دانشگاه شهید بهشتی فصلنامه تحقیقات حقوقی 1024-0772 29 2 2026 07 23 Editorial 114 سخن سردبیر 114 1 2 107422 10.48308/jlr.2026.246386.3175 FA منصور امینی 0000-0002-5487-653X Journal Article 2026 09 07 In the summer of 2026, coinciding with the conclusion of another academic term and the administration of students examinations, Issue 114 of the Legal Research was published. In this issue the selected articles have been published after undergoing different phases of formal and substantive review, literary and technical editing and final page layout. In this regard, we appreciate all esteemed authors, who collaborated with us to complete the preparation process. The first article of this issue No. 114 is dedicated to "A Reflection on the Institutions, Stakeholders, and Modes of Water Governance in the Legal Systems of Iran and Afghanistan". This article studies water governance through analyzing legal and institutional structures and considering Iran's and Afghanistan's legal systems. Moreover, this issue of Legal Research encompasses topics in various areas including International Law, Intellectual Property Law, Civil Procedure Law, Criminal Law & Criminology, Human Rights, Civil Liability Law, Child Law, Contract Law and Public Law containing articles from esteemed and prominent authors aiming to provide readers with appropriate content in different legal fields. We respectfully request the authors to fully study the journal's guidelines before submitting their articles to get informed of the journal's formal and substantive requirements. This leads to time reduction in evaluation and review process and prevents the prolongation of initial formal review before substantive review. We desire that the review process be completed in a reasonable and standard time however the initial formal and structural deficiencies including failure to adhere to word count limits or journal's citation method and etc. hinder the achievement of this goal. We also recommend that respected authors, if they use artificial intelligence to find sources relevant to their field of study, personally examine and analyze the sources suggested by the AI. Sometimes, the sources introduced by AI do not actually exist, or their information is incomplete or incorrect, which calls the authenticity of the article into question. We strive at various stages, including the technical editing stage, to minimize such cases; however, on this path, we need the cooperation of respected authors, their adherence to the prevailing rules and regulations, and their commitment to the principles of research ethics. We strive to publish the journal's issues on time and consistently to play our constructive and efficient role and develop the existing legal literature with our respected audience as part of our social responsibility. Please share any suggestions and criticisms with us via the journal's email address: law.res.mag@sbu.ac.ir. سخن سردبیر در تابستان 1405 و همزمان با پایان یک ترم تحصیلی دیگر و برگزاری امتحانات دانشجویان، شماره 114 فصلنامه تحقیقات حقوقی، منتشر شد. در این شماره نیز مجموعه مقالات منتخب پس از طی فرآیندهای مختلف داوری‌های شکلی و ماهوی، ویراستاری‌های ادبی و فنی و نهایتا صفحه‌آرایی، منتشر گردید. در همین راستا، از همه نویسندگان عزیز، که در طول این مسیر ما را همراهی کردند، صمیمانه سپاسگزاریم. اولین مقاله از شماره 114 این فصلنامه به عنوان «تأملی درباره نهادها، کنشگران و شیوۀ حکمرانی آب در نظام حقوقی ایران و افغانستان» اختصاص یافته‌است. این مقاله با تحلیل‌ ساختارهای حقوقی و نهادی، به مساله حکمرانی آب می‌پردازد و در این مطالعه، نظام حقوقی ایران و افغانستان را مورد بررسی قرار می‌دهد. همچنین این شماره از فصلنامه تحقیقات حقوقی، مقالاتی با موضوعات متنوع دیگری را نیز پوشش می‌دهد. ازجمله در حوزه‌های حقوق بین‌الملل، حقوق مالکیت فکری، حقوق آیین دادرسی مدنی، حقوق جزا و جرم‌شناسی، حقوق بشر، حقوق مسئولیت مدنی، حقوق کودک، حقوق قراردادها و حقوق عمومی، مقالاتی از نویسندگان مبرز و برجسته انتخاب شدند تا محتوای مناسب به مخاطبانی با حوزه‌های مطالعاتی گوناگون ارائه گردد. همچنان از نویسندگان گرامی تقاضا داریم قبل از ثبت و ارسال مقاله به فصلنامه تحقیقات حقوقی، حتما راهنمای نویسندگان این فصلنامه را مطالعه نمایند تا از مشروح شرایط شکلی و ماهوی مقالات در این مجله مطلع گردند. این امر به کاهش مدت زمان ارزیابی و داوری مقاله کمک می‌کند و از طولانی‌شدن فرآیندهای بررسی اولیه شکلی برای ورود مقالات به داوری ماهوی، جلوگیری می‌نماید. ما تمایل داریم که فرآیندهای داوری در یک بازه زمانی متعارف و معقول طی گردد؛ اما گاهی‌اوقات ایرادات شکلی و ساختاری اولیه مانند عدم رعایت محدودیت حجمی واژگان یا عدم رعایت شیوه استناددهی این فصلنامه و مانند آنها، مانع تحقق این هدف می‌گردد. همچنین به نویسندگان محترم توصیه می‌کنیم درصورتی‌که برای یافتن منابع مرتبط با موضوع مطالعاتی خود از هوش مصنوعی بهره می‌گیرند، حتما منابع پیشنهادی معرفی‌شده توسط هوش مصنوعی را شخصا مورد بررسی و تحلیل قرار دهند. گاهی‌اوقات منابع معرفی‌شده توسط هوش مصنوعی وجود خارجی ندارند یا اطلاعات آنها ناقص یا اشتباه است و همین امر اصالت علمی مقاله را زیر سوال می‌برد. ما در مراحل مختلف ازجمله در مرحله ویراستاری فنی، تلاش می‌کنیم که این موارد را به حداقل برسانیم اما در این مسیر نیازمند همراهی نویسندگان محترم و رعایت ضوابط و مقررات حاکم و نیز پایبندی به اصول اخلاق در پژوهش هستیم. ما تلاش می‌کنیم تا با انتشار به‌موقع و منظم مقالات، نقش سازنده و کارآمد یک فصلنامه علمی-پژوهشی را ایفا نماییم و در کنار شما مخاطبان و اندیشمندان گرامی، به مسئولیت اجتماعی خود در راستای توسعه ادبیات حقوقی کشور عمل کنیم. لطفا هرگونه پیشنهادات و انتقادات سازنده خود را از طریق رایانامه مجله، به نشانی law.res.mag@sbu.ac.ir با ما در میان بگذارید.

https://lawresearchmagazine.sbu.ac.ir/article_107422_1c70acd0fd64edb0856b7cf34393ab02.pdf

دانشگاه شهید بهشتی فصلنامه تحقیقات حقوقی 1024-0772 29 2 2026 07 23 A Reflection on the Institutions, Stakeholders, and Modes of Water Governance in the Legal Systems of Iran and Afghanistan تأملی درباره نهادها، کنشگران و شیوۀ حکمرانی آب در نظام حقوقی ایران و افغانستان 1 28 103692 10.52547/jlr.2023.229665.2387 FA علی اکبر گرجی ازندریانی استاد، دانشکده حقوق، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران. کبرا حسینی دانشجوی دکتری، دانشکده حقوق، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران (نویسنده مسئول) k_hossaini@sbu.ac.ir 0009-0006-9709-5684 Journal Article 2023 01 08 Introduction Transformations in water management over recent decades demonstrate that the water cycle is not merely a technical or operational matter; rather, its quality depends on the organization of institutions, the relationship between state and society, and the modes through which power is exercised. The transition of countries from private ownership and state-centered water management to governance-oriented models further indicates that contemporary water management operates within a more complex framework grounded in broader institutional and social arrangements—an approach commonly referred to as good water governance. As a component of public governance, water governance rests on the design of socially accepted policies, the establishment of effective institutional frameworks, and the mobilization of social resources for managing water resources and services. Adopting the good water governance approach, this article examines three structural components—institutions, actors, and management styles—in the legal systems of the Islamic Republic of Iran and Afghanistan to clarify the position of each country along the path toward desirable water governance. Methods The research methodology is based on documentary and structural analysis; however, unlike the conventional separation of literature and method, the theoretical concepts and analytical tools are developed within the examination of institutional and legal structures in both countries. By reviewing laws, regulations, policy documents, strategic plans, governmental resolutions, and organizational structures related to water in Iran and Afghanistan, the study first traces the evolution of formal and informal institutions and then reconstructs the water management model in each country through an analysis of actors and management styles. This approach—anchored in the direct linkage between institutional discussions and legal-administrative frameworks—allows the comparative analysis of the two countries to unfold not as a separate section but continuously throughout the examination of each component. Results and Discussion The findings indicate that in Iran, formal water institutions hold a dominant and nearly exclusive role in managing water resources and services. From the Constitutional Revolution to the present, the evolution of water institutions—from the Civil Code and the Qanats Law to the Law on Water and Its Nationalization, the Law on Fair Distribution of Water, the establishment of the Ministry of Water and Electricity and later the Ministry of Energy, the creation of regional water companies, and the Supreme Water Council—has consistently reinforced centralized management and strengthened the role of the state. Although post-revolution strategic documents emphasize principles such as integrated water-cycle management, recognition of the economic and security value of water, improved efficiency, and public participation, the institutional structure in practice has remained hierarchical and state-centered. Traditional informal institutions such as Mirabs, which once played a significant role in regulating relations among water users, have lost their position, and water user associations are largely products of state policies rather than local traditions. Consequently, water-sector actors in Iran are predominantly governmental, and civil society and local communities have limited direct involvement in decision-making and policy processes. This institutional configuration has steered water management toward a hierarchical model in which decisions are made centrally and implemented at lower levels, while water networks and markets emerge only marginally and under the close supervision of formal institutions. In Afghanistan, however, the findings present a different yet complex picture. During the period of the Islamic Republic, inspired by the EU Water Framework Directive, efforts were made to shift water management from a fragmented system rooted in traditional Mirab-based practices to a basin-oriented, participatory, and multi-actor model. The establishment of the Ministry of Water and Energy, the Water Affairs Regulation Authority, the delineation of major and minor river basins, the formation of basin advisory councils, and the formal recognition of water user associations all reflect the combination of formal and informal institutions and the attempt to involve local communities and water users in resource management. Within this institutional framework, governmental and non-governmental actors operate alongside one another: the Ministry of Water and Energy, the Ministry of Agriculture, local administrations, advisory councils, and water user associations each assume part of the responsibilities related to regulation, allocation, monitoring, and dispute resolution. The interaction of these institutional arrangements and actor configurations has produced a management style that blends network-based and market-oriented elements. Nevertheless, political instability, prolonged conflict, legal changes—particularly the weakening of explicit provisions on user participation in the new water law—and limited administrative and financial capacity have prevented this hybrid model from being fully and sustainably realized. Conclusion The overall outlook of the study shows that Iran and Afghanistan both face significant challenges in water management and follow different trajectories in their transition toward good water governance. In Iran, the persistence of a centralized and state-dominated structure has restricted stakeholder participation and slowed the shift toward participatory and multi-actor models. Moreover, the historical dependence of water management on state institutions and the weakness of intersectoral coordination mechanisms have further complicated reform efforts. In Afghanistan, although basin-based and participatory mechanisms have begun to take shape and a combination of formal and informal institutions has emerged, political instability and limited institutional capacity have hindered the consolidation of these developments. Additionally, financial constraints and administrative fragility have intensified the difficulties of transition. These findings demonstrate that the three structural components—institutions, actors, and management styles—have shaped distinct pathways for the two countries in their movement toward good water governance; however, neither has yet achieved a fully realized model. امروزه که مدیریت آب تابع ترتیبات سازمانی بسیار پیچیده و متنوعی در جهان است، بررسی عناصر ساختاری چون نهادها، کنشگران و شیوۀ حکمرانی به تحلیل و ارزیابی نظام‌مند حکمرانی آب کمک می‌نماید. با توجه به اینکه ویژگی‌های این عناصر اثر تعیین‌کننده‌ای بر عملکرد حکمرانی آب کشورها دارد، این تحقیق در پی بررسی چگونگی مؤلفه‌های فوق در نظام حکمرانی آب ایران و افغانستان است. در این راستا، در بحث نهادها که تعیین‌گر نحوۀ ادارۀ منابع آب‌اند، نهادهای رسمی نقش و جایگاه برجسته‌ای در حکمرانی آب هر دو کشور دارند، هرچند در افغانستان نهادهای غیررسمی نیز در مدیریت آب‌های کشاورزی دارای فعالیت چشمگیری هستند. در بحث کنشگران، باتوجه‌به اضلاع مثلث کنشگران حکمرانی خوب آب (دولت، ملت و جامعۀ مدنی) کنشگران مدیریت آب ایران دولتی بوده، مردم و جامعۀ مدنی در این عرصه حضور نداشته و برای به صحنه کشیدن آنها تدبیری سنجیده نشده است؛ ازاین‌رو شیوۀ مدیریت آب نیز در ایران سلسله‌مراتبی بوده و تصامیم اصلی باتوجه‌به سیاست‌های دولت حاکم اخذ و توسط وزارت‌ها و ادارات مربوطه اجرا می‌گردد. اما در افغانستان باتوجه‌به سیاست‌ها و قوانین بیست‌سالۀ نظام جمهوری اسلامی و آنچه در عمل جریان داشته، به هدف تأمین حکومت‌داری خوب آب، تمایل به مدیریت غیرمتمرکز با ترکیب شیوۀ شبکه و بازار به محوریت وزارت آب و انرژی، حوضه‌های دریایی و مشارکت مردم بوده است.

https://lawresearchmagazine.sbu.ac.ir/article_103692_a261a0243637a85982c357e5b6a75197.pdf

