602.html As AI technology expands, addressing its legal challenges has received significant attention, as AI, like any new technology, faces legal challenges alongside its technical benefits. This makes policymaking in the field of AI even more important because the legislature, judicial practice, and the policies of the executive agencies must follow a single policy so that we do not witness fragmentation or the establishment of conflicting and conflicting policies. Legal policy, in addition to the need to follow some general principles, must naturally be proportionate to the economic, cultural, political, and social conditions of each country, otherwise the negative consequences of this phenomenon will outweigh its benefits in the long run.In Iran, despite the existence of a national document on artificial intelligence, we are not witnessing coherent policymaking, and by utilizing a comparative study, it must be determined analytically and scientifically which policymaking model would be most suitable for Iran.Since this important issue has not been seriously examined in Iranian law, this article seeks to answer the question of whether the European Union's policymaking model can be suitable for Iran, although one should not neglect Iran's local and cultural requirements and specific economic conditions, such as sanctions.The following article is presented from a legal perspective and in two parts: In the first part, the concept of artificial intelligence and artificial intelligence policymaking models are explained with reference to the principles of the subject in the European Union, and in the second part, an appropriate model for Iranian law is proposed and analyzed.Finally, specific and practical solutions are presented to groups benefiting from the research results, including legislators. The reason for choosing the European Union for the comparative study is that, according to the hypothesis of the article, the European Union model is more suitable for Iran than expansionist models such as the American model, although we should not neglect the local and cultural requirements and specific economic conditions of Iran, such as sanctions. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_729868.html Legal entities, much like natural persons, are endowed with legal rights and obligations and play a significant role in social, economic, and cultural spheres. They are capable of sustaining harm, both financially and morally. While there is broad consensus regarding the recognition and compensation of financial and moral damages inflicted upon natural persons, the possibility of moral harm and its compensation for legal entities remains a contentious issue. This debate has sparked serious disagreement among legal scholars, judges, and practitioners.The core question revolves around whether, given the non-human and abstract nature of legal persons, injuries such as reputational damage, loss of credibility, or other non-material harms can be acknowledged and compensated. Some legal theories, relying on the fictional and constructed nature of legal personality, argue that moral damage in this context lacks a sound legal and logical foundation. They contend that since legal entities do not possess emotions or human dignity, they cannot suffer moral harm in the same way individuals do.On the other hand, opposing views emphasize the principle of legal equality between natural and legal persons. These perspectives invoke foundational legal doctrines such as the “La Zarar” principle (no harm), and point to the real-world consequences of reputational and credit-related damage in commercial and professional relationships. They argue that such harm can undermine a legal entity’s standing, trustworthiness, and economic viability, and therefore should be legally recognized and compensated.This article adopts an analytical-descriptive methodology to explore these divergent views and conducts a comparative legal study of France, Egypt, and Iran. It aims to demonstrate that moral damage to legal entities is not only conceptually valid but also legally actionable within the Iranian legal system. Moreover, certain legislative texts explicitly acknowledge the possibility of moral harm to legal persons, reinforcing the argument for its compensation. . https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_730104.html The concept of gross contractual imbalance has become one of the most significant legal instruments for combating contractual abuse, particularly in relationships marked by evident economic or social inequality between the parties. The primary objective of this doctrine is to prevent the imposition of unfair terms and to restore a minimal degree of equilibrium between the reciprocal obligations of the contracting parties. The theory seeks to ensure that contractual consent is deemed valid only when formed under conditions of fairness and balance. In French law, the origin of this concept can be traced to consumer law, where the legislator, seeking to protect the weaker party from one‑sided contractual conditions, empowered judges to review, amend, or annul unfair terms. Gradually, its influence expanded beyond the sphere of consumer protection, gaining autonomous recognition in commercial law through Article L.442‑I(2) of the Commercial Code. Ultimately, during the comprehensive reform of 2016, the legislator incorporated this concept into the core of contract law, most notably within Article 1171 of the Civil Code. Pursuant to this provision, the judge is authorized to intervene actively in assessing contractual balance and to remove or invalidate any clause that creates a manifest disproportion in the parties’ respective obligations. In Iranian law, the Sharia‑based principles of La‑Zarar (no harm) and Nafy‑al‑‘Osr wa al‑Haraj (elimination of hardship) establish a normative foundation for modifying or nullifying contractual terms that cause excessive harm or undue hardship to one party. Where such harm or hardship is proven, the judge may amend the terms, order partial adjustment, or dissolve the contract altogether. Functionally, these principles operate similarly to Article 1171 of the French Civil Code as instruments for achieving contractual justice. This comparative study demonstrates that, although the philosophical bases of the French and Iranian legal systems differ—France emphasizing contractual fairness and judicial intervention, and Iran relying on religious and jurisprudential principles—both systems pursue the limitation of severe inequalities and the restoration of substantive fairness in contractual relations. The main distinction lies in the degree of judicial involvement and the balance between judicial control and the principle of contractual freedom: whereas French law adopts a wider scope of judicial review, Iranian law relies primarily on traditional fiqh doctrines and classical options (khiyarat) to maintain equitable equilibrium in contracts. