Journal of Historical Research, Law and Policy

This study, by reexamining the philosophy of qisas al-nafs in Imami jurisprudence and Iranian criminal law, demonstrates that qisas, contrary to revengeful and violent interpretations, is a rights-based institution limited by the principle of equivalence. Its objective is to restore the disturbed moral and social balance through a proportionate response to intentional homicide, to restrain the cycle of blood vengeance, and to consolidate collective security, rather than to merely eliminate the offender physically. Within this framework, qisas functions as a right that can be claimed, forgiven, or converted by the victim’s next of kin, and it is carried out through judicial procedures under the supervision of a judge and within the bounds of human dignity—including prohibitions against mutilation, excessive harm, and the obligation to act benevolently in execution—so that both the deterrent principle and the dignity of even the offender are preserved. The study further shows that this intrinsic logic of qisas, in light of the maqasid al-shari‘ah (objectives of Islamic law) and the rule of preserving life (hifz al-nafs) and maintaining public order, tends toward limiting the scope of harsh punishments and preferring restorative and life-affirming alternatives. This interpretation aligns with the Qur’anic principle “and for you in retribution there is life” (wa lakum fi al-qisasi hayatun), such that “life” is understood not only as the deterrence of future killings but also as the creation of actual possibilities for life for others. The third and fourth discussions explore the feasibility of an alternative model in which the victim’s heirs, instead of demanding the traditional implementation of qisas al-nafs, may—by virtue of their rights to reconciliation and waiver, and under conditions of the convict’s informed and non-coerced consent, with judicial and medical oversight—choose to convert their right into a mechanism for organ donation, thereby saving the lives of patients on the verge of death. This is contingent upon safeguarding the dignity of the condemned person throughout and after the process, prohibiting any form of coercion or humiliation, ensuring the separation of the jurisdictions of the execution judge and the medical ethics committee, and institutionally guaranteeing the jurisprudential legitimacy of exercising or waiving the right. The conclusion drawn is that qisas can transcend the mere logic of terminating the offender’s life and evolve into a dignity-centered mechanism of justice that is simultaneously deterrent and life-giving for society as a whole.

The significant role of transportation in trade, the circulation of goods, and the distribution of wealth in the international arena has necessitated the establishment of uniform international laws and regulations. Among the most important conventions—and the most up-to-date development in this regard—is the Convention on Contracts for the International Carriage of Goods Wholly or Partly by Sea, known as the Rotterdam Rules (2008). One of the key issues in maritime transport is the obligations of the shipper toward the carrier. Unlike its predecessors, the Rotterdam Rules dedicate an entire chapter (Chapter 7) specifically to the shipper’s obligations and enumerate them in detail. The purpose of this article is to examine the obligations of the shipper toward the carrier, as well as the challenges arising from the breach of these obligations. Finally, based on the policy orientation of the Rotterdam Rules—which establish balanced and reciprocal obligations and liabilities for both parties to the contract of carriage—it is suggested that the Iranian legislature consider acceding to this convention. The research method adopted in this study is descriptive–analytical, and the data collection has been conducted through library-based sources.

Today, most scholars in the field of children and adolescents agree that the involvement of adult police officers in the judicial process of this specific age group not only fails to assist the justice system but also produces adverse long-term effects on the children’s future. Accordingly, in many countries, in order to deal wisely with children and adolescents, a specialized institution known as the Juvenile Police has been established to perform various duties. However, in Iran, this specialized body has been neglected because such a police organization has not yet been formed. The Juvenile Police, as one of the specialized institutions within the juvenile justice system, was first proposed in Iran in the Bill on the Procedure for Handling Juvenile Offenses (2004) and later implicitly emphasized in the Fifth Five-Year Development Plan. Nevertheless, due to the non-ratification of the bill and the lack of implementation of the development plan, the legislator included the establishment of a specialized Juvenile Police in Article 31 of the Criminal Procedure Code (2013), thereby obligating the Police Organization to form such a unit. Therefore, the establishment of a specialized police force for children and adolescents can contribute to improvin