دانشگاه شهید بهشتی فصلنامه تحقیقات حقوقی 1024-0772 29 2 2026 07 23 Limitations of the Right to Disclose the Work by the Author on Copyright Exploitation Contracts; Comparative Study of Iranian and French Law محدودیت‌های حق افشای اثر توسط پدیدآورنده بر قراردادهای بهره‌برداری از حقوق مؤلف؛ مطالعه تطبیقی حقوق ایران و فرانسه 29 44 106711 10.48308/jlr.2026.239457.2882 FA پژمان محمدی استاد، دانشکده حقوق، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران (نویسنده مسئول) p.mohamadi@modares.ac.ir 0000-0002-2475-2229 سعیده حسینی کارشناس‌ارشد، دانشکده حقوق، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران 0009-0001-7824-1811 Journal Article 2025 04 16 Introduction The right of disclosure is one of the author's moral rights and, more than in any other jurisdiction, owes its development to French case law. It plays a fundamental role in protecting the author's privacy and maintaining the author's control over the work. The similarities between Iranian and French law regarding the recognition and exercise of authors' rights have made it necessary to examine the present issue in both legal systems. While the consistent jurisprudence of French courts has led the French legislature to recognize this right and define the scope of its effects in various situations, no comparable clarity can be found in either Iranian legislation or judicial practice. This article examines the effects of the right of disclosure on the economic rights of exploiters. One of the principal questions addressed is whether the right of disclosure may be modified or transferred within exploitation licensing agreements. Using a descriptive-analytical method and relying on library resources, the article reaches a negative conclusion. The authors believe that the right of disclosure cannot be modified or transferred to the holder of an exploitation licence and is not extinguished even by the conclusion of employment, commission, or work-for-hire contracts for the creation of a work. The findings of this comparative study demonstrate that the right of disclosure is both non-transferable and non-waivable and therefore cannot be assigned to another person or relinquished by the author. Consequently, the author retains the right to decide on the time and manner of disclosure of the work, even after transferring the economic rights in the work, granting an exploitation licence, or entering into an employment or commission contract for its creation. In cases where a conflict arises between the author's moral right of disclosure and the concurrent economic rights of the contracting party, the author's moral right of disclosure generally remains protected, even where it is subject to limited modification. Such protection may restrict the economic rights of the contracting party and, in certain circumstances, may even expose them to extinction. Methods In this study, a descriptive-analytical research method with a comparative approach was used, and its discussions were organized in several sections. In the concepts section, the theoretical foundations of the right of disclosure, including its definition, the position of the right of disclosure in French and Iranian law, and the status of this right in copyright exploitation contracts were examined. Then, in the restriction of the right of disclosure section, the effect of this right on the exercise of the financial rights of the exploiter was analyzed, and the restrictions resulting from it in relation to the right of reproduction, the right of presentation, the right of performance, and the right to create derivative works were studied. Next, the elimination of the right of disclosure section examined the role of this right in nullifying or suspending financial rights in commission contracts and employment contracts, and showed that the exercise of the right of disclosure can challenge the implementation of these contracts. In the final section, solutions are presented to reduce the negative effects of the right of disclosure and manage the risks arising from it in contractual relations. Theoretical findings show that the right of disclosure, in addition to initial publication, also affects republishing, display, reproduction, and even the format of presentation of the work, and that the exploitation of financial rights will remain suspended until the creator allows disclosure. Results and Discussions Comparative analysis shows that the priority of the right of disclosure over financial rights is an accepted rule in both legal systems. As a result, even a valid publishing or licensing agreement cannot oblige the author to disclose unless he exercises this right freely and knowingly. For example, if the publisher has the right to publish a book according to the agreement but the author has not yet published it or refuses to deliver it, the publisher cannot demand that he be forced to publish and may only have the right to compensation. This situation is also repeated in commission and employment contracts because the obligation to disclose before the work appears is tantamount to the abandonment of a right that has not yet been created and is therefore considered to be without binding effect. Thus, although the employer or client becomes the owner of financial rights, he does not have the practical possibility of exercising financial rights until the author intends to disclose. This indicates that the right of disclosure is not only an individual right but also a protective tool to maintain the independence of the artist's creativity. If the creator refuses to disclose without a valid reason and this refusal causes damage, his civil liability will be examined. Therefore, the right to disclose does not in itself prevent the execution of the contract, but it can suspend its execution for an indefinite period and, in the absence of a clear contractual provision, cause significant economic losses. As a result, disclosure plays a decisive role in the balance between moral and financial rights, and the lack of a contractual provision regarding the time and manner of disclosure increases the legal and economic risk of the exploiter. In the meantime, the role of a precise and transparent exploitation contract becomes more important than ever, because only by including clear terms can disputes and lengthy lawsuits be prevented. Conclusion Based on the comparison of the two systems, it is clear that the right of disclosure has legal priority over financial rights and can limit, suspend, or nullify the execution of the contract even after the transfer or granting of a license to exploit financial rights. In practice, this may put the economic interests of the exploiter at risk, especially when financial investments have been made before disclosure. Therefore, it is suggested that publishing and exploitation contracts include explicit clauses regarding the time of disclosure, the limits of possible delays, the guarantee of non-disclosure, the obligation, and the right to terminate. Such provisions can ensure a balance between the will of the creator and the interests of the exploiter and prevent subsequent disputes. In addition, raising the legal awareness of publishers and employers and educating them about the status of the right of disclosure can help reduce economic risks. Finally, the right of disclosure as a moral right can establish a link between creative freedom and economic order and, for this reason, should be considered carefully and delicately in any legal system. حق افشای اثر یکی از حقوق معنوی پدیدآورنده است که بیش از هر کشوری زاده‌ رویه قضایی کشور فرانسه است و نقشی اساسی در حفظ حریم خصوصی و کنترل پدیدآورنده بر اثرش ایفا می‌کند. نزدیکی حقوق ایران و فرانسه در شناسایی و اعمال حقوق پدیدآورنده، باعث ایجاد ضرورت بررسی موضوع حاضر در دو نظام حقوقی مذکور شده است. درحالی‌که رویه قضایی مستمر فرانسه در این زمینه قانون‌گذار آن کشور را به شناسایی این حق و تعیین قلمرو تأثیرگذاری آن در موارد مختلف واداشته است، در ایران چنین وضوحی در رویه قضایی یا قوانین دیده نمی‌شود. این مقاله به بررسی تأثیرات حق افشا بر حقوق مالی بهره‌برداران پرداخته است. یکی از سؤالات اصلی این است که آیا حق افشا در قراردادهای مجوز بهره‌برداری قابل تعدیل و واگذاری است یا خیر. این مقاله با روش تحلیلی و توصیفی و با استفاده از منابع کتابخانه‌ای در پاسخ به این پرسش به نتیجه منفی دست یافته است. نویسندگان باور دارند که حق افشا قابل تعدیل و واگذاری به دارنده مجوز بهره‌برداری نیست و حتی با انعقاد قرارداد کار یا سفارش یا استخدام برای خلق اثر نیز ساقط نمی‌شود. در واقع، یافته‌های این مقاله پس از انجام مطالعه تطبیقی در این دو نظام حقوقی نشان می‌دهد که حق افشا یک حق غیرقابل انتقال و غیرقابل اسقاط است و نمی‌توان آن را به دیگری واگذار یا از آن صرف‌نظر کرد. در نتیجه، پدیدآورنده همچنان حق دارد که درمورد زمان و نحوه افشا اثر خود تصمیم بگیرد؛ حتی اگر حقوق مالی اثر را منتقل یا مجوز بهره‌برداری آن را اعطا کرده باشد یا برای خلق اثر قرارداد استخدام یا سفارش منعقد کرده باشد. در واقع، در فرض تعارض حق پدیدآورنده و حق مالی هم‌زمان طرف قرارداد وی غالباً، حق معنوی افشای اثر توسط پدیدآورنده اگرچه تعدیل هم بشود، در امان می‌ماند و این ماندگاری و محافظت، می‌تواند گاهی حقوق مالی طرف قرارداد با پدیدآورنده را محدود کند و‌ حتی در معرض زوال و‌ نابودی، قرار دهد.

https://lawresearchmagazine.sbu.ac.ir/article_106711_1040baeb8ff76589c85cb9665c87bc54.pdf

دانشگاه شهید بهشتی فصلنامه تحقیقات حقوقی 1024-0772 29 2 2026 07 23 Biological Dimensions of Male Sexual Victimization زمینه‌های زیستی بزه‌دیدگی جنسی مردان 45 66 107039 10.48308/jlr.2026.241705.2963 FA عارف اسماعیل زاده کارشناس‌ارشد، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی: واحد علوم و تحقیقات، تهران، ایران 0009-0003-9752-5806 علی صفاری دانشیار، دانشکده حقوق، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران (نویسنده مسئول) alisaffary2020@gmail.com 0000-0002-3466-445X راضیه صابری استادیار، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی: واحد علوم و تحقیقات، تهران، ایران 0000-0001-7564-7042 Journal Article 2025 09 26 Introduction Male sexual victimization, despite its growing importance in victimology and criminology studies, remains one of the less addressed areas in scientific research and criminal policymaking. The historical focus of criminological literature on female victimization has led to the formation of a gender dichotomy in the analysis of sexual crimes; such that men are often perceived as powerful actors or potential perpetrators of violence, and the possibility of their sexual victimization is overlooked. This perspective, in addition to creating a theoretical gap in victimology, has led to the misinterpretation of many behavioral, psychological, and biological reactions exhibited by male victims within the criminal justice system. Consequently, reactions such as behavioral freezing, silence, delayed reporting, or impairments in recounting the incident are sometimes mistakenly interpreted as signs of consent or a lack of coercion. By focusing on the "biological contexts of male sexual victimization," this research seeks to demonstrate that sexual victimization is not merely the product of social and cultural factors; rather, biological, genetic, hormonal, physiological, and neurobiological factors also play a significant role in increasing or exacerbating male vulnerability. The main objective of the study is to identify and analyze the biological mechanisms affecting male sexual victimization and to elucidate how these mechanisms interact with high-risk environments and social structures. Furthermore, at an applied level, the research strives to explain the legal and judicial implications of these findings to achieve a more accurate understanding of the concepts of consent, coercion, involuntary reactions, and the evaluation of evidence in sexual crimes against men. The study is based on the premise that genetic characteristics, dysfunctions of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis, hormonal fluctuations, brain structure dysfunctions, and physiological vulnerabilities, in interaction with social and cultural contexts, can increase the probability of male sexual victimization. Therefore, the research seeks to provide a multidimensional model of male sexual victimization in which biological and environmental factors are analyzed concurrently. Methods The research was conducted using a mixed-methods approach, combining qualitative methods and theoretical studies to enable a multi-layered analysis of male sexual victimization. In the qualitative section, data were collected through semi-structured interviews and the Delphi technique. Participants included experts in the fields of victimology, psychiatry, psychology, neuroscience, criminal biology, and physiology, who were selected using purposive sampling. The Delphi process was conducted in three stages, involving a total of 18 experts. Additionally, interviews were conducted with some men who had lived experiences of sexual victimization; however, their data were not directly used in the final analysis due to limitations in verifying the narratives and the presence of psychological barriers. Data analysis was performed using MAXQDA software based on inductive coding. The data obtained from the interviews were categorized into conceptual categories and subcategories, and subsequently integrated with the theoretical findings. In the theoretical section, a systematic review of domestic and international scientific literature in the fields of behavioral genetics, neuroscience, psychobiology, victimology, and criminal law was conducted. The objective of this stage was to complete the conceptual framework of the study and elucidate the relationship between biological factors and male sexual victimization. Results and Discussions The study revealed that male sexual victimization is influenced by a complex set of biological factors categorized into four main domains: genetic, physiological, neurobiological, and hormonal. In the genetic dimension, the results demonstrated that certain gene polymorphisms, particularly the 5-HTTLPR gene and genes associated with the HPA axis such as FKBP5 and CRHR1, play a crucial role in regulating stress, emotion, and response to threat. Individuals possessing sensitive variants of these genes exhibit more severe reactions, such as fear, behavioral freezing, anxiety, or submissiveness, when confronted with stressful situations. The findings also support the "differential susceptibility" theory, meaning that some individuals are biologically more sensitive to their environment and, in high-risk situations, display greater vulnerability to victimization. In the realm of physiology, the research indicated that physical weaknesses, motor disabilities, developmental disorders, and sensory limitations can increase the likelihood of male sexual victimization. Men who have weak defensive reactions or greater dependence on others are more susceptible to abuse in power-centric relationships or environments lacking effective supervision. Furthermore, certain physical appearances and non-aggressive body language may be perceived by offenders as signs of weakness or an inability to report the crime. The findings showed that, in many cases, the primary motivation of the offender is not sexual desire, but domination, humiliation, and the exercise of power. At the neurobiological level, three key brain structures, including the amygdala, hippocampus, and prefrontal cortex, played a prominent role in increasing or decreasing vulnerability. Amygdala dysfunction can lead to deficient threat detection or the manifestation of a freezing response; a reaction that, in sexual crimes against men, might be misconstrued as implied consent. Additionally, hippocampal impairments can disrupt the victim's narrative memory, resulting in amnesia or distortion of the incident's details. Under such circumstances, inconsistencies in the narrative or inability to accurately recall the time and place should not be interpreted as deception. Moreover, dysfunction in the prefrontal cortex causes impaired decision-making, poor impulse control, and inability to respond effectively to danger. In the hormonal domain, the findings revealed that testosterone, cortisol, and oxytocin play a dual and complex role in male sexual victimization. Elevated testosterone levels can reduce sensitivity to social threats and drive individuals toward high-risk situations, whereas its reduction is associated with passivity, social anxiety, and silence in the face of victimization. Cortisol, as a biomarker of chronic stress, during prolonged activation of the HPA axis, causes structural brain changes, memory impairment, anxiety, and diminished coping capacity. Likewise, oxytocin, contrary to popular belief, is not solely the hormone of empathy and trust, but can also lead to "misplaced trust" or "trauma bonding," a condition wherein the victim develops emotional dependence on the perpetrator. Conclusion Male sexual victimization cannot be analyzed solely by relying on social or psychological explanations; rather, biological and neurobiological factors also play a fundamental role in shaping and exacerbating vulnerability. Genes, hormones, brain structures, and physiological characteristics, in interaction with cultural and social conditions, generate distinct patterns of threat response, silence, freezing, or an inability to defend oneself. These findings hold direct significance for the criminal justice system, as they can prevent the misinterpretation of male victims' behavior and prove effective in assessing consent, coercion, the credibility of testimony, and the analysis of evidence. The research results also underscore the necessity of training judges, law enforcement officers, and mental health professionals regarding the neurobiological reactions of victims. Ultimately, the present study demonstrates that preventive and therapeutic policies concerning male sexual victimization must be founded on an interdisciplinary approach, grounded in modern victimology, neuroscience, and criminal law, to facilitate more effective support for male victims and mitigate secondary victimization بزه‌دیدگی جنسی مردان دارای ابعاد زیستی مهمی است که می‌تواند در افزایش آسیب‌پذیری آنان نقش تعیین‌کننده‌ای داشته باشد. این پژوهش با هدف بررسی عوامل زیستی شامل ویژگی‌های ژنتیکی، هورمونی، فیزیولوژیکی و نوروبیولوژیکی و تأثیر آنها بر بروز و شدت بزه‌دیدگی جنسی مردان انجام شده است. این پژوهش با رویکرد آمیخته انجام شد. در بخش کیفی، داده‌ها از طریق مصاحبه‌های عمیق با مردان دارای تجربه زیسته و اجرای تکنیک دلفی میان متخصصان گردآوری شد. برای انتخاب مشارکت‌کنندگان، از روش نمونه‌گیری هدفمند با معیارهای مشخص استفاده شد. داده‌ها با نرم‌افزار MAXQDA و رویکرد کدگذاری استقرایی تحلیل شدند. در بخش نظری نیز مرور نظام‌مند منابع علمی برای تکمیل چهارچوب مفهومی صورت گرفت. یافته‌های پژوهش نشان می‌دهد مجموعه‌ای از عوامل زیستی، ازجمله زمینه‌های ژنتیکی و اختلال در محور HPA، ناتوانی‌ها و ضعف‌های جسمی، اختلال عملکرد آمیگدال، هیپوکامپ و قشر پیش‌پیشانی، و نیز نوسانات هورمونی، در تعامل با محیط‌های پرخطر، آسیب‌پذیری مردان را به‌طور معناداری افزایش می‌دهند. توجه به این داده‌ها می‌تواند در ارزیابی ادله، احراز رضایت، تشخیص اکراه و تضمین دادرسی منصفانه در جرائم جنسی علیه مردان نقش تعیین‌کننده‌ای ایفا کند و از بزه‌دیدگی ثانویه در نظام عدالت کیفری جلوگیری نماید. بزه‌دیدگی جنسی مردان صرفاً اجتماعی یا روان‌شناختی نیست، بلکه ریشه‌های زیستی نیز در آن مؤثرند. تعامل این عوامل با شرایط اجتماعی آسیب‌پذیری مردان را تشدید می‌کند. بنابراین توجه به ابعاد زیستی در سیاست‌گذاری‌های پیشگیرانه و درمانی ضروری است و می‌تواند مبنای طراحی مداخلات چندلایه برای حمایت از مردان بزه‌دیده قرار گیرد.