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_730132.html In various legal systems, assessment and establishing the inventive step as a fundamental requirement for patent registration has always been one of the most complex issues in patent law. This complexity stems from the qualitative nature of this criterion, which distinguishes it from other patentability conditions novelty and industrial utility. Accordingly, the judicial and administrative practices of leading countries reveal that a significant portion of patent related disputes revolve around assessing and proving the inventive step. Among the various standards developed to assess the inventive step, the problem and solution approach has been widely accepted as a reliable method due to its systematic structure and relative flexibility. The primary advantage of this approach, compared to other standards, is that it enables a more objective and evidence-based analysis of the invention. However, the practical application of this standard faces several challenges, including difficulties in precisely defining the scope of the technical problem, comprehensively identifying relevant prior art, and distinguishing between obvious and non-obvious solutions. Over time, and with the emergence of newer technologies, these challenges become even more pronounced. In Iran's legal system, despite the explicit mention of the inventive step requirement in the Patent, Industrial Designs, and Trademarks Registration Act of 1386 and the newly enacted Industrial Property Protection Law of 1403, there is no uniform and transparent practice for evaluating this criterion. A random review of registered patents in patent office of Iran indicates that although the patent office primarily follows the problem and solution approach, in practice, the lack of detailed guidelines and a coherent framework has led to inconsistent and sometimes contradictory interpretations of this standard. To address these shortcomings, a comparative study of the practices of international patent offices, such as the European Patent Office and the UK Intellectual Property Office etc., could provide valuable insights. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_731196.html The emergence of deepfake technology, particularly in the form of digital pornography, poses serious threats to privacy and human dignity in the online environment. Produced through artificial intelligence and deep learning techniques, this phenomenon inflicts substantial psychological and social harm on victims. Accordingly, addressing such content, particularly from a legal perspective, requires the development of effective legislative and enforcement mechanisms. This article undertakes a comparative analysis of the legal frameworks of Iran and the European Union for combating deepfake pornography. Using a descriptive and analytical method, and drawing on library sources and reputable scholarly articles, the study examines the existing laws in Iran and the European Union in terms of their responses to deepfake related challenges. Within the Iranian legal system, provisions such as Article 14 of the Computer Crimes Act and Article 16 of the same statute, particularly with respect to defamation through alteration of digital content, address this threat. In the European Union, the Artificial Intelligence Act and the Digital Services Act establish frameworks for the removal of illegal content and the liability of platforms. The findings indicate that in Iran, despite existing regulations, challenges persist, including the lack of clear criteria for reputational harm and insufficient technical infrastructure for detecting deepfakes. In the European Union, although the legal frameworks are comparatively more comprehensive in relation to content removal and platform responsibility, issues such as technical divergences in detection and the transnational enforcement of rules remain. Finally, the study analyzes how combining the legal capacities of Iran and the European Union can generate innovative solutions for the evolution of legislative mechanisms to counter deepfakes in Iran, and on this basis, the Union’s framework, relying concurrently on the Artificial Intelligence Act, the Digital Services Act, and the General Data Protection Regulation, outlines an integrated scheme for the regulation of illegal content and the reinforcement of victim protection. Through mechanisms of transparency, labeling, and on platform reporting, this scheme promotes platform accountability and responsiveness, although its implementation faces cross border and technical challenges. In Iran, criminal categories addressing obscene and manipulated content provide initial coverage, yet practical effectiveness remains limited due to conceptual ambiguity and the absence of clear criteria for identifying deepfakes. Deficiencies in enforcement mechanisms and limited technical capacity for detection hinder the effectiveness of legal responses, underscoring the need to strengthen infrastructure and specialized institutions. Optimizing the national response requires revising and adopting context sensitive rules aligned with the European Union approach, with a focus on content governance and victim support. The development of diagnostic tools, the education and empowerment of law enforcement and judges, and the drafting of protocols for the preservation of digital evidence provide the operational foundation for this transformation. Advancing this trajectory becomes feasible and measurable through a time bound roadmap, the designation of a single coordinating authority, and periodic regulatory impact assessments. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_731368.html The national flag and anthem, as official symbols of national identity, are protected under criminal law in many countries, and the criminalization of their desecration is often justified as a means to preserve national identity and safeguard state security. These measures aim to prevent actions that may undermine the authority, legitimacy, or dignity of the state. However, criminalizing desecration can conflict with the fundamental right to freedom of expression, which is guaranteed under international human rights instruments. Human rights analyses suggest that national unity cannot be effectively maintained through coercive legal interventions alone, and mandatory respect for national symbols risks restricting individual freedoms. Excessively strict criminal policies may lead to human rights violations, limiting citizens’ capacity to engage in political discourse, symbolic protest, or social criticism. Comparative studies show that countries such as the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom generally do not criminalize