Today, most scholars in the field of children and adolescents agree that the involvement of adult police officers in the judicial process of this specific age group not only fails to assist the justice system but also produces adverse long-term effects on the children’s future. Accordingly, in many countries, in order to deal wisely with children and adolescents, a specialized institution known as the Juvenile Police has been established to perform various duties. However, in Iran, this specialized body has been neglected because such a police organization has not yet been formed. The Juvenile Police, as one of the specialized institutions within the juvenile justice system, was first proposed in Iran in the Bill on the Procedure for Handling Juvenile Offenses (2004) and later implicitly emphasized in the Fifth Five-Year Development Plan. Nevertheless, due to the non-ratification of the bill and the lack of implementation of the development plan, the legislator included the establishment of a specialized Juvenile Police in Article 31 of the Criminal Procedure Code (2013), thereby obligating the Police Organization to form such a unit. Therefore, the establishment of a specialized police force for children and adolescents can contribute to improving the performance of the Police Organization and the criminal justice system concerning minors. Good governance, by creating conditions such as political stability, active and constructive political participation, corruption control, and increased institutional accountability, can strengthen the foundational structure and legitimacy of such a specialized police force. It should be noted that the wide range of functions expected from police organizations—such as the development of various specializations within the police, the ambiguity surrounding the provision of multiple policing services, the growth of direct cross-border police cooperation, and the adoption of strategic and managerial approaches by governmental and non-governmental organizations—has made reform and specialization within policing inevitable. Findings of the present study indicate that the establishment of a Juvenile Police, without taking into account the particular needs and requirements of this age group and without utilizing specific and dedicated mechanisms, would not be effective and would ultimately lead to bureaucratic inflation and reduced organizational agility within the police structure.

g the performance of the Police Organization and the criminal justice system concerning minors. Good governance, by creating conditions such as political stability, active and constructive political participation, corruption control, and increased institutional accountability, can strengthen the foundational structure and legitimacy of such a specialized police force. It should be noted that the wide range of functions expected from police organizations—such as the development of various specializations within the police, the ambiguity surrounding the provision of multiple policing services, the growth of direct cross-border police cooperation, and the adoption of strategic and managerial approaches by governmental and non-governmental organizations—has made reform and specialization within policing inevitable. Findings of the present study indicate that the establishment of a Juvenile Police, without taking into account the particular needs and requirements of this age group and without utilizing specific and dedicated mechanisms, would not be effective and would ultimately lead to bureaucratic inflation and reduced organizational agility within the police structure.

Private joint stock companies in Iran, as one of the most common forms of business entities, often face challenges such as the violation of shareholders’ and partners’ financial rights, particularly those of minority shareholders. These issues primarily arise due to decision-making systems based on majority voting. This study seeks to identify the causes of these non-financial disputes and propose new judicial solutions to protect the rights of shareholders and partners. Using a descriptive–analytical approach and combining library and field research methods, the study explores the legal, social, and managerial causes underlying these conflicts. The findings indicate that factors such as shareholders’ and partners’ lack of legal awareness, deficiencies in the company’s articles of association, misuse of majority power, and absence of impartial managers constitute the main sources of such problems. The study proposes innovative measures such as strengthening the derivative suit system, applying the Islamic jurisprudential principle of La Zarar (“no harm”), and invoking constitutional and civil law provisions (such as Articles 328 and 331 of the Civil Code) to safeguard the rights of minority partners. These approaches emphasize the judiciary’s role in preventing rights violations and aim to establish a balance between majority rule and corporate justice. Ultimately, the research underscores the necessity of reforming relevant laws, developing stronger protective regulations, and enhancing partners’ awareness of their rights and obligations. Such efforts can serve as a legal policy guideline and help reduce litigation in private joint stock companies.

This study conducts a comparative analysis of the criminal policy of Iran and the United Kingdom concerning the use of narcotic drugs, and explains the logic behind integrating punishment with health-oriented interventions. The research follows a descriptive–analytical approach and relies on primary legal sources, sentencing guidelines, and executive documents. For comparison, the study employs a three-dimensional matrix—legislative, judicial, and executive—against four policy criteria: proportionality, deterrent effectiveness, alignment with public health, and enforceability. The findings indicate that Iran criminalizes “use/addiction” but Articles 15 and 16 of the Anti-Narcotics Law provide treatment-oriented pathways for exemption or suspension of prosecution, thereby facilitating the legal exit of the user from the criminal cycle. In the United Kingdom, “use” per se is not criminalized, and criminal policy exerts its practical effect through the criminalization of “possession” under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 and the focus on production and supply under the Psychoactive Substances Act 2016. Sentencing is calibrated through binding guidelines of the Sentencing Council, and treatment-oriented community orders offer an alternative to short-term imprisonment. The executive analysis reveals that Iran, in order to enhance the effectiveness of its response to drug use, requires standardization of criminal decision-making, continuity of treatment from prison to community, and integration of health–justice data systems. Conversely, the United Kingdom—through its “From Harm to Hope” strategy, mandatory treatment requirements in community orders, and expanded access to naloxone—presents a more coherent model. Accordingly, the article recommends developing criteria-based sentencing guidelines, institutionalizing diversion from prosecution conditional on treatment, implementing the “Take-Home Naloxone” protocol, and establishing online dashboards for monitoring coverage and outcomes as key policy implications.