https://lawresearchmagazine.sbu.ac.ir/article_107039_11f0c83454755d903bed39060f031455.pdf

دانشگاه شهید بهشتی فصلنامه تحقیقات حقوقی 1024-0772 29 2 2026 07 23 Feasibility of Adjusting the Expert Opinion at the Judgment Issuance Stage in Claims for Damages Arising from Breach of Financial Obligations امکان‌سنجی تعدیل نظریه کارشناس در مرحله صدور حکم در دعاوی مطالبه خسارت ناشی از نقض تعهدات مالی 67 84 106354 10.48308/jlr.2025.239342.2869 FA حسن بادینی دانشیار، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران آزاده شمس دانشجوی دکتری، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران (نویسنده مسئول) azade.shams@ut.ac.ir 0009-0002-2458-383X Journal Article 2025 04 05 Introduction A persistent and practical problem in the Iranian adjudicatory process for claims of monetary damages arises from reliance on expert valuations that are not updated to reflect the erosion of monetary value between the date of expertise and the date of judgment. Expert reports frequently constitute the factual and technical backbone of court determinations about quantum; yet, where protracted proceedings and inflationary economies intervene, the nominal sums established by experts at an earlier date may no longer represent the victim’s real loss at the time the judgment is enforced. This divergence undermines the compensatory objective of private law — namely, the restoration of the injured party to the position they would have occupied had the obligation been performed — and risks producing unjust enrichment of defaulting obligors. The present study asks whether, and on what legal and doctrinal bases, an expert’s valuation in disputes concerning breach of financial obligations should be adjusted at the judgment stage in light of economic changes, and seeks normative and practical solutions to align judicial practice with principles of corrective justice and procedural fairness. Methods The inquiry adopts a doctrinal-interpretive and comparative methodology. Domestically, the analysis stages a hermeneutic reading of foundational norms of Iranian private law and procedural law, including doctrinal principles derived from Islamic jurisprudence (notably the rule against harm and the imperative of real compensation), statutory provisions such as the Note to Article 19 of the Law on Official Experts, the analogous procedural provisions addressing valuation at execution, and pertinent judicial practice and advisory opinions. The study then subjects these domestic materials to critical scrutiny in light of comparative experience, paying particular attention to recent legislative developments in French contract law (post-2016 reforms recognizing interest and adjustment mechanisms) as a paradigmatic example of legal accommodation to monetary depreciation and delayed enforcement. Scholarly literature on expectation interest, delay damages, and the interface between compensation and usury concerns is surveyed to test doctrinal coherence and to illuminate possible models for implementation that remain sensitive to Iran’s legal and religious constraints. Results and Discussions The research finds that adjustment of expert valuations at the judgment stage is defensible both doctrinally and practically. From a substantive vantage, Iranian law’s underlying commitment to realizing the claimant’s expectation interest and to effecting real compensation supports modification of out-dated expert figures: allowing a report’s nominal sum to govern an eventual judgment without correction is inconsistent with the compensatory function of damages and effectively subsidizes delinquency. Statutory signals corroborate this view. The Note to Article 19 of the Law on Official Experts, by limiting the unqualified validity of valuations to a six-month horizon where “current price” determinations are at issue, manifests legislative awareness that time devalues expert findings. Other procedural and civil norms that invoke the price at time of execution or require restitution in contemporaneous value similarly imply that temporal adjustment is not alien to the legal system. Nevertheless, judicial practice has tended toward formalism: courts often adopt the earlier expert report unamended, and some appellate authorities have rejected anticipatory claims to post-judgment adjustment, thereby creating doctrinal friction between statutory purpose and adjudicative routine. The inquiry further distinguishes between monetary (purely pecuniary) obligations and complex, non-monetary financial obligations. In monetary obligations, the study suggests that indexation to official inflation measures or other reliable economic indicators can produce a rapid, administrable correction of the expert sum without the need for repeated technical inquiry; this preserves expedition while safeguarding substantive redress. By contrast, obligations whose value is tethered to market-specific inputs (for example, construction contracts or deliveries of goods with volatile input costs) often require a substantive reassessment by a domain expert because general inflation indices may not capture discrete price movements in sectoral elements such as materials or labour. Procedural fairness considerations are decisive: whenever an adjustment would produce a materially different outcome — conceived here as a substantial percentage deviation or a change in the valuation method — the court must notify the parties and afford an opportunity to contest or supplement the new assessment in order to preserve adversarial rights and the principle of equality of arms. Comparative experience, notably French practice of attaching post-judgment interest and granting appellate courts discretionary power to order adjustment, demonstrates viable institutional designs that reconcile speedy enforcement with protection against depreciation. Finally, the study addresses doctrinal concerns about usury by arguing that properly structured corrective interest or indexation intended solely to restore purchasing power — and not to provide a premium for delay — can be reconciled with Islamic prohibitions, provided the remedy is framed as compensatory rather than punitive or lucratively interest-bearing. Conclusion In sum, the study concludes that failure to adjust expert valuations between the date of expertise and the date of judgment frustrates the core aims of compensation law and weakens the deterrent capacity of contractual remedies. A legally coherent and practically workable approach is to institutionalize adjustment as part of the judgment stage: for monetary obligations, by applying transparent, official indices to revalue expert amounts; for non-monetary, market-sensitive obligations, by ordering a targeted reassessment by qualified experts; and in all cases by ensuring that substantial adjustments trigger procedural protections so that parties may contest the new assessment. If judicial practice remains resistant, a calibrated legislative amendment that explicitly empowers courts to revise valuations at judgment (mirroring the Note to Article 19’s spirit and providing a six-month threshold and criteria for substantial change) would reconcile statutory law with equitable compensation, shore up public confidence in the justice system, and secure more faithful restitution of expectation interests in inflationary conditions. چکیده یکی از چالش‌های عملی در دعاوی حقوقی مربوط به جبران خسارت، عدم توجه رویه قضایی به کاهش ارزش پول در رابطه با مبالغ مندرج در نظریة کارشناسی، در فاصلة زمانی میان صدور نظر کارشناسی و صدور حکم دادگاه است. این وضعیت ممکن است به زوال منفعت مورد انتظار طلبکار و همچنین استیفای ناروای عهدشکنان منجر گردد و به‌ویژه در بستر شرایط تورمی، مانع نیل زیان‌دیده به جبران خسارت به معنای اصیل و متعارف آن شود و با رویکرد احقاق کامل حقوق زیان‌دیده که یکی از مهم‌ترین اهداف نظام جبران خسارت است، ناسازگاری ماهوی دارد. بر مبنای اصول تفسیر هرمنوتیکی در احکام قانون مدنی و بهره‌گیری از ظرفیت‌های نهفته در نظام حقوقی ایران ازجمله معیار مستفاد از تبصره ماده ۱۹ قانون کانون کارشناسان رسمی دادگستری و نیز با الهام از الگوی مشابه در نظام حقوقی فرانسه، پیشنهاد می‌شود که نظریات کارشناسی که از تعرض مصون مانده یا به‌هرحال، مورد قبول دادگاه واقع شده‌اند، در هنگام صدور حکم نهایی، متناسب با نوع تعهد و اوضاع‌واحوال تورمی کشور، تعدیل و بازنگری شوند. چنین رهیافتی می‌تواند به تحقق عدالت تقنینی و قضایی، جبران خسارت به نحو اکمل و پیشگیری از تفویت حقوق زیان‌دیده منتج گردد. درصورتی‌که رویه قضایی به هر دلیلی در برابر این تغییر مقاومت نشان دهد، ضروری است که قانونگذار با بازنگری سنجیده و خردمندانة قانون آیین دادرسی مدنی، چنین سازوکاری را به‌صورت صریح پیش‌بینی کند. این تدبیر، نه‌فقط به تحقق بهتر منفعت انتظار طلبکار کمک می‌کند، بلکه موجب تقویت اعتماد عمومی به عدالت قضایی نیز خواهد شد.

https://lawresearchmagazine.sbu.ac.ir/article_106354_42b25a33bfce3f1f77b1861ea638bad7.pdf