insults to national symbols, protecting such acts under freedom of expression unless they involve direct threats, violence, or public disorder. Conversely, in countries including Germany, France, China, and Iran, desecration of national symbols is criminalized; in Iran, similar acts may be prosecuted under broad provisions concerning crimes against national security, reflecting an ambiguous and expansive criminal policy. Based on a descriptive-analytical approach, this article examines the foundations of criminalizing insults to the flag and anthem, its conflict with freedom of expression, and the approaches adopted in eight selected countries. The study concludes that criminalizing desecration per se conflicts with freedom of expression and the principle of minimal criminal law. Such criminalization is only justified when actions genuinely threaten public order or national security. Therefore, a proportionate, human-rights-based criminal policy should respect national symbols while ensuring that fundamental human rights and freedom of expression are fully protected, maintaining a balance between symbolic national protection and individual liberties. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_731459.html Maintaining public security and ensuring a balance between individual rights and collective interests is one of the fundamental and complex issues in contemporary criminal law, especially in the face of crimes against security that can directly threaten political stability, social order, and national security. Determining the type and extent of punishment in this area, in addition to observing fundamental criminal principles such as proportionality, deterrence, and justice, requires legal flexibility and a variety of criminal and supervisory tools to respond to emerging threats, including cybercrime and transnational terrorism. In the Iranian criminal system, the framework based on Islamic jurisprudence and codified laws has provided for severe hadd and ta’zir punishments such as execution, amputation, long imprisonment, and flogging for crimes against security; these punishments are mainly designed with the aim of absolute deterrence and protection of public order, but the lack of objective criteria and broad definitions of some concepts has led to diverse and sometimes disproportionate interpretations in issuing sentences. In contrast, the American system, based on the common law and civil rights tradition, faces diverse supervisory and criminal instruments and federal and state separation; however, security policies after 9/11 have created restrictions on fundamental rights and in some cases have violated the principle of proportionality.This study has examined the laws, regulations, and judicial procedures of the two systems using a comparative approach and documentary analysis. The findings show that efforts to deter and prevent security crimes in both systems face limitations; the Iranian system, with its focus on severe penalties and legal restrictions, and the American system, with its combination of supervision and punishment, both face challenges in maintaining a balance between security and individual rights. The comparative results show that Iran can target the social roots of crime by utilizing preventive tools and data-driven analyses, and the American system also needs to review its security policies to ensure the protection of individual rights and public trust, and to achieve a sustainable balance between security and civil liberties. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_731490.html In the Romano-Germanic legal system, the sanctity of obligations is recognized as a fundamental principle. This means that the law must exert every possible effort to preserve the validity of contracts concluded through the free will of the parties. Accordingly, compelling the obligor to perform the specific subject matter of the obligation constitutes the primary reaction to a breach of contract. The German legal system, which is generally influenced by ancient Roman law and characterized by a formalistic structure, has designed a multi-stage enforcement mechanism which, while maintaining the priority of compulsion within the hierarchy of remedies, has succeeded to a large extent in overcoming the practical deficiencies of this remedy and establishing a balance between the protection of the obligee and the consideration of the obligor’s interests.this study scrutinizes the first stage of this mechanism—namely, granting an additional period for performance—from substantive, procedural, and legal-effects perspectives, within a comparative analytical framework. The findings indicate that under this system, when the obligor refuses to perform the obligation, the obligee must first grant an additional deadline for performance, and only in the case of continued refusal may the subsequent stages and other legal remedies be invoked.Conversely, in Iranian law, according to the predominant doctrinal opinion, compelling the obligor is likewise regarded as the initial reaction to contractual breach. However, the enforcement of this remedy in practice has proved inefficient and has constantly faced serious theoretical and practical criticisms. In recent legislative developments, under a considerable influence of the solutions adopted in the common law system and with the aim of facilitating contractual relations, the Iranian legislator’s inclination to maintain the central position of compulsion among contractual remedies has diminished. applying a comparative and descriptive–analytical method and based on a precise interpretation of the relevant provisions of the German Civil Code, this article seeks to propose a functional model for reforming and enhancing the system of compulsion in Iranian law. The findings suggest that, without departing from the traditional foundations of civil law and through targeted reforms inspired by the German legal experience, most of the existing deficiencies can be resolved and the efficiency of contractual performance enforcement can be significantly improved. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_731601.html In obligations, the principle is the specific performance of the obligation itself. From the perspective of whether the obligation can or cannot be performed by a third party, obligations are divided into two categories: personal obligations (intuitu personae) and non-personal obligations. A key characteristic of personal obligations is their reliance on the personality of the obligor. In personal obligations, if one of their essential elements—which may be the obligor or the subject matter of the obligation itself—is impaired, the fate of the obligation changes, and its rules differ from those governing non-personal obligations. Furthermore, when compelling the obligor to perform the obligation during the enforcement stage, the compulsion method differs from that used for non-personal obligations. In this type of obligation, performance by a third party is not possible; hence, if the obligor refuses to perform the obligation, claiming the cost for third-party execution is not an option. For this reason, and based on the principle of specific performance, the legislator stated in the note to Article 47 of the Law on Enforcement of Civil Judgments (1977): "If the performance of the act by another person is impossible, it shall be carried out in accordance with Article 729 of the Code of Civil Procedure." With the repeal of the 1939 Code of Civil Procedure and the adoption of the 2000 Code of Civil Procedure, the question of whether the ruling in the said note remains in force or is repealed has been raised in courts and constitutes the main question of this research. This study employs library resources and a descriptive-analytical method to investigate the main question. It aims, firstly, to examine the status of the aforementioned note considering the repeal of the former Code of Civil Procedure. Secondly, it seeks to clarify the enforcement mechanism for personal obligations, under the assumption that the note is either repealed or remains applicable. The findings of this research suggest that the repeal of Article 729 of the former Code of Civil Procedure is unacceptable, and the institution of civil fine (non-criminal chastisement/penalty) is a ruling that not only does not contradict Sharia law but also guarantees the execution of the contract based on the rule of "Afw Bil-Uqud" (Fulfill the contracts). https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_731624.html In modern economies, states have transitioned from direct intervention to regulatory roles, reshaping their market presence This shift is exemplified by the supervision of market participants through established competitive rules and dedicated regulatory institutions, aimed at cultivating healthy competition and preventing anti-competitive conduct. While the principal objective of competition law remains the enhancement of economic efficiency, this article contends that distributive justice constitutes a crucial dimension of market regulation. Its significance is underscored by imperatives such as safeguarding small and nascent enterprises, mitigating societal inequality, and augmenting consumer welfare. This research conducts a comparative analysis of the realization of distributive justice within the competition law frameworks of Iran and the United States. The Iranian system, despite explicit legal prohibitions against monopoly and unjust discrimination, has achieved limited success in promoting distributive justice. This shortfall is attributed to profound structural challenges, substantive weaknesses in the legal framework, and a critical lack of autonomy vested in its regulatory body. Conversely, the United States antitrust tradition explicitly prioritizes consumer welfare as its paramount goal, thereby relegating distributive justice to an indirect and secondary status. Although U.S. antitrust enforcement has indirectly influenced economic disparities, the nation continues to grapple with severe and escalating income inequality, signaling the inadequacy of its current approach in addressing distributive concerns. The core finding of this study is that neither jurisdiction has successfully established a robust and effective linkage between competition regulation and the pursuit of distributive justice. Shared impediments include the insufficient explicit codification of distributive justice within primary legislation, a deficit in practical operational mechanisms to integrate distributive objectives into judicial and executive decision-making, and the absence of meaningful independence for regulatory agencies. To bridge this gap, the study proposes concrete reforms: undertaking legislative revision to explicitly enshrine distributive justice as a goal, reinforcing operational tools for achieving distributive aims in practice, and granting greater autonomy to sectoral and cross-sectoral regulators to insulate them from external pressures. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_731655.html The constitution is the fundamental document of a legal system about which numerous concepts and theories have been formed. This article attempts to present one of these concepts, called the endurance of the constitution. The first constitutions that were written were written in the belief that they would have a very long life and were unchangeable. Gradually, changing, amending, and replacing constitutions became common. Some opposed this because they believed it would harm the legal system and its continuity, while others considered it necessary to change the world and historical conditions. The endurance of the constitution refers to the stability and endurance of a constitution over time. That is, the constitution can remain and function properly for a long time without major changes, without being abandoned or replaced by a new constitution. This article seeks to answer the question of what the endurance of the constitution means and why constitutions survive or die, using a descriptive-analytical method and by using a comparative study and looking at the experience of different countries in the world and the fate of constitutions. To explain this concept, the causes of the disappearance of constitutions as well as the causes and factors of the endurance and stability of a constitution have been explained. The requirement for the stability and stability of a constitution is that it is not too resistant to changes in order to allow for evolutionary change. Of course, it should be known that too much flexibility can also be dangerous. What this article has shown, while studying the experience of constitutions in different countries of the world, is that over time and over the past two centuries, despite the beliefs of the first writers of constitutions - if we ignore exceptions such as the US Constitution - the life of constitutions in the world has been short, and due to the very rapid changes in today's world, constitutional changes have also been very rapid https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_731729.html Both programmers refer to their software programs as code and jurists refer to their laws and regulations by the term the “code”. Such a verbal commonality between these two terms inherently indicates a set of technical and functional truths concerning the substantive and structural dimensions shared between these two fields. The discovery and identification of these common dimensions allow, after presuming a similarity between them, for the transference of the properties and features existing in programming languages to laws and regulations, and to utilize