If a trial is fair, the rights of the parties will not be violated, since justice itself is a right, and no judicial process should be conducted in a way that undermines fairness. One of the main objectives of the judiciary is to ensure justice and to resolve disputes; therefore, judges must act in a manner that guarantees a fair trial. The realization of a fair trial requires adherence to a set of procedural and substantive principles throughout the judicial process. The barriers to implementing the general principles of law include legal, substantive, procedural, cultural, and economic obstacles. If these barriers are not removed, they will distort the path of justice, erode public trust in the judiciary, and produce negative social consequences. The International Court of Justice (ICJ), in accordance with the general principle of pacta sunt servanda (good faith in treaty performance) and based on its contentious and advisory jurisdiction, issues two types of decisions: judgments (contentious rulings) and advisory opinions. Moreover, before issuing a final judgment, the Court may, under Article 41 of its Statute, order provisional measures. The present paper examines the barriers to implementing the general principles of civil litigation in Iran, particularly in relation to the execution of the ICJ’s decisions—especially provisional measures and advisory opinions—despite their non-binding nature, as well as the mechanisms for rendering such decisions binding and the challenges associated with their enforcement.

The present study, titled “Comparative Analysis of the Criminalization of Offenses against Administrative Integrity in Iran and Afghanistan in Light of the Merida Convention,” aims to examine the extent to which the criminal policies of the two countries conform to international anti-corruption standards. The research method is descriptive–analytical and based on a comparative study of national and international legal documents. This article first explicates the theoretical concepts of criminalization and administrative integrity and then examines the international framework of the Merida Convention and its governing principles, including transparency, accountability, international cooperation, prevention, and asset recovery. Subsequently, the legal systems of Iran—such as the Islamic Penal Code, the Law on Intensifying Punishment for Perpetrators of Bribery, Embezzlement, and Fraud, and the Law on Promotion of the Administrative Health System and Combating Corruption—and those of Afghanistan—such as the Penal Code (2017) and the Law on Combating Administrative Corruption (2018)—are analyzed. The findings indicate that Afghanistan has taken a step further than Iran in terms of the comprehensiveness of criminalization and alignment with the provisions of the Convention, while Iran possesses stronger jurisprudential foundations and institutional structures. Nevertheless, both countries face challenges such as legislative fragmentation, weak enforcement mechanisms, lack of protection for whistleblowers, and the influence of political structures on law enforcement. It is concluded that achieving administrative integrity requires legislative reforms, strengthening institutional independence, and institutionalizing a culture of transparency and accountability so that the obligations contained in the Merida Convention can be effectively and sustainably implemented.

The present article examines the role of judicial precedents in achieving economic balance between contracting parties within the framework of contract law. The main issue addressed in this study is that, despite the existence of civil and commercial laws as well as consumer protection regulations, the realization of economic justice and protection of the weaker party in contracts faces considerable challenges in practice in Iran. The primary objective of the research is to identify the legal instruments and judicial practices that effectively promote economic balance and to conduct a comparative analysis with the legal systems of France, Germany, and the United States. The research method is descriptive–analytical, employing domestic and international legal sources, judicial decisions, international instruments such as the CISG and UNIDROIT Principles, and comparative evaluation of domestic and foreign precedents. The findings indicate that, although Iranian legislation provides the initial tools for protecting the weaker contractual party, legislative gaps, enforcement limitations, and the absence of unified judicial practice have hindered the full realization of economic balance in practice. Comparative analysis with France, Germany, and the United States reveals that coherent, dynamic, and principle-based judicial precedents can play a significant role in protecting weaker parties and establishing economic justice. Moreover, the incorporation of international instruments enhances alignment with global standards and increases the legal security of contracting parties. The study demonstrates that, to improve the practical performance of Iran’s judiciary, it is necessary to provide judicial training, develop guidelines, and promote judicial consistency to ensure that economic justice is achieved in a systematic and continuous manner. The findings further suggest that international experience can serve as an effective guide for reforming domestic judicial practices and adapting laws and procedures to evolving economic and social conditions. This research, through its practical and comparative analysis, underscores the importance of integrating domestic and international law to achieve economic justice and shows that judicial precedents can become an effective mechanism for protecting the weaker party in contractual relationships.