دانشگاه شهید بهشتی فصلنامه تحقیقات حقوقی 1024-0772 29 2 2026 07 23 Feasibility of Participatory Budgeting in Iran According to Comparative Studies (Spain, France, Germany) امکان‌سنجی بودجه‌ریزی مشارکتی در ایران در پرتو مطالعات تطبیقی (اسپانیا، فرانسه، آلمان) 85 104 107159 10.48308/jlr.2024.235301.2711 FA سعیدرضا ابدی دانشیار، دانشکده حقوق، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران (نویسنده مسئول) s_abadi@sbu.ac.ir 5739-3324-0002-0000 فردوس صابرماهانی دانشجوی دکتری، دانشکده حقوق، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران 0000-0002-7003-050X Journal Article 2024 04 07 Introduction In recent decades, the decline of citizens' trust in political institutions and elected representatives has highlighted the need to redesign participatory mechanisms in public affairs management. Participatory Budgeting (PB), as a process in which non-elected citizens participate in the allocation or prioritization of public resources, has evolved since its inception in Porto Alegre, Brazil (1989) into one of the most effective tools for realizing direct democracy, reducing corruption, improving distributive justice, and enhancing public accountability. By 2019, over 12,000 PB cases had been identified across 71 countries. Despite the emphasis of several articles of the Iranian Constitution (Articles 3, 6, 43, 100, and provisions on councils) on public participation in all political, social, and economic dimensions, PB remains theoretically unexplored and practically neglected in Iran. Therefore, the main objective of this research is to assess the feasibility of establishing PB in Iran through a comparative study of three countries: Spain, France, and Germany. The research questions are: (1) What are the optimal models of PB and their key components? (2) Which models align with the PB systems of the aforementioned countries? (3) Is it possible to establish such a system in Iran given its existing legal and institutional contexts? Methods This research adopted a descriptive-comparative approach. First, by reviewing theoretical literature, six ideal models of PB—"Participatory Democracy", "Proximity Democracy", "Participatory Modernisation", "Multi-stakeholder Participation", "Neo-corporatism", and "Community Development"—were elaborated based on criteria such as citizens' decision-making power, socio-political objectives, degree of decentralization, the role of civil society, and resource allocation methods. Second, the experiences of Spain, France, and Germany were separately examined using reliable international reports, domestic laws, and previous studies, and then matched with the six models. Third, using documentary analysis, Iran's upstream laws (the Constitution, the Islamic Councils Act, and provisions regarding Neighborhood Councils or Shorayari), as well as the rulings of the Administrative Justice Court, were evaluated in terms of legal-institutional capacities and obstacles to establishing PB. Finally, by comparing the strengths of all three foreign models and localizing them with Iran's urban management structure, a hybrid model was proposed. Results and Discussions The comparative study reveals that Spain, inspired by the Porto Alegre experience, follows the "Participatory Democracy" model. In this model, non-elected citizens hold actual decision-making power, and projects are ranked based on distributive justice criteria to redistribute resources in favor of disadvantaged classes. Local councils and citizens' associations manage over 10% of the municipal budget, and civil society enjoys significant independence and influence in setting priorities. In France, PB is shaped within the framework of "Proximity Democracy". Through the establishment of neighborhood councils (mandatory for cities with over 80,000 inhabitants) and the strengthening of local budgets, its primary goals are decentralizing public decisions, bringing citizens and policymakers closer, and enhancing political legitimacy through local dialogues. Paris, allocating €100 million annually (5% of its investment budget), runs the largest PB program globally and employs digital tools ("civic technology") to facilitate participation. In Germany, however, a different approach prevails. PB is primarily advisory and emerged within the context of "Participatory Modernisation" in response to the fiscal crisis of the 1980s. Here, citizens are invited as "customers" of public services to submit cost-saving proposals, while final decision-making authority remains with elected officials. Around 280 German municipalities use this method. In the Iranian feasibility section, findings indicate that the Constitution provides robust legal foundations for citizen participation through principles such as "administration of the country based on public votes" (Art. 6), "general public participation" (Art. 3, para. 8), and "Islamic Councils" (Art. 100). Furthermore, council laws (especially Articles 80, paragraphs 5 and 7) and the experience of establishing Neighborhood Councils (Shorayari) in metropolises like Tehran demonstrate institutional capacity. However, the annulment of the Shorayari election resolution by the Administrative Justice Court (2016) and the lack of general decision-making competence for local units in Iran's legal system constitute serious obstacles. By combining the advantages of the three foreign models (Spain's justice-orientation, France's decentralization, and Germany's managerial efficiency) and adapting them to Iran's structure of Islamic Councils and Shorayari, a "hybrid model" can be designed. In this model, local councils act as intermediaries, the budgeting process is defined at three levels (neighborhood, district, and city), and citizens participate in the formulation of priorities and monitoring of implementation. Conclusion Establishing PB in Iran is not only legally consistent with constitutional principles but also yields significant benefits politically (enhancing legitimacy and accountability), socially (creating solidarity, sense of belonging, and awareness), and economically (optimizing resources, distributive justice, and cost reduction). Achieving this requires strong political will, the enactment of a comprehensive PB law, redesigning the fiscal decentralization system, empowering councils and Shorayari, establishing e-government and information transparency throughout the entire budget cycle (formulation, approval, implementation, and oversight), and continuous citizen education. Given the success of international experiences and the untapped domestic capacities, PB can serve as a fundamental step in strengthening the republican dimension of Iran's system and realizing social justice. چکیده بودجه‌ریزی مشارکتی فرایندی است که شهروندان غیر منتخب را قادر می‌سازد در تخصیص پول عمومی مشارکت کنند. این مقاله به‌عنوان مطالعه تطبیقی درمورد بودجه‌ریزی مشارکتی متمرکز است که می‌تواند به‌عنوان مدلی برای امکان‌سنجی اجرای آن در ایران مورد استفاده قرار گیرد. نتایج بررسی تجارب بودجه‌ریزی مشارکتی کشورهای مورد مطالعه در این مقاله حاکی از آن است که رویکرد حاکم بر بودجه‌ریزی اسپانیا با مدل دموکراسی مشارکتی همخوانی دارد که هدف اصلی آن برقراری عدالت اجتماعی و عدالت توزیعی است. در فرانسه بودجه‌ریزی مشارکتی با هدف تقویت تشکل‌های مردمی، تمرکززدایی تصمیمات عمومی، بهبود و نزدیکی روابط شهروندان و سیاستگذاران با تقویت بودجه‌های محلی و شوراهای محله شکل گرفته است که با مدل دموکراسی مجاورتی قرابت دارد و در نهایت بودجه‌ریزی مشارکتی در آلمان بیشتر جنبه مشورتی دارد که با هدف بهبود و نوسازی خدمات عمومی، کاهش هزینه‌های عمومی و افزایش مشروعیت سیاست‌های عمومی به کار گرفته می‌شود که با مدل نوسازی مشارکتی مطابقت دارد. با توجه به مزیت‌های اساسی هر سه مدل در کشورهای مورد مطالعه، طراحی الگوی مطلوب بودجه‌ریزی مشارکتی برای ایران با ترکیبی از این سه مدل پیشنهاد می‌شود.

https://lawresearchmagazine.sbu.ac.ir/article_107159_daca9fa0a7864e1aff425023f8f8bf21.pdf

دانشگاه شهید بهشتی فصلنامه تحقیقات حقوقی 1024-0772 29 2 2026 07 23 A Comparative Study on the Essence of the “Right” in the Islamic Jurisprudence, Private Law and Public Law تطبیق ماهیت «حق» در فقه اسلامی، حقوق خصوصی و حقوق عمومی 105 126 105256 10.48308/jlr.2025.232531.2552 FA محمدرضا ویژه دانشیار، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی، تهران، ایران mrezavijeh@atu.ac.ir 0000-0003-0694-7767 Journal Article 2023 08 27 Introduction The concept of “right” is one of the most foundational yet contested notions in legal and jurisprudential thought. Although the term is widely used across Islamic jurisprudence, private law, and public law, its meaning is not uniform in these different discourses. In Islamic jurisprudence, a right is often understood as a kind of entitlement, an acquired privilege, or an abstract legal power relating a person to a specific object, act, or legal position. In positive law, by contrast, the concept of right is more closely tied to the legal capacity and standing of the right-holder, rather than merely to the nature of the entitlement itself. This divergence has significant theoretical consequences for the structure of legal reasoning, the relation between rights and duties, and the distinction between claimable and non-claimable interests. The present study aims to compare the essence of the “right” in Islamic jurisprudence, private law, and public law, and to clarify whether these traditions use the term in the same conceptual sense or within fundamentally different paradigms. It also seeks to show how this conceptual distinction affects the classification of rights, especially the distinction between real rights and personal rights, and how it shapes modern legal thinking about entitlement, obligation, and enforcement. Methods This study follows a descriptive-analytical and comparative method based on library research. The analysis begins with a conceptual examination of the term “right” in juristic and legal texts, followed by a comparison of its usage in Islamic jurisprudence, private law, and public law. The research focuses on the conceptual layers of the term, because much of the ambiguity surrounding rights stems from the confusion between lexical meaning, juristic meaning, and technical legal meaning. The study then examines the relationship between right and closely related notions such as entitlement, authority, ownership, obligation, duty, and enforceability. Special attention is paid to the distinction between real rights and personal rights, since this distinction is central to modern legal thought and strongly influences the way the right-holder is positioned within the legal system. The methodological assumption of the study is that differences in philosophical foundations and legal functions produce genuine differences in the meaning of right, and that such differences cannot be reduced to a merely linguistic variation. Results and Discussions The findings show that, although Islamic jurisprudence and positive law use the same term “right,” they do not assign it the same conceptual content or legal function. In Islamic jurisprudence, a right is generally associated with a kind of entitlement or juridical power that connects a person to a specific object, act, or legal condition. In this framework, the essence of the right lies in the relation between the holder and the object of the right, and it is often understood through the lens of legal privilege or abstract control. The concept is therefore not primarily centered on the personality of the holder, but on the legal relation itself. In positive law, however, especially under the influence of modern legal theory, the right is mainly understood as a subjective right. Here the focus shifts from the object of the right to the legal standing of the right-holder, who is recognized as having the power to claim, enforce, and exercise the right against others or against public authority. This means that the right functions not merely as a normative relation, but as a legal position securing the subject’s ability to act within the legal order. Another important finding concerns the distinction between real rights and personal rights. Real rights establish a direct legal relationship between a person and a thing and are enforceable against all third parties. Personal rights, by contrast, arise from a legal bond between specific persons and are usually connected with obligations, debts, or contractual duties. This distinction is crucial for private law, but it also informs public law, where rights such as civil rights and fundamental rights are best understood through the legal position of the individual vis-a-vis state power. In this sense, public law rights are less about the object of entitlement and more about the subject’s capacity to demand legal recognition or protection from public authority. The study also shows that the dominance of the notion of subjective right in positive law has shifted attention from the right itself to the right-holder. This shift has altered the way law conceptualizes the relation between rights and duties. In Islamic jurisprudence, rights are more closely tied to normative privileges or juridical powers, and their analysis often remains connected to duty, liability, waiver, and transferability. In positive law, however, rights are discussed primarily in terms of enforceability, standing, and the legal protection of the subject. As a result, the same word “right” is embedded in different conceptual networks and generates different practical consequences depending on the legal system in which it is used. Conclusion The comparative analysis demonstrates that the “right” is a homonymous but not a conceptually identical term in Islamic jurisprudence, private law, and public law. Differences in philosophical assumptions and legal structures have led to different understandings of the right: in Islamic jurisprudence, it is closer to a legal privilege or abstract entitlement; in positive law, it is more closely associated with subjective legal power and the status of the right-holder. This is not a merely terminological difference; it has important implications for legal theory, the relation between rights and duties, and the practical operation of legal enforcement. Therefore, any use of the term “right” in scholarly analysis or legal drafting should first clarify the conceptual framework in which it is employed and the theoretical consequences that follow from it. The study concludes that a precise understanding of the essence of right is only possible through careful comparison between the Islamic juristic tradition and modern legal systems, and by avoiding the assumption that the same term necessarily denotes the same concept across these traditions هنگامی که درمورد « حق» سخن گفته می‌شود، آیا این مفهوم در گفتمان حقوق موضوعه همان معنا را دارد که در گفتمان فقه اسلامی سخن می‌گوییم؟ آیا پارامترهای «حق» در دو گفتمان یکسان است؟ تفاوت گفتمانی «ماهیت حق» در حقوق موضوعه و فقه اسلامی چه آثاری به دنبال خواهد داشت؟ در فقه اسلامی، «حق» بیشتر به‌عنوان «امتیاز» مطرح می‌شود؛ امتیازی که ناشی از وضعیت حقوقی است و ازاین‌رو بیشتر صبغه‌ای نهادی می‌یابد. در مقابل، در حقوق موضوعه چنین نیست و حق بیشتر به صاحب حق و توانایی‌های او مربوط می‌شود. این مفهوم جدید از «حق» آثار و توالی به دنبال دارد. در این مقوله، اهمیت روزافزون «حق شخصی» کاملاً بر مفهوم «حق» در حقوق موضوعه سیطره یافته است. اثر مهم این مفهوم اهمیت یافتن صاحب حق به‌جای موضوع حق است و همین امر موجب تمایز پارادایم «حق» در گفتمان حقوق موضوعه با پارادایم مشابه در گفتمان فقه اسلامی می‌شود. تفاوت پارادایمی و گفتمانی فوق آثار دیگری نیز بر جای می‌گذارند که نمود بارز آنها در قابلیت مطالبه و رابطه با تکلیف است.

https://lawresearchmagazine.sbu.ac.ir/article_105256_13bbbbbeab4163f197b6bcceceecb261.pdf