them for enhancing the three aspects of accuracy, efficiency, and transparency of laws. The utilization of the theory of programming languages as a foundational discipline in the field of computer sciences, the concept of algorithm, and recent technical experiences in this field constitute the research and a study basis of this article, the application of which under the title of an interdisciplinary and comparative study has led to the creation of a new analytical method in legal science. This article, with attention to the topics of lawmaking, law enforcement, and legal interpretation, will address and examine how the theory of programming languages can be applied in legal analysis through a descriptive-analytical method. This research is considered novel in terms of subject literature, and in terms of legal thought and philosophy of law, it follows the general studies regarding the relationship between laws and software codes, which over the past two decades in the legal system of the United States of America has been examined by some scholars under the title of "Law as Code Version Two," and in recent years in England under the title of "Law as Code Version Three." However, in that it scientifically and logically elucidates the relationship between legal codes and software codes for the first time, this article is considered innovative. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_731950.html One of the emerging issues at the intersection of neuroscience and criminal law is the use of brain-reading technologies to discover the truth, detect lies, assess criminal responsibility, or predict the risk of recidivism. These technologies, which have so far been used to a limited extent and primarily with individual consent in judicial proceedings in some European countries such as Italy, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom, raise a fundamental question: Does compulsory and non-consensual use of such tools conflict with fundamental human rights, including the right to mental privacy?In Western legal systems, some ethicists and jurists, to counter these threats, have proposed recognizing a new right termed "mental privacy." However, more cautious viewpoints suggest that this domain can be interpreted and developed within the framework of existing rights, such as the right to privacy, human dignity, and the right to silence, negating the need for creating a separate and independent right.This article, which adopts an analytical-descriptive method and focuses on the Iranian legal system while also studying the European Convention on Human Rights, seeks to determine whether the existing legal structure – particularly the principles of the Constitution, Criminal Procedure Laws, and legal foundations – possesses the necessary capacity to protect mental privacy and counter the improper applications of neuroimaging technologies. In case legal gaps are identified, it examines what legislative or interpretive approaches should be adopted.The findings of the research indicate that although existing law in Iran can to some extent protect freedom of thought, the right to silence, and human dignity, these protections are insufficient to address the unique challenges posed by neural data. Therefore, the compulsory use of brain-reading technologies could be considered an instance of probing into thoughts and a violation of mental privacy. Consequently, the explicit recognition and legislation of the "right to mental privacy" in the Iranian legal system, inspired by the experience of countries such as Chile and France, is deemed necessary. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_732014.html One of the industries that plays an important role in the economy of countries is mining activities. According to Article 1, Clause 1 of the Executive Regulations of the Iranian Mining Law approved in 1390 with amendments on 04/04/1396: “Mining activities include prospecting operations to find deposits and explore and extract mines and ore dressing and mineral processing and extractive metallurgy.” Therefore, prospecting, exploration, extraction, ore dressing, processing and metallurgy are recognized as six types of mining activities. However, which of these six activities are commercial? In Article 2 of the Iranian Commercial Law approved in 1311 and the Iranian Mining Law and the regulations of this law, none of the mining activities is explicitly mentioned as commercial activities, and this creates the impression that none of these mining activities may be commercial. The French Commercial Law is also silent on this matter, but the French Mining Law has specified the duties of commercial mining activities. According to Article 131-3 of the French Mining Code: “Mining exploitation is considered a commercial act.” The subject of this article is to answer the question, using a comparative-analytical method and library study, which of the mining activities in Iranian and French law are commercial? In addition, it is based on the assumption that, given the role of mines in the circulation of wealth and capital, this activity can be considered commercial. After examining the types of mining activities in Iranian law and stating the criteria for commerciality, it is concluded that in Iranian law, based on paragraphs one and four of Article 2 of the Commercial Code 1311, the extraction of mineral substances and exploitation can be considered intrinsic commercial operations. Because mineral substances are movable assets that are obtained from nature and are then processed in a factory and converted into raw materials for consumption by other industries. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_732220.html Therapeutic cloning is a new method in the field of biotechnology and medical sciences that has led to the emergence of novel fields in the field of treating intractable human diseases. These fields could not have been achieved except through the innovations of scientists and researchers active in this field. These inventions are the fruit of the intellectual efforts of scientists and are considered one of the types of property that can be protected in the system of rights. In fact, the right to protect inventions in the field of therapeutic cloning is a claim right, the violation of which will violate the human dignity and moral agency of the right holder. Therefore, the institution of rights can protect this claim through legal and supportive mechanisms - as will be mentioned in the legal systems of Iran and the United States in this context - to not only prevent the distortion of one of the protectable rights, Rather, in this way, some of the suffering of humanity can be alleviated by opening new doors in methods and processes related to therapeutic cloning, by increasing the private sector's incentive to invest in supporting the innovations of scientists in this field. Of course, in order to strike a balance between the necessity of maintaining an incentive system to protect property rights over the results of innovations in the field of therapeutic simulation and providing a platform for the crystallization of new innovations in related fields - which are in a way a continuation of the chain of previous innovations and an upgrade of previous creations - the level of support of the legal system must be determined in such a way that, on the one hand, the incentive for the emergence of innovations at upstream levels is increased and, on the other hand, the potential for suppressing innovation at downstream levels is reduced. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_732229.html The effectiveness of the mediation process and the establishment of trust in honest negotiations regarding family disputes depend fundamentally on the disputing parties' absolute confidence in the safety and security of the mediation environment. This security specifically entails the rigorous protection of sensitive information and private disclosures shared by parties in the hope of achieving a desirable, efficient, and sustainable agreement. Confidentiality is not merely a theoretical legal principle, but an indispensable practical tool providing the necessary foundation for candor, mutual trust, and the overall efficiency of the mediation process. Conversely, a lack of confidentiality or any weakness in its enforcement can directly and negatively impact the quality and durability of agreements, ultimately preventing mediation from achieving its intended dispute resolution goals. However, defining the precise contours of confidentiality, categorizing the types of information requiring protection, and determining applicable exceptions face significant challenges in the legal systems of both the United States and Iran. In the Iranian context, although scattered legal provisions exist to support confidentiality, the notable absence of a comprehensive mediation law and the lack of explicit legislative protection act as major barriers. This legal ambiguity hinders public trust in mediation and discourages parties from selecting this effective method for resolving complex family disputes. In the United States, while the Uniform Mediation Act has formally recognized confidentiality, ambiguities remain regarding the distinction between related concepts like confidentiality and evidentiary privilege, as well as the scope of their exceptions. Adopting a comparative and descriptive-analytical approach, this study examines these legal challenges through a detailed analysis of statutes, judicial practice, and relevant case studies to propose robust solutions for protecting confidentiality. Findings indicate that the U.S. legal system, by explicitly recognizing mediation privilege, has taken effective steps toward information protection, with some states providing broad safeguards. However, the study concludes that Iran requires a comprehensive mediation law clearly defining confidentiality, its scope, and exceptions. Furthermore, establishing strict enforcement mechanisms such as the inadmissibility of mediation communications as evidence in court is essential to strengthen trust in the process. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_732310.html Commercial companies, owing to the expansion of their activities and rising inflation, require both liquidity and capital increase. However, Iranian companies increase their capital by not distributing profits and revaluing assets or by taking out loans to meet their capital needs, but these methods frequently fail to deliver a genuine increase in capital due to a lack of the necessary efficiency and effectiveness. A key reason for the persistence of such methods is managers’ concern that attracting new equity may transfer control, which can be addressed by implementing a dual-class share structure (DCSS). By adopting a descriptive–analytical approach and scrutinize U.S. corporate-law experience, this article demonstrates that a DCSS can, on the one hand, supply the liquidity and equity of firm needs without a transfer of control, and, on the other hand, in addition to providing real liquidity in a manner consistent with Islamic investment standards, insofar as the mechanism can be structured without Usury or quasi usury. In this model, two types of shares are issued with voting rights or more votes, and shares without votes or single votes. based on this structure, vesting the authority to formulate the corporation’s long-term business strategy in managers who exercise control, and entrusting the company’s helm to entrepreneurial executives capable of carrying their distinctive commercial vision out, is grounded on the theory of the separation of ownership and control. As qualified fiduciaries, such managers are positioned to discern the firm’s true—and hidden—value without being unduly influenced by transitory market fluctuations or the speculative behavior of short-term and retail shareholders. which are in accordance with the standards of Iranian law, considering the acceptance of the theory of separation of ownership from possession and the non-mandatory criterion of One Share-One Vote. To avoid inefficient entrenchment of management, however, precautionary legal measures should not be neglected, because the stability of management is supported as long as it is efficient. Therefore, by including Sunset Clauses, the authority and privileges of the manager can be restricted so that, in the event of inefficiency, the company's management can be changed. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_732335.html The growing production of household, industrial, and urban waste in recent years has become one of the most significant threats to environmental health and the fundamental rights of citizens. Pollution arising from such waste directly undermines the quality of human life and the safety of the environment. In response to this situation, the Iranian legislature—through the adoption of various provisions in development plans, the Waste Management Act of 2004, and constitutional principles, particularly Article 50—has sought to prevent waste related harm by criminalizing harmful conduct and establishing criminal, civil, and administrative obligations. Nevertheless, the dispersion of legal norms, inconsistencies between certain provisions, weak enforcement mechanisms, and the absence of a coherent regulatory and institutional framework have hindered the effectiveness of the Iranian legal system in realizing the right to a healthy environment. Using a descriptive–analytical method and relying on authoritative domestic and international sources, this article first examines the theoretical foundations of environmental criminalization in Iranian criminal law and evaluates