دانشگاه شهید بهشتی فصلنامه تحقیقات حقوقی 1024-0772 29 2 2026 07 23 Male Domestic Violence against Female: An Evolutionary Approach رویکردی تکاملی به خشونت خانگی شوهر نسبت به زن 127 144 106572 10.48308/jlr.2025.241616.2958 FA مهدی صبوری پور دانشیار، دانشکده حقوق، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران (نویسنده مسئول) m_sabooripour@sbu.ac.ir 0000-0002-3308-1578 Journal Article 2025 09 21 Abstract Introduction The prevailing approach in mainstream criminology toward understanding the etiology of crime has traditionally focused on identifying proximal causes of criminal behavior. Within this conceptual framework, scholars have emphasized risk factors such as associative patterns with delinquent peers, inadequate socialization processes during formative developmental stages, familial instability and dysfunction and community disorganization. These factors have formed the cornerstone of both theoretical explanations and preventive interventions in conventional criminology. While this perspective has undoubtedly made significant contributions to our comprehension of criminal behavior and informed numerous prevention strategies, it nevertheless presents certain epistemological limitations. Evolutionary criminology, building upon the theoretical foundations of evolutionary psychology, posits that beyond these immediate causal factors lies a deeper stratum of explanation rooted in our species' phylogenetic history. This emerging discipline maintains that natural selection and sexual selection have shaped not only the physical morphology of contemporary humans but also our psychological architecture. To elaborate, human evolution was not solely driven by physical adaptations such as encephalization or the development of bipedal locomotion. Equally crucial were psychological adaptations including sexual proprietariness, predator avoidance mechanisms, kin recognition and attachment systems and nocturnal anxiety responses. These psychological traits played instrumental roles in enhancing the inclusive fitness of our ancestors throughout their evolutionary trajectory. Consequently, any comprehensive analysis of human behavior - including criminal behavior - that fails to incorporate these evolutionarily informed perspectives remains fundamentally incomplete. Methods The current paper employs a rigorous meta-analytic methodology, systematically reviewing all peer-reviewed research published in indexed journals specializing in evolutionary psychology and criminology between 2004 and the present. Given both the relative paucity of evolutionary literature in criminological research and the specific focus of this study on domestic violence phenomena, particular care has been taken to ensure exhaustive coverage and accurate representation of all relevant scholarly works. Results and Discussions Epidemiological data collected across diverse cultural contexts reveals that approximately 30% of women worldwide experience physical intimate partner violence during their lifetime. Domestic research shows a similar, if not worse, situation. Some studies report that 66% of Iranian women have experienced various forms of domestic violence - verbal, physical, psychological, economic, and sexual. The trend has been increasing, rising from about 52,000 cases in 2009 to over 83,000 cases in 2018. Despite decades of multidisciplinary research aimed at elucidating the etiology of domestic violence, effective prevention remains an elusive goal. Traditional criminological explanations have predominantly emphasized socio-cultural determinants, including patriarchal ideological systems, Social learning of aggressive behavioral scripts and media influences modeling violent interpersonal dynamics. While these factors undoubtedly contribute to our understanding, they fail to provide a complete explanatory framework. Evolutionary criminology offers complementary insights by examining the ultimate causation of such behaviors through the lens of our species' evolutionary history. From an evolutionary perspective, the capacity for violence represents an adaptive psychological mechanism that has been selectively retained in the human behavioral repertoire. Numerous studies indicate that violence remains a persistent cognitive option for humans. For instance, a survey of 5,000 men and women revealed that 91% of men and 84% of women have seriously considered killing someone at least once in their lifetime. Notably, men consistently dominate these statistics - a global criminological pattern showing male overrepresentation in violent crimes specifically and criminal behavior generally. This phenomenon has at least two evolutionary explanations: A) Intersexual competition for resources throughout hominid evolution, meant that males who successfully maintained control over critical resources (e.g., nutrient-rich territories, high-quality shelter) through aggressive displays and physical dominance enjoyed greater reproductive success. This created an evolutionary arms race favoring males with enhanced capacities for territorial defense, resource acquisition and competitive confrontation. B) Intersexual selection pressures: In both polygynous mating systems (which characterized most of human evolutionary history) and more recent monogamous systems, males employed aggressive strategies to secure and retain high-fertility mates, prevent mate poaching by competitors and ensure paternity certainty. Paternity uncertainty is the core evolutionary mechanism in domestic violence. The phenomenon of male-perpetrated intimate partner violence finds its most parsimonious evolutionary explanation in the concept of paternity uncertainty. The unique nature of human internal fertilization created an adaptive problem for ancestral males: the impossibility of absolute certainty regarding genetic parentage. This evolutionary pressure selected for a suite of anti-cuckoldry adaptations, including: A) Mate guarding behaviors: These behaviors consist of actions a husband takes to prevent his wife from having sexual relations with other men by controlling and restricting her interactions and activities, encompassing a wide range of option like social isolation tactics, monitoring of partner's social interactions and emotional manipulation strategies. B) Preemptive aggression like punitive responses to perceived infidelity threats, escalated violence during periods of suspected conception and intensified control during pregnancy. C) Reproductive interference strategies like forced termination of pregnancies with uncertain paternity and neonaticide in cases of confirmed non-paternity. These hierarchically implemented strategies all serve a single purpose: reducing the likelihood of the mate's pregnancy by other males, thereby ensuring the male's genetic transmission to the next generation. Conclusion The evolutionary perspective does not posit that intimate partner violence represents an inevitable or morally justifiable outcome of our biological heritage. Rather, it provides a crucial missing dimension to our understanding by revealing the deep phylogenetic roots of these behavioral patterns. Modern manifestations of domestic violence can be understood as the maladaptive expression of evolved psychological mechanisms that were originally selected for in ancestral environments radically different from contemporary social contexts. This recognition allows for more nuanced theoretical models that integrate both proximate (sociocultural) and ultimate (evolutionary) causation, development of prevention programs that account for these deeply ingrained behavioral tendencies and more effective intervention strategies that target the psychological mechanisms underlying violent behavior. In other words, the integration of evolutionary perspectives with traditional criminological approaches offers the promise of greater explanatory power in understanding criminal behavior, more comprehensive prevention frameworks and more effective policy interventions. By acknowledging both the immediate social determinants and the evolutionary foundations of criminal behavior, we move closer to developing truly holistic solutions to the complex problem of domestic violence in modern societies. جرم‌شناسی تکاملی، برخلاف جرم‌شناسی متعارف که بر علل بی‌واسطه‌ای چون اختلالات روانی یا محیط خانوادگی تمرکز دارد، ریشه‌های عمیق‌تر رفتارهای مجرمانه را در فرایند تکامل انسان جست‌وجو می‌کند. از این منظر، بسیاری از ویژگی‌های روانی امروزی، ازجمله خشونت، محصول انتخاب طبیعی و جنسی برای بقا و تولیدمثل‌ هستند. خشونت مردانه در دیدگاه تکاملی دو عامل اصلی دارد: نخست رقابت بر سر منابع (مثل غذا و قلمرو) که استفاده از خشونت را برای حفظ این منابع توجیه می‌کند؛ دوم رقابت بر سر جفت، زیرا مردانی که توانایی بیشتری در کنترل دسترسی به زنان داشتند، احتمال بیشتری برای انتقال ژن‌هایشان به نسل بعدی هم داشته‌اند. این پژوهش به‌صورت فراتحلیل و با بررسی تمام مطالعات منتشرشده در منابع معتبر مرتبط با روان‌شناسی و جرم‌شناسی تکاملی از سال 2004 تاکنون انجام شده است. یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهد که عامل کلیدی خشونت خانگی مردان علیه زنان از منظر تکاملی «نااطمینانی از پدر بودن» است. ازآنجاکه مردان نمی‌توانند مطمئن باشند همسرانشان رابطه جنسی با دیگران نداشته‌اند، مکانیسم‌های تکاملی‌ مانند کنترل جنسی و خشونت پیشگیرانه شکل گرفته‌اند. این مکانیسم‌ها شامل محدود کردن ارتباط زن با مردان دیگر، پرخاشگری هنگام احتمال خیانت، افزایش خشونت در دوران بارداری (به‌خاطر تردید در پدری جنین) و حتی کشتن فرزندان می‌شوند. از منظری دیگر، این پژوهش نشان می‌دهد که رویکردهای تک‌عاملی مانند نسبت دادن خشونت به فقر، بیکاری، اعتیاد یا آموزه‌های مردسالارانه کفایت توضیحی ندارند. رویکرد تکاملی با عمق‌بخشی به تحلیل علت‌شناختی، ریشه‌های این رفتارها را در سازوکارهای تکاملی نشان می‌دهد و درک جامع‌تری از پدیده فراهم می‌آورد.

https://lawresearchmagazine.sbu.ac.ir/article_106572_e68a3fa1ef62f80ce940bed20eb15553.pdf

دانشگاه شهید بهشتی فصلنامه تحقیقات حقوقی 1024-0772 29 2 2026 07 23 Rereading Kant’s Just War Theory within the Framework of Contemporary International Law (With Emphasis on the Russia–Ukraine War) بازخوانی نظریۀ جنگ عادلانۀ کانت در چارچوب حقوق بین‌الملل معاصر (با تأکید بر جنگ روسیه و اوکراین) 145 162 106152 10.48308/jlr.2025.234043.2648 FA میثم نوروزی استادیار، دانشکده علوم انسانی، دانشگاه بوعلی سینا، همدان، ایران (نویسنده مسئول) m.norouzi@basu.ac.ir 0000-0001-7742-3480 شهرام زرنشان دانشیار، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی، تهران، ایران شبنم سادات شاه طاهری دانشجوی دکتری، دانشکده حقوق، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی: واحد همدان، همدان، ایران Journal Article 2024 01 29 Introduction The concept of a just war is one of the oldest and always controversial topics in political philosophy and international law. This concept has been discussed from the time of ancient Greece and medieval Christian teachings to the thoughts of modern and contemporary thinkers and has always posed a fundamental question to thinkers: Can war, despite its violent and destructive nature, enjoy moral and legal legitimacy in certain circumstances? Among modern philosophers, Immanuel Kant holds a prominent position. In his treatise "Perpetual Peace" and other philosophical writings, he attempted to explain the relationship between war, peace, and international justice and to provide a theoretical framework for limiting the violence resulting from war. In Kant's view, the occurrence of war in international relations is inevitable, but this fact should not be an excuse for departing from moral and legal rules. He considers only those wars that are fought in the context of legitimate defense and compliance with international principles to be legitimate and considers any war with expansionist goals or imposing political will to be absolutely illegitimate. The importance of this issue in today's world, especially in light of the Russia-Ukraine war, has doubled. This crisis, as one of the most important geopolitical events of the 21st century, has once again brought the issue of the legitimacy of war, its moral boundaries, and its legal foundations back to the center of international debate. The present study aims to re-examine Kant's just war theory and examine its effectiveness in explaining the Russia-Ukraine crisis, and is based on the assumption that this theory, despite its valuable capacities, needs to be redefined in light of contemporary conditions. Methods The research method in this study is based on a descriptive-analytical approach and has been conducted in a library manner. In the first step, Kant's main works, especially the treatise "Perpetual Peace" and his writings on ethics and natural law, are examined to clarify the theoretical foundations of just war from his perspective. Then, the philosophical and legal interpretations of contemporary thinkers on the theory of just war are collected and analyzed. In the next step, these foundations are adapted within the framework of contemporary international law and an attempt is made to determine the extent to which they are consistent or conflicting with recognized international principles such as the United Nations Charter, humanitarian rules, and the doctrine of self-defense. Finally, the Russia-Ukraine crisis is examined as an objective example to test the effectiveness of Kant's theory in analyzing this war and assessing the legitimacy of the actions of the parties. The reason for choosing this method is to establish a connection between theoretical foundations and legal frameworks on the one hand, and to provide the possibility of analyzing a real and contemporary situation on the other. Results and Discussions The findings of the study show that Kant, despite accepting the inevitable reality of war, provides a moral and legal framework to limit it. He divides war into two categories: legitimate and illegitimate. Wars that are waged for the purpose of legitimate self-defense or in support of general principles of international justice are defensible in his view; while wars that are launched for the purpose of expansionism, hegemony, or violation of the rights of nations are illegitimate and morally reprehensible. These criteria, when applied to the Russia-Ukraine crisis, yield significant results. Russia claims that it entered the war to prevent NATO expansion and defend its national security, but this argument is unacceptable in the Kantian framework, because it was accompanied by a clear violation of Ukraine's independence and territorial integrity. On the other hand, Ukraine, which resists this attack, is initially placed in a position of self-defense, but the prolongation of the war, the expansion of humanitarian consequences, and the widespread use of military means have also raised serious questions about this initial legitimacy. The findings also show that Kant's theory, despite its effectiveness in providing general principles, is not fully adequate for analyzing complex contemporary crises. The emergence of phenomena such as hybrid wars, the presence of non-state actors, the spread of transnational terrorism, cyberwars, and the widespread use of new military technologies have created dimensions that were not foreseeable in Kant's time. These issues challenge the traditional rules of just war and reveal the need to reinterpret this theory. In addition, the findings show that the international community has relied on its own political and security interests in responding to the war in Ukraine rather than relying on Kantian ethical principles. This indicates the gap between theory and practice in international relations. Nevertheless, Kant’s theory can still remain as a valuable framework for critiquing the conflicting claims of the parties and reminding us of the importance of ethics and law in the arena of war. Conclusion The conclusion of the research is that Kant’s just war theory, despite its shortcomings and limitations, still provides us with a high capacity for analyzing and evaluating the legitimacy of wars. This theory can serve as a moral and legal framework for policymakers and international institutions and serve as a reminder that even in unavoidable conditions of war, it is necessary to observe moral principles and international rules. However, geopolitical developments and new technologies require that Kantian principles be redefined in accordance with new realities. The innovation of the present research lies in the fact that by linking Kant’s philosophical foundations to one of the most important contemporary crises, namely the Russo-Ukrainian war, it provides a practical model for assessing the legitimacy of war, thus contributing to the enrichment of theoretical and legal debates in international relations. مفهوم جنگ عادلانه و نسبت آن با صلح و عدالت بین‌المللی همواره مورد تأکید محققان سیاسی و فلاسفه بوده است. نظریه جنگ عادلانه از مهم‌ترین نظریه‌های روابط بین‌الملل پیرامون صلح و حقوق جنگ بوده که توسط امانوئل کانت مطرح‌ شده است. از منظر کانت، استفاده از ابزار جنگ برای پیشبرد اهداف سیاسی امری اجتناب‌ناپذیر است، اما این اقدام نباید با نقض قوانین و تعهدات بین‌المللی همراه باشد. طرح این نظریه و مضامین پس‌ از آن همچنان محل مناقشه بسیاری از اندیشمندان سیاسی است. بر این اساس، پژوهش حاضر به تبیین نظریۀ جنگ عادلانه و ویژگی‌های آن از منظر کانت پرداخته و جایگاه آن را در نظام حقوق بین‌الملل معاصر با تأکید بر جنگ روسیه و اوکراین مورد واکاوی قرار داده است.‌‌‌ براساس یافته‌های این مقاله که با تکیه‌بر منابع کتابخانه‌ای و به روش تحلیلی- توصیفی انجام‌ گرفته است، نظریۀ جنگ عادلانۀ کانت در حقوق بین‌الملل معاصر، علی‌رغم اصول بنیادین آن درباره مشروعیت جنگ و دفاع مشروع، به‌دلیل پیچیدگی‌های سیاسی و امنیتی معاصر، به‌ویژه در جنگ روسیه و اوکراین، نیازمند بازتعریف و بازخوانی است تا بتواند قانونمندی جنگ و صلح پایدار را تضمین کند

https://lawresearchmagazine.sbu.ac.ir/article_106152_ca9956ea1712bd25f6188d0b2326d706.pdf

دانشگاه شهید بهشتی فصلنامه تحقیقات حقوقی 1024-0772 29 2 2026 07 23 An Examination of The Legal Status of Avatars in the Metaverse بررسی جایگاه حقوقی آواتارها در متاورس 163 181 105762 10.48308/jlr.2025.238577.2845 FA مریم بحرکاظمی دانشجوی دکتری، دانشکده علوم انسانی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی: واحد رشت، رشت، ایران 0009-0008-3778-2743 پرویز باقری دانشیارحقوق ، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه ایلام، ایلام، ایران (نویسنده مسئول) p.bagheri@ilam.ac.ir 0000-0002-3114-7609 Journal Article 2025 02 02 Introduction Metaverse expansion has rapidly transformed digital interaction patterns by introducing avatars as primary representational entities of users within immersive environments. These avatars function not only as communication interfaces but also as carriers of identity, economic activity, and behavioral traces. The increasing complexity of avatar-mediated interactions has challenged traditional private law frameworks, which were designed for physical world relations. Consequently, fundamental legal questions arise regarding attribution of conduct, liability allocation, ownership of digital assets, and the possible recognition of independent legal personality for avatars. This study aims to examine the legal status of avatars in private law and to analyze challenges related to civil liability, digital property rights, and legal personhood within metaverse ecosystems. It further seeks to propose a coherent regulatory framework capable of addressing gaps in existing legal structures while ensuring balance between technological innovation and legal certainty. The significance of this research lies in the growing integration of metaverse applications into economic and social life, which requires new approaches in private law, particularly regarding civil liability, the protection of digital identity, and the legal status of digital assets. These issues remain insufficiently regulated in many legal systems, especially in cross-border virtual environments. Methods This research adopts a descriptive analytical methodology based on library sources including academic articles, legal reports, and doctrinal interpretations related to metaverse governance, avatar regulation, and digital property law. A comparative approach is also employed to evaluate how different legal systems address issues of digital identity, liability, and ownership within virtual environments. The study further relies on doctrinal analysis of private law principles such as attribution, causation, fault, and ownership to assess their adequacy in regulating avatar driven interactions within metaverse platforms. Data interpretation focuses on identifying gaps in existing legal frameworks and evaluating potential reform proposals aimed at improving regulatory coherence and legal certainty in digital ecosystems. The analysis also incorporates interdisciplinary insights from information technology studies, artificial intelligence governance, and cybersecurity law to ensure a comprehensive understanding of avatar based legal relations, particularly in relation to autonomous systems and algorithmic decision making processes. The methodology emphasizes critical evaluation of normative frameworks and their applicability to emerging digital realities while maintaining focus on legal coherence and practical enforceability in metaverse environments under evolving technological conditions globally. Furthermore it examines legal responsibility allocation models between users, developers, and platform providers ensuring balanced regulatory interpretation frameworks across jurisdictions and legal systems under evolving technological conditions globally. Results and Discussion The findings indicate that avatars currently lack independent legal personality within existing private law systems and are predominantly treated as extensions of their users rather than autonomous legal subjects. This attribution model places primary civil liability on users for actions performed through avatars, especially in contractual interactions and tortious harm. However, increasing complexity emerges when avatar behavior is influenced by automated systems, artificial intelligence, or platform level algorithms. In such cases, liability may extend to developers or service providers under negligence based or product liability principles depending on system design and foreseeability of harm. Digital assets within metaverse environments possess significant economic value and exhibit characteristics of property despite their intangible nature, including virtual land, tokens, and digital goods. These assets require legal recognition to ensure transactional security and ownership clarity across platforms, yet current regulatory frameworks remain fragmented and inconsistent across jurisdictions. Digital identity protection constitutes a critical legal concern, as avatars operate as digital representations of users and require effective safeguards against impersonation, identity fraud, and unauthorized access. Violations involving avatar-based digital identities may give rise to both pecuniary and non-pecuniary harm, thereby requiring a broader interpretation of existing privacy and personality rights doctrines. The study further examines the feasibility of recognizing a limited form of legal personality for avatars and concludes that such recognition is presently unjustified due to the absence of autonomous intent and independent legal capacity. Instead, the findings support the adoption of hybrid regulatory frameworks that allocate legal responsibility among users, platform operators, and, where applicable, artificial intelligence systems according to their respective levels of control and risk allocation. The research also identifies substantial legal uncertainty in cross-border metaverse transactions, where jurisdictional complexities hinder the effective enforcement of rights and obligations. Furthermore, it highlights the need for adaptive legal frameworks capable of accommodating technological developments while preserving the coherence of private law principles within digital ecosystems. Particular attention is also given to the legal enforceability of smart contracts, avatar-mediated transactions, and platform governance mechanisms. Contractual standardization may reduce legal uncertainty in environments governed more by terms of service than negotiated agreements. Enforcement mechanisms remain underdeveloped in decentralized systems where traditional jurisdictional tools are limited. Increasing convergence between data protection law, cybersecurity regulation, and private law doctrines shapes governance of avatar activities. Interdisciplinary regulatory approaches integrating legal, economic, and technological perspectives are essential for addressing metaverse challenges related to trust, accountability, and user protection. International cooperation is necessary to harmonize legal standards for avatar governance and digital asset regulation, ensuring consistency across jurisdictions. The metaverse ultimately challenges doctrinal boundaries of private law, requiring continuous reform and adaptive interpretation of legal norms. Conclusion The study concludes that avatars represent a central legal challenge in the evolution of metaverse ecosystems requiring reassessment of traditional private law categories. Although they do not yet qualify as independent legal persons their increasing functional autonomy necessitates enhanced regulatory attention particularly in relation to liability allocation, identity protection and digital property rights. The findings support development of hybrid legal frameworks combining user responsibility platform accountability and technological governance mechanisms in order to ensure legal certainty and sustainable innovation in virtual environments. Additionally international coordination is essential for harmonized regulation across jurisdictions addressing cross border digital interactions effectively با توسعه روزافزون فناوری‌های مبتنی‌بر متاورس، آواتارها به‌عنوان بازنمایی‌های دیجیتال کاربران در این فضا، جایگاهی مهم و درعین‌حال چالش‌برانگیز در حوزه حقوق خصوصی یافته‌اند. استفاده از آواتارها نه‌تنها ابزار تعامل با محیط‌های مجازی را فراهم می‌سازد، بلکه مسائل حقوقی متعددی را نیز در پی دارد؛ ازجمله ابهامات مربوط به حدود مسئولیت مدنی کاربران، مالکیت دارایی‌های دیجیتال، و همچنین وضعیت حقوقی و قابلیت انتساب اقدامات آنها به اشخاص حقیقی یا حقوقی است. این مقاله با روش توصیفی ـ تحلیلی و بر پایه منابع کتابخانه‌ای، به بررسی ابعاد مختلف حقوقی آواتارها در متاورس می‌پردازد. تمرکز اصلی پژوهش بر تحلیل وضعیت مسئولیت مدنی ناشی از اقدامات آواتارها در بسترهای مجازی، امکان اعطای شخصیت حقوقی به آنها، و آثار حقوقی مالکیت دارایی‌های دیجیتال در این محیط است. همچنین، این مقاله باتوجه‌به رویکردهای حقوق تطبیقی، تلاش دارد ضمن شناسایی چالش‌های تقنینی موجود، چارچوبی پیشنهادی برای تنظیم روابط حقوقی مرتبط با آواتارها ارائه دهد که از منظر حقوقی معتبر و از نظر عملی، قابل اجرا باشد. در همین راستا، الزامات قانونی بهره‌برداری از آواتارها در پلتفرم‌های مختلف بررسی و پیشنهادهایی برای اعمال مسئولیت و شناسایی حقوق کاربران در این بستر نوین مطرح شده است. هدف نهایی، ارائه راهکارهایی برای انطباق نظام حقوقی با تحولات ناشی از ظهور فناوری‌های دیجیتال نوظهور در متاورس است.

https://lawresearchmagazine.sbu.ac.ir/article_105762_1c3e0c50f5fc2c8da3442b8beb2de88e.pdf

دانشگاه شهید بهشتی فصلنامه تحقیقات حقوقی 1024-0772 29 2 2026 07 23 Derogation from Human Rights in States of Emergency: With Particular Emphasis on the Suspension of Elections During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Light of the Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights تعلیق حقوق بشر در وضعیت اضطراری با تأکید بر توقفِ انتخابات در شرایط کرونایی در پرتو رویه دیوانِ اروپاییِ حقوقِ بشر 181 200 106328 10.48308/jlr.2025.239610.2888 FA علی محمد فلاح زاده دانشیار، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی، تهران، ایران (نویسنده مسئول) fallahzadeh@atu.ac.ir 0000-0002-8673-689X علی رضائی دانشجوی دکتری، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی، تهران، ایران 0009-0008-6221-4916 Journal Article 2025 05 22 Introduction During the COVID-19 pandemic, nearly 70 countries have suspended elections or held elections under special conditions. According to Article 15 of the European Convention on Human Rights (Derogation in emergencies), in exceptional cases, it is possible for the governments of member states to waive, under certain conditions, temporarily, limitedly and under supervision, their obligation to ensure certain rights and freedoms protected by law. Derogation that must be lifted after the emergency situation is resolved. Among the rights that may be subject to derogation during a state of emergency is the right to hold elections, which may be temporarily suspended and postponed to a later date. Thus, in this article, the review of cases that have been raised in this regard in the European Court of Human Rights and that the Court has examined on categories such as "emergency situations" has been considered and analyzed. It can be said elections and the possibility of Derogation, the need to adhere to and observe the principles governing emergency situations are also important and significant in this regard. Derogation of elections in emergency situations is also assessed with the aim of better strengthening and consolidating democracy. Although, for reasons such as security issues and considerations, administrative and managerial obstacles, economic problems, psychological and social atmosphere, etc., holding elections does not seem very logical. Methods In this article, the authors examine the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights in the form of a case study and examine the principles and components related to holding elections in emergency situations, taking into account the human rights obligations and commitments of the member states of the European Convention. The case law of the Court shows that member states must adapt their approach to each issue in accordance with the principle of proportionality and observance of the fundamental principle of respect for human rights, and those impose restrictions in a way that does not violate the right to political participation. Also, with the Court's new approach to examining cases, especially after the outbreak of the coronavirus, a reasonable balance has been established between the powers of states and the requirements imposed and the protection of human rights. This article attempts to examine these practices and examine the importance of states, both as initiators and as responsible for respecting human rights, taking into account the time and place conditions, which always prioritize the observance of human rights even in unforeseen circumstances, and the analysis of these opinions is innovative in this respect. Results and Discussions Any Derogation, halt or unusual holding of elections and distortion of the right to participate in the political affairs of the country must be justified and documented to protect a higher value such as the Right to life. In various opinions, the European Court has considered the necessity of adopting emergency measures to be subject to compliance with Article 15 and other human rights principles. Based on these opinions, Derogation of elections can have substantive limitations such as the existence of a threat and proportionality and non-derogable rights or procedural conditions such as official announcement, time conditions and an emphasis on temporary rather than permanent. Important conditions stated in the opinions of the Court are the necessity of ensuring the principle of proportionality with the measures taken, the principle of compliance with other international commitments, prohibition of discrimination, spatial and temporal justification, the possibility of compensation and the right to appeal to judicial authorities. Based on the rule of official announcement and the principle of reporting, governments are obliged to observe the reporting system during their emergency measures and to document all their affairs and take them based on the law, and the public is aware of them. Derogation must be limited in both time and spatial scope. In some countries, Derogation of elections was limited to specific points. Derogation of elections due to the existence of emergency situations or the creation of restrictions for voters or candidates should not eliminate or limit the fundamental principle of the right to self-determination and the right to participate in the political affairs of the country, and the existence of legal regulations and the establishment of special measures and their anticipation are evaluated precisely in this regard. Some countries undertook to hold elections under the supervision of the European Union, and some others used postal voting conditions and in accordance with the conditions and the "margin of appreciation" of governments in holding elections in compliance with health requirements, which indicates the need for both positive and negative measures. The suspension of human rights is temporary, and after the crisis subsides, governments are obliged to lift restrictions and take positive measures to compensate for the effects of the Derogation. Conclusion The European Court of Human Rights jurisprudence also shows that compliance with the principles governing suspension is not limited to holding elections, but also covers all stages from the beginning to the end, as well as the possibility of protesting the election results and the subsequent actions that resulted from this in some of the cases presented. The studies and findings of this article indicate that in the cases presented in the opinions of the European Court of Human Rights, principles and components that can be extracted and emphasized, such as the principle of the need for prior notification (official notification) by member states, the determination of the existence or likelihood of a threat to the life of the nation, the principle of proportionality, the principle of non-discrimination, the principle of respect for non-derogable rights, and time limits, are among the cases that member states must adhere to in emergency situations and the possibility of suspending elections در دوران رخداد بیماری کرونا، نزدیک به هفتاد کشور مبادرت به توقف برگزاری انتخابات یا برگزاری انتخابات با شرایط ویژه کردند. مطابق ماده 15 کنوانسیون اروپایی حقوق بشر (تعلیق در شرایط اضطراری)، در موارد استثنایی، این امکان برای کشورهای عضو وجود دارد که تحت شرایطی، به‌صورت موقت، محدود و تحت نظارت، رعایت حقوق بشر را به حالت تعلیق درآورد. تعلیق‌هایی که البته پس از برطرف شدن شرایط اضطراری، باید مرتفع شوند. ازجمله موارد تعلیق حقوق بشر، حق برگزاری انتخابات است که ممکن است برای مدتی متوقف و برگزاری آن به زمان دیگری موکول گردد. بدین‌سان، در این مقاله بررسی پرونده‌هایی که در این راستا در دیوان اروپایی حقوق بشر مطرح شده است و پیرامون مقوله‌هایی چون «وضعیت‌های اضطراری» دیوان در خصوص آن رسیدگی کرده است، مورد توجه و تحلیل قرار گرفته است. بررسی‌ها و یافته‌های این نوشتار حکایت از این دارد که در پرونده‌های مطروحه در دیوان اروپایی حقوق بشر، اصولی نظیر اصل لزوم اعلان پیشینی (اعلام رسمی) توسط دولت‌های عضو، احراز وجود یا احتمال وقوع تهدید علیه حیات ملت، اصل تناسب، اصل عدم تبعیض، اصل رعایت حقوق غیرقابل تعلیق و محدودیت زمان‌بندی در زمره‌ مواردی است که دولت‌های عضو باید در شرایط اضطراری و امکان تعلیق انتخابات به آنها ملتزم باشند. همچنین در بسیاری از پرونده‌ها اهمیت قاعده‌ «حاشیه ارزیابی» که مؤید حمایت از حقوق داخلی کشورها و توجه به اقتضائات زمانی و مکانی است، مورد اشاره قرار گرفته است.

https://lawresearchmagazine.sbu.ac.ir/article_106328_2bb1a76b36f8799ed8a3a069857a1b77.pdf

دانشگاه شهید بهشتی فصلنامه تحقیقات حقوقی 1024-0772 29 2 2026 07 23 A Comparative Analysis of the Concept of Bio-Citizenship with Emphasis on the Law on Family Protection and Youthful Population تحلیل تطبیقی مفهوم شهروندی زیستی با تأکید بر قانون حمایت از خانواده و جوانی جمعیت 201 220 106117 10.48308/jlr.2025.240575.2922 FA مهدی مرادی برلیان استادیار، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه مازندران، بابلسر، ایران (نویسنده مسئول) m.moradib@umz.ac.ir 0000-0002-2881-1556 محمدقاسم تنگستانی دانشیار دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه خوارزمی، تهران، ایران Journal Article 2025 07 06 Introduction Recent developments in biotechnology, demographic policy and reproductive medicine have changed the classical relationship between citizenship, the body and public law. The human body is no longer only a private or medical matter; it has become a legal site through which the state grants benefits, imposes duties, narrows choices and defines public interest. Bio-citizenship names this shift. It describes a form of citizenship in which legal recognition and social responsibility are shaped by biological features such as health, fertility, sex, genetic information and bodily vulnerability. This article examines the Iranian Law on Family Protection and Youthful Population, adopted in 2021, as an important legal expression of this transformation. Its central question is how this law constructs a biological model of citizenship and what consequences it has for human dignity, bodily autonomy, reproductive freedom, biological justice and fundamental rights. The aim is to clarify the legal limits of state intervention in the body, reproduction and social continuity. Methods The study uses a descriptive-analytical and comparative method. Its analytical part examines the main provisions of the Law on Family Protection and Youthful Population, including the National Population Headquarters, birth-related incentives, maternity benefits, restrictions on contraception, rules on sterilization and the legal-medical mechanism for abortion. These provisions are read through the lens of public law, human dignity, and rights theory. The theoretical part draws on biopolitics, bare life, dignity, autonomy, biological justice and communicative participation to explain how the body becomes a subject of public power. The comparative part considers Germany, France, Canada and the United Kingdom, not as models to be copied, but as legal experiences that show different ways of regulating biological life. The comparison is organized around four criteria: the constitutional place of human dignity, the permissible scope of state intervention, the role of informed consent and the existence of social and institutional oversight. The research materials include legislation, institutional practice and interdisciplinary studies on biomedicine and citizenship. Results and Discussions Bio-citizenship is not only a sociological description. It points to a bigger change in public law: the citizen is increasingly viewed not merely as a voter, legal subject or member of a political community, but as a body that can be measured, protected, directed, optimized and, at times, controlled. Biological life becomes a language through which the state allocates benefits, defines duties, produces risks and frames public interest. This transformation can be emancipatory when it strengthens the right to health, supports access to infertility treatment, and prevents biological discrimination. It becomes problematic, however, when legal status and social entitlements are tied to biological performance, especially fertility, maternity or conformity with demographic objectives. The central normative issue is therefore not whether the state may adopt population and health policies, but whether such policies remain bounded by dignity, autonomy, equality and proportionality. Comparative experiences reveal different ways of drawing these boundaries. Germany offers a dignity-based model of biological regulation. Its legal order places human dignity at the center of health, family, reproductive and parental policies, while state support remains framed by proportionality, equality and bodily self-determination. France reflects a republican-institutional model. Through bioethics legislation and specialized agencies, French law seeks to reconcile reproductive freedom with the prohibition of commodification and the constitutional value of dignity. Canada connects bio-citizenship with the right to health, informed consent, the prohibition on the commercial exploitation of the body, and voluntary participation in biobanking and biomedical research. The United Kingdom relies on the National Health Service, soft regulation and medical ethics to shape the responsible health citizen. These experiences suggest that biological regulation gains legitimacy when collective interests are joined with freedom, transparency, participation and anti-discrimination guarantees. The Iranian law presents a more ambivalent picture. On its surface, the Law on Family Protection and Youthful Population appears supportive and family-oriented. However, its internal logic places the fertile body, especially the female body, at the center of public policy. The creation of the National Population Headquarters, the distribution of benefits based on childbirth, the legal emphasis on maternal roles, restrictions on contraceptive services, the prohibition of sterilization except in narrow cases, and the transfer of abortion-related decisions to judicial-medical mechanisms all point to a specific form of biological citizenship. In this model, the ideal citizen is implicitly the reproductive citizen whose body aligns with the state's demographic aims. The difficulty lies in the law’s weak distinction between support, encouragement, regulation and coercion. Once this distinction fades, demographic policy may shift from public welfare to the governance of bodies. The law also reveals deficiencies in dignity-based reasoning, informed consent, biological justice and social oversight. Some provisions link social benefits to reproductive performance, potentially classifying citizens by fertility. Others place bodily autonomy and reproductive health under the pressure of a collective population objective. Institutionally, the concentration of authority in the National Population Headquarters, limited reporting duties, weak participation by women and affected groups, and the absence of impact assessments increase the risk of politicization of the body. The article therefore proposes a framework for citizens’ biological rights; legislative revision of contraception, sterilization and abortion rules according to necessity and proportionality; separation between macro-level planning and micro-level bodily intervention; and an independent body to monitor biological rights, receive complaints and publish reports. Conclusion The article concludes that the Law on Family Protection and Youthful Population marks an important entry of Iranian public law into bio-citizenship, but this entry has not yet been adequately shaped by dignity, bodily freedom and civic participation. Demographic policy is defensible only when it does not reduce individuals to instruments of statistical goals and when it balances collective interests with personal rights. A rights-based model of bio-citizenship in Iran requires moving beyond a merely population-oriented approach toward a framework in which the human body is treated as a bearer of dignity and rights, not as an object of political possession تحولات ژرف در فناوری‌های زیستی، سیاست‌گذاری‌های جمعیتی و نظارت دولت‌ها بر امر تولیدمثل، پدیدارشدن نوعی از شهروندی را در پی داشته‌ که در آن بدن زیستی فرد، کانون اصلی مداخله حقوقی و حکمرانی قرار می‌گیرد؛ مفهومی که در ادبیات معاصر از آن با عنوان «شهروندی زیستی» یاد می‌شود. این مقاله با هدف واکاوی تحلیلی و تطبیقی این مفهوم، تلاش دارد جایگاه آن را در بستر نظام حقوقی ایران، به‌ویژه در پرتو قانون حمایت از خانواده و جوانی جمعیت مصوب ۱۴۰۰ بررسی کند. پرسش محوری پژوهش آن است که چگونه قانون مزبور با سازوکارهای حقوقی و نهادهای اجرایی خود، نوع خاصی از شهروندی را بر مبنای ویژگی‌های زیستی فرد نهادینه می‌سازد و این نوع از شهروندی چه نسبت‌هایی با کرامت انسانی و حقوق بنیادین دارد. روش تحقیق مقاله، تحلیلی-توصیفی و تطبیقی است و از منابع میان‌رشته‌ای حقوق عمومی و نظریه‌های انتقادی بهره می‌گیرد. یافته‌ها حاکی از آن است که قانون یادشده، با تمرکز بر بدن انسان، سیاست‌های بارداری و فرزندآوری، نظارت بر درمان ناباروری و کنترل سقط، نوعی زیست‌سیاست حقوقی را نهادینه می‌کند که در غیاب اصول کرامت‌محور و محدودیت‌های حقوقی مؤثر، خطر عبور از مرزهای مشروعیت عمومی را به‌همراه دارد. مقاله در پایان، ضرورت بازتعادل میان منافع جمعیتی و حقوق بنیادین فردی را در قالب اصلاحات تقنینی و نهادی پیشنهاد می‌کند.

https://lawresearchmagazine.sbu.ac.ir/article_106117_cbae58715ba95d10cc95ae6a18703202.pdf

دانشگاه شهید بهشتی فصلنامه تحقیقات حقوقی 1024-0772 29 2 2026 07 23 The Relational Approach to Contract, the Vested (Formal) Relational Contract, and Their Implications for Contractual Relationships رویکرد رابطه‌ای به قرارداد، قرارداد رابطه‌ای قاعده‌مند (نوشته) و آثار آنها در روابط طرفین قرارداد 221 246 106655 10.48308/jlr.2026.241695.2964 FA محمدعلی بهمئی استادیار، دانشکده حقوق، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران 0000-0002-6536-7052 ماهور نصیری ماهینی دانشجوی دکتری، دانشکده حقوق، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران (نویسنده مسئول) mahoornasirii@gmail.com 0009-0009-8839-748X Journal Article 2025 09 28 Introduction This article examines the relational approach to contracts, an approach that, despite theoretical acceptance and practical application in many countries and its recognized positive effects, has not yet found a place in Iranian legal literature. Classical contract law emphasizes the necessity of the parties’ explicit intent, precise expression of will, and fulfillment of written terms, stating that its aim is to ensure predictability and certainty. However, it often fails to achieve its stated objectives and is unable to reflect and realize the parties’ actual intent, which is inherently shaped by the economic, social, and human dimensions of the relationship. The relational theory of contracts emphasizes ongoing cooperation, mutual trust, and the parties’ actual objectives, particularly in long-term contractual relationships. Despite the theoretical acceptance of relational contracts, their practical application has been limited. A review of laws and judicial decisions from different countries indicates that legal uncertainties and the need for court intervention are the main reasons for this limited use. Therefore this article aims to examine the effectiveness of written relational contracts, thereby contributing to the improvement of contractual practice. Methods The research method employed in this article is descriptive-analytical, and the data collection approach is library-based. In the descriptive section, the fundamental concepts and legal foundations of relational approach to contracts are elucidated, while the analytical section throughout the article examines the practical impacts of the aforementioned approach. Then the analysis has led to vested (written) relational contract and the concept, foundation and impacts of it have been analytically studied. Results and Discussions The relational approach to contracts seeks discovering instead of emphasizing on what it shows. This approach proves that ignoring the relationality of the contracts, may lead to overlooking the economic and social dimensions of contracts and failing to achieve the parties’ true objectives, leading to inefficiency in contract formation, negative performance by one or both parties, and consequent losses. Therefore, a novel written contract, informed by the relational approach, has emerged. The question is whether a structured relational contract can integrate classical legal principles with the relational approach, providing an enforceable legal framework that maximizes mutual benefits, reduces opportunistic behavior, and preserves long-term relationships? By enabling the introduction of the relational approach-particularly its structured form-into the Iranian legal system, significant transformation in both contract formation and enforcement, including judicial practice, becomes plausible. This study employs legal analysis with comparative and interdisciplinary approaches. The theoretical foundations of relational contracts and their development in jurisdictions recognizing relational principles are examined. Iranian legal principles are analyzed to determine the scope and limitations of classical contracts. Selected foreign laws and judicial decisions are also reviewed to assess the judicial application of the relational approach and its practical implications. Findings from economics, organizational behavior, and strategic management are integrated to analyze the economic and behavioral effects of relational contracts, providing a comprehensive understanding of the advantages and challenges of this approach. The analysis indicates that classical contract law, with its formalistic and abstract approach, is often unable to reflect the parties’ actual intentions and the complexity of their relationships, and cannot resolve the issue of incomplete expression, where predicting all future contingent events at the time of contracting is impossible. Courts are consequently forced to interpret or apply rules, leading to unpredictable or undesired outcomes. In contrast, the relational approach emphasizes that all contracts are to some extent relational, and cooperation, trust, and mutual adjustment of the relationship are essential for long-term success. A structured and written relational contract, explicitly incorporating relational principles while maintaining flexibility, provides deeper access to articulating and realizing the parties’ intentions, better protecting mutual interests than classical contracts, implicit contracts, or unwritten ones, reducing opportunistic behavior, increasing enforceable predictability, and ensuring the continuity of long-term relationships even under unstable economic, social, or political conditions. As the first comprehensive legal study in Iran focusing on relational contracts, this article introduces the concept of the “vested (structured) relational contract” and bridges the gap between relational theory and practical application. The research demonstrates that relational contracts can enhance efficiency and fairness in contract execution and reflect the parties’ true objectives. The proposed model has significant implications for courts, offering a framework for interpreting and enforcing contracts based on relational principles, while equipping parties with tools to organize long-term relationships and effective cooperation, reduce disputes and costs, and increase trust and stability. It also emphasizes the importance of interdisciplinary training for lawyers and judges to understand relational dynamics and apply this framework effectively. Conclusion The vested (structured) relational contract provides a practical and legal mechanism for certainty of the benefits of contractual relations, containing implicit contracts, away from a dispute. Hence providing the parties with the merits of relational contracts. This type of contract overcomes the limitations of classical law, increases predictability, reduces opportunistic behavior, and strengthens the continuity of long-term relationships. Combining a written expression of the parties’ intentions with relational principles, establishes the psychological contract between the parties and ensures that their true objectives are achieved and mutual benefits preserved. Given that this study represents the first comprehensive legal analysis of relational contracts in Iran, understanding this approach for the first time in the country could lay the groundwork for a major transformation in the fate of contracts, including international contracts. It also paves the way for future research, practical implementation, and adaptation of relational contract principles to the Iranian legal and economic context, providing a tool to strengthen, preserve, and optimize contractual relationships both in performance and dispute resolution با آنکه بسیاری از پژوهشگران قرارداد، رویکرد رابطه‌ای را پذیرفته‌اند و آن را به‌منزلۀ چارچوبی نظری و ابزاری عملی برای جبران کاستی‌های حقوق قراردادها در تأمین منافع متقابل طرفین به کار می‌گیرند، ادعای سرنوشت مبهم چنین قراردادی در برخی موارد به فراگیر نشدن استفاده از آن منجر شده است. نیاز به دخالت دادگاه‌ها و تبعات آن، نشان‌دهنده این سرنوشت مبهم است. در مقابل، تحقیقات نظری و عملی نشان می‌دهند این عدم استفاده، صورت‌مسئله را حذف کرده و به نادیده انگاشتن تأثیر ابعاد اقتصادی و اجتماعی قراردادها، خواسته‌ها و درحقیقت هدف اشخاص از انعقاد قرارداد منجر شده است. این درحالی است که رابطه‌گرایی برای طرفین قرارداد واجد اثر عملی بوده و به‌خصوص در روابط بلندمدت نجات‌بخش است. مقالۀ حاضر درصدد است ضمن بررسی چیستی و ویژگی‌های رویکرد رابطه‌ای به قرارداد، با عبور از صرف تفسیر رابطه‌ای، به معرفی قرارداد نوین قاعده‌مند رابطه‌ای بپردازد. قراردادی که ضمن مبتنی بودن بر نفع متقابل، کتبی و مصرح، لکن منعطف است. بدین ترتیب این قرارداد همراه با بهره‌مندی از مزایای رویکرد رابطه‌ای، از ایرادات منتسب به آن فارغ است و امکان استفاده از رویکرد رابطه‌ای را به شکل نوشته و مبتنی‌بر اهداف حقوق قراردادها فراهم می‌آورد.

https://lawresearchmagazine.sbu.ac.ir/article_106655_25420d1f995b4897f263c907e7ad3f66.pdf

دانشگاه شهید بهشتی فصلنامه تحقیقات حقوقی 1024-0772 29 2 2026 07 23 Feasibility of Civil Liability for Uncertain Causation in Light of the Loss of a Chance Theory with Emphasis on Medical Cases امکان‌سنجی مسئولیت مدنی سببیت نامشخص در پرتو نظریه فرصت ازدست‌رفته با تأکید بر پرونده‌های پزشکی 247 262 106836 10.48308/jlr.2026.240066.2902 FA سجاد شهبازقهفرخی . استادیار، دانشکده علوم انسانی، دانشگاه شهرکرد، شهرکرد، ایران sajjadshahbaz@sku.ac.ir 1. Assistant Professor, Facu 0000-0001-9757-6361 Journal Article 2025 05 24 Introduction Establishing causation is a fundamental pillar of civil liability claims, with the burden of proof resting on the claimant. However, in medical malpractice cases, determining the precise role of medical error in causing the final injury (such as death, permanent disability, or failure to recover) is often difficult or impossible due to scientific and clinical complexities. In such scenarios, where causation remains uncertain, the traditional civil liability system based on the "all-or-nothing" rule applies. This means that if the claimant cannot prove the causal link to the degree of certainty required by the legal system, they will receive no compensation, even if the physician's fault is established. This approach can lead to unjust outcomes, particularly when marginal differences in the probability of causation result in fundamentally different results (full compensation versus complete deprivation). The difficulties associated with proving causation in medical disputes have prompted scholars and courts in several jurisdictions to reconsider the traditional understanding of causation and damage. Modern tort law increasingly recognizes that scientific uncertainty should not necessarily deprive an injured patient of all compensation when negligent conduct has demonstrably reduced the prospect of a favorable outcome. Consequently, the loss of a chance theory has emerged as an intermediate solution between complete liability and complete exoneration, seeking to reconcile corrective justice with evidentiary limitations. The primary objective of this article is to examine the theoretical and practical challenges of the "loss of a chance" (perte d’une chance) theory as a mechanism to mitigate these injustices in cases of uncertain causation, through a comparative study of the legal systems of selected European countries. By recognizing the "reduction of the chance of recovery or survival" as an independent and compensable damage, this theory seeks to ensure that injured patients receive at least partial compensation. Focusing on medical cases, this article addresses the question of whether this theory can establish a fair balance between the rights of patients and physicians, or whether its challenges outweigh its benefits. Methods This research employs a descriptive-analytical method with a focus on comparative study . The scope encompasses European legal systems (including France, Germany, Austria, Spain, Belgium, and England) which have adopted different approaches to this issue. Research data was gathered through the examination of legal texts such as the civil codes of relevant European countries and the Principles of European Tort Law, key judicial precedents (e.g., rulings from the French Cour de Cassation and German case law), and doctrinal views in these jurisdictions. The collected data was then subjected to critical analysis. The aim is to dissect the foundations, implementation, and challenges facing this theory within the context of comparative law. Results and Discussions The findings indicate that the loss of a chance theory attempts to circumvent the impasse of proving definitive causal links by redefining the concept of damage from the "final injury" to the "reduction of the chance of recovery or survival." In this model, the lost chance itself becomes an independent and compensable head of damage. The comparative study reveals a dichotomy in approaches across Europe. Countries such as France, Spain, and Belgium have accepted this theory, thereby opening a path to partial compensation. For instance, in French law, compensation is often awarded as a percentage of the final damage, proportionate to the lost chance. In contrast, German and Austrian legal systems, citing the non-recognition of "chance" as an independent, tangible legal right within their civil codes (e.g., §823 of the German Civil Code - BGB), maintain a more cautious stance, largely rejecting the theory and emphasizing the preservation of the traditional rule. The comparative analysis further demonstrates that acceptance of the doctrine reflects a broader evolution in tort law from a strictly factual conception of causation toward a more normative and policy-oriented approach. Rather than focusing exclusively on whether the defendant's conduct can be identified as the definitive cause of the final injury, courts in several jurisdictions have increasingly concentrated on whether the defendant's negligence deprived the claimant of a valuable opportunity for recovery or survival. This shift is particularly significant in medical malpractice litigation, where the progression of disease, pre-existing conditions, and the limits of medical science frequently render causal certainty unattainable. Accordingly, the doctrine seeks to preserve the compensatory function of tort law by recognizing the destruction or reduction of a chance as a legally cognizable injury. Despite its justice-oriented advantage, fundamental challenges limit the theory's efficacy. First, the philosophical challenge of causal determinism targets its core premise. Second, the inherently vague and subjective nature of "chance" creates significant practical problems: a) Ambiguity regarding the objective existence of the initial chance (e.g., in cases of congenital disabilities). b) Lack of objective criteria for calculating the chance percentage and converting it into compensation, leading to arbitrariness in judicial decision-making. c) The problematic distinction between a "reduced" and a "lost" chance. Third, there is a risk of increased frivolous litigation due to the lowered motivational burden of proof and the potential for double recovery. Furthermore, the theory may conflict with the principle of full compensation (restitutio in integrum), as it only covers a portion of the loss. Another significant concern relates to the quantification of damages. The legitimacy of the doctrine largely depends upon the availability of reliable statistical and medical evidence capable of demonstrating the extent to which the defendant's conduct reduced the claimant's prospects. In the absence of transparent and objective criteria, judicial assessments may become excessively discretionary, thereby undermining legal certainty and predictability. Consequently, critics argue that while the doctrine may enhance substantive fairness in individual cases, it risks generating inconsistency and uncertainty at the systemic level. From a policy perspective, concerns are raised about its potential negative impact on professional medical conduct and rising healthcare system costs. Compared to the alternative of "proportional liability based on probabilistic causation," where compensation is directly proportional to the probability that the error caused the harm, the loss of a chance theory suffers from discontinuity and may result in practical injustice in determining compensation amounts. Conclusion The loss of a chance theory emerged as a response to the inefficacy of the "all-or-nothing" rule in addressing uncertain causation in medicine and has achieved some success in mitigating unfair outcomes in certain legal systems. However, its theoretical (e.g., the determinism debate) and practical (e.g., subjectivity in assessment) challenges are significant and cannot be overlooked. This theory alone cannot serve as a comprehensive solution. The article's ultimate conclusion is that to achieve sustainable and equitable justice, an intelligent combination of this theory with other mechanisms, such as proportional liability, appears essential. Furthermore, developing transparent legal frameworks that provide more objective criteria for establishing and valuing a "chance," coupled with establishing specialized tribunals for medical disputes, could mitigate its shortcomings. Ultimately, any solution must strike a precise balance between protecting the rights of injured patients and avoiding overburdening the medical profession with liability in a manner that impedes the provision of healthcare services اثبات رابطه سببیت در دعاوی مسئولیت مدنی همواره با چالش‌های عمیقی مواجه بوده است؛ این مسئله به‌ویژه در مواردی که تعیین نقش دقیق خطای پزشکی در وقوع آسیب دشوار یا ناممکن باشد، نمود بیشتری دارد. مقاله حاضر با روش توصیفی- تحلیلی و با مطالعه تطبیقی در نظام حقوقی برخی کشورهای اروپایی، به بررسی قابلیت «نظریه فرصت ازدست‌رفته» به‌عنوان راهکاری برای جبران این خلأ می‌پردازد. یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهد که این نظریه با شناسایی «کاهش شانس بهبود یا بقا» به‌عنوان «ضرر» به بهره بردن از این مفهوم پرداخته است و تجربه برخی نظام‌هایی حقوقی نیز نشان می‌دهد ایشان از مفهوم سنتی رابطه سببیت درحال گذارند. بااین‌حال، چالش‌های نظری و عملی متعددی ازجمله ابهام در وجود شانس‌، ذهنی بودن معیار محاسبه غرامت و خطر افزایش دعاوی کم‌اساس، کارایی آن را محدود ساخته است. مطالعه تطبیقی نشان می‌دهد که برخی نظام‌های حقوقی نظیر آلمان و اتریش با استناد به عدم شناسایی «فرصت» به‌عنوان حق مستقل، رویکرد محتاطانه‌تری اتخاذ کرده‌اند. در نتیجه، به‌رغم مزایای نظریه فرصت ازدست‌رفته در کاهش ناعدالتی‌های ناشی از اعمال قاعده سنتی مسئولیت مدنی_ قاعده همه یا هیچ_ برای تحقق هرچه بیشتر عدالت نیاز است تا این نظریه با نظریات دیگر نیز ترکیب شود

https://lawresearchmagazine.sbu.ac.ir/article_106836_c1e9be2b4ca800b983d72d32dd664fa0.pdf

دانشگاه شهید بهشتی فصلنامه تحقیقات حقوقی 1024-0772 29 2 2026 07 23 Analysis of the Right to Physical Protection of the Child within the Triad of Rights: Provision, Protection, and Participation in the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Iranian Legal System تحلیل حق حمایت جسمانی از کودک در سه‌گانه حق تأمین، حمایت و مشارکت در کنوانسیون حقوق کودک و نظام حقوقی ایران 263 282 107108 10.48308/jlr.2026.237467.2804 FA سعید محجوب استادیار، دانشکده حقوق، دانشگاه قم، قم، ایران s.mahjoub@qom.ac.ir 0000-0002-4347-1377 Journal Article 2024 11 05 Introduction Child rights constitute one of the most dynamic and evolving areas in contemporary international and domestic legal discourse. In recent decades, scholarly efforts have increasingly moved toward a more structured classification of these rights, dividing them into three major categories: the right to provision (right to support), the right to protection, and the right to participation. Among these, the right to protection represents the negative or restrictive dimension of child rights, aimed at preventing interference, harm, or abuse by third parties. Within this framework, protection can itself be further divided into physical and non-physical protection, depending on whether the child’s bodily integrity or psychological and emotional well-being is concerne. The present study focuses primarily on the concept of physical protection rights of children and their specific manifestations in international instruments—particularly the Convention on the Rights of the Child—and in Iranian legal doctrine. The central objective is to provide a systematic conceptualization of the right to protection, distinguish it from the right to provision, and clarify its legal consequences. The study further aims to identify and analyze key manifestations of physical protection rights, including the right to live with parents except in exceptional circumstances, protection against all forms of violence, protection against child trafficking, protection against drug abuse, and protection against torture or inhuman treatment. Another objective is to examine the theoretical and normative implications of distinguishing between rights of provision and rights of protection. While provision rights require positive state action and resource allocation, protection rights are primarily negative in nature and can be ensured through effective legislation and criminalization of harmful conduct. Finally, the study seeks to compare the approaches of international instruments—especially the Convention on the Rights of the Child—with Iranian legal frameworks, identifying both strengths and deficiencies in their treatment of child protection rights. Methods This research adopts a descriptive–analytical methodology, grounded in doctrinal legal analysis of both international and domestic legal texts. The primary sources include the Convention on the Rights of the Child and relevant Iranian