the legislative framework governing the criminalization of waste related conduct, with a focus on its alignment with principles such as proportionality, necessity, deterrence, and the protection of citizens’ rights. It then adopts a comparative approach by analyzing Iranian regulations alongside the legal framework of England and the environmental directives of the European Union, highlighting the strengths, weaknesses, and transferrable capacities relevant to improving Iran’s criminal policy on waste management. Finally, the study identifies key legislative and enforcement challenges—particularly those relating to regulatory oversight, normative coherence, and the effectiveness of sanctions—and proposes a set of legislative, institutional, and criminal policy reforms aimed at strengthening criminal protection of the urban environment, enhancing inter institutional coordination, and improving the criminalization framework governing waste related harm to ensure more effective safeguarding of citizens’ rights. institutional, and criminal policy reforms aimed at strengthening criminal protection of the urban environment, enhancing inter institutional coordination, and improving the criminalization framework governing waste related harm to ensure more effective safeguarding of citizens’ rights https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_732534.html Research has shown that, in most contemporary legal systems, prosecutorial authorities enjoy broad discretion in deciding whether to initiate criminal proceedings. This discretion is exercised not only within the framework of formal rules but also through informal practices. Although such flexibility is ostensibly justified in the name of enhancing the efficiency of the criminal justice system, it is in practice shaped by a variety of extra-legal factors that may significantly alter the fundamental aims of criminal justice.Focusing on this reality, the present study examines the central question of how managerialism influences prosecutorial decision-making in the use of discretion regarding the initiation of criminal prosecution and the determination of charges. Methodologically, this research is qualitative in nature and employs a combined descriptive-analytical and comparative approach. Domestic data were collected through semi-structured, in-depth interviews with 35 actors in the criminal justice system—including prosecutors, assistant prosecutors, administrative staff, and defense attorneys—as well as through content analysis of 20 selected case files. In the comparative component, using library research, the empirical findings were evaluated against the legal practices of common-law systems (the United States and the United Kingdom). The findings indicate that managerialist indicators have significantly permeated the structure and functioning of prosecutorial institutions. This influence has reshaped prosecutorial attitudes and practices, transforming the traditional role of the prosecutor as a administrator of justice into a managerial role oriented toward resource allocation, caseload control, and the pursuit of performance metrics. The comparative analysis reveals a functional convergence among the systems studied: in all contexts, prosecutorial discretion is used as a tool for managing case overload, though in Western systems this occurs through formal institutional mechanisms, while in Iran it manifests through informal practices. Prominent manifestations of this influence include the non-prosecution of minor offenses, a tendency toward de-criminalizing charges, reclassifying offenses from imprisonment-based crimes to those carrying financial or lesser penalties, and prioritizing efficiency over substantive justice. Accordingly, the results point to a fundamental shift in the philosophy of criminal prosecution—from a justice-oriented model to an efficiency-oriented one—which carries significant theoretical and practical implications for criminal policy, prosecutorial independence, and the protection of defendants’ rights. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_732748.html The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence, particularly facial recognition systems, has profoundly transformed traditional mechanisms of crime detection and evidentiary assessment within criminal justice systems. These systems, which rely on biometric data processing and complex machine-learning algorithms, ostensibly enhance the efficiency, accuracy, and speed of policing and judicial decision-making. Nevertheless, due to their probabilistic, opaque, and sometimes biased nature, they may generate erroneous identifications that directly threaten fundamental rights, including due process, privacy, and the presumption of innocence. This raises a central question: when a wrongful arrest, prosecution, or conviction is caused by an algorithmic error, which actor within the criminal justice system bears criminal liability—the police officer, investigative authority, judicial decision-maker, or even the system’s designers and developers? Adopting a comparative methodology, this study examines the approaches of the United States and the European Union to the problem of algorithmic error and criminal accountability. The findings indicate that the United States continues to adhere to the classical principle of individual criminal responsibility, whereby technological tools serve merely as auxiliary inputs, and human decision-makers remain solely accountable. U.S. courts generally regard algorithmic outputs as probabilistic indicators rather than conclusive evidence. In contrast, the European Union—through its risk-based Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act)—imposes stringent obligations of algorithmic transparency, documentation, human oversight, and regulated deployment of high-risk systems such as facial recognition, alongside a distributed model of accountability across the technological supply chain. In Iran, despite the absence of explicit statutory provisions regarding AI-generated evidence, general principles embedded in the Islamic Penal Code—such as the personal nature of criminal responsibility (Article 140), evidentiary standards, and the rules of causation—provide implicit foundations for assigning liability to law-enforcement actors. Based on comparative insights and the unique challenges posed by high-risk AI systems, this article proposes a “chain liability model,” according to which criminal responsibility is allocated across designers, developers, supervisory bodies, law-enforcement officials, and judicial authorities. This model mitigates institutional responsibility-avoidance, reinforces criminal justice safeguards, and ensures a balanced integration of technological efficiency with the protection of citizens’ rights. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_732834.html Ownership has always had a significant status, prestige and prestige in different legal systems, and the feasibility of limiting private ownership has been discussed and debated by philosophers, lawyers and thinkers since ancient times. Whether in the Iranian legal system or in the common legal system, it has been accepted and favored by lawyers to not restrict or restrict the personal rights of owners in the event of conflict with collective rights or interests, such as the rights of the state, although there is an opposing theory in absolute support of the right to personal ownership. The purpose of the present article is to explain that if a person occupies another person's property or property for a long time, but no objection is made by the owner, does the possessor have a right to ownership or not? The present article concludes with a descriptive-analytical method that in the common law legal system, especially in countries such as England and America, a rule called conflicting or secondary ownership has been established and implemented as a barrier against absolute ownership of individuals due to economic, cultural and social considerations. In the Iranian legal system, although the limitation of private ownership in the conflict between personal and social rights has a religious and legal aspect due to the principle of non-harm and Article 40 of the Constitution, there has been no independent or explicit rule or regulation to reduce the powers of owners, as in the common law legal system. It seems that the legislative silence on the aforementioned issue, if it causes legal scholars to be passive in interpreting and unquestioningly following the opinions of the predecessors and successors, will distance the law from the ultimate goal of justice. Therefore, judicial or legal logic and the rule of preventing abuse of rights require that the right to absolute ownership be limited in conflict with social benefit, growth, development, and economic excellence. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_733450.html The institution of independent directors, as one of the vital pillars of modern corporate governance, has increasingly gained attention from various legal and economic systems worldwide over the past two decades. This institution is designed and implemented with specific objectives, including enhancing transparency in corporate decision-making processes, mitigating potential conflicts of interest between executive managers and shareholders, and ensuring effective protection of minority shareholders’ rights. The significance of this role is amplified in transitional economies, which have a long history of state ownership and management. In this regard, the present research conducts a comparative study of the institution of independent directors in Iran and Russia. Both countries, having experienced a transition from centralized state-controlled economies to market economies, face unique challenges in establishing and operationalizing this institution. This study particularly focuses on aspects related to the financial independence of directors and the nature of their relationships with government entities and major shareholders, which can impact the actual effectiveness of this institution. The main research question revolves around elucidating the differences and similarities in the formation and functioning of the institution of independent directors in the legal systems of Iran and Russia, as well as examining the cultural, economic, and political contexts influencing it. The research methodology is descriptive-analytical with a comparative approach, analyzing relevant laws, regulations, and legal and economic literature in both countries to compare the challenges, characteristics, and achievements of the independent director institution. The results of this analysis indicate that despite structural differences and specific legal frameworks in each country, there are common and profound challenges concerning the assurance of true independence for independent directors and the effective oversight of their performance in both legal systems. These challenges often stem from ownership structures, the influence of state entities, and the incomplete maturity of corporate governance culture. The article’s findings emphasize that adopting a gradual and adaptable process in legislating and implementing the requirements for independent directors, coupled with educating and raising awareness among stakeholders, can lead to significant improvements in the efficiency and effectiveness of this key institution in both countries and contribute to strengthening capital market trust. https://jcl.illrc.ac.ir/article_734924.html In contracts concluded between its parties, whether in English law, which follows the common law legal system, or in the Iranian legal system, which is influenced and derived from The Islamic jurisprudence and Roman Germanic law, there is a fundamental principle called the "principle of relativity of contracts", according to which the effects of the contract and the obligations arising from it are limited to the parties to the contract. However, today, due to the increasing complexity of contractual relations, the requirements and necessities of protecting the rights of individuals, some laws and legal systems have recognized the possibility of some third parties being benefited and have made This Principle Subject to exceptions. In order to unification of The English legal system, a law entitled the Rights of third parties in contracts was passed in 1999, which divides third party beneficiaries into two categories: intended and accidental beneficiaries. In the present study, which was conducted to explain the possibility of third parties enjoying the benefits of a contract incidentally, it is concluded that in English law, the sources for identifying this type of beneficiary are based on the interpretation of laws, judicial precedent, and legal doctrine. In The Iranian law, its sources can also be identified by examining the existing limited laws, general rules of contracts, teachings of Imami jurisprudence, and theories of doctrine. The criteria for identifying an incidental third party beneficiary in both legal systems include the absence of the parties' intention to grant a benefit, the failure to specify a third party in the contract, as well as his being benefited from the contract in a secondary and collateral manner. Mean while, in neither of the two legal systems under study there is the possibility of requiring the party to perform the contract by an incidental third party beneficiary, and these individuals are not legally protected. Therefore,for The purpose of making the third party to be benefited from the contract, he can only wait for the performance of the contract by the obligor until a benefit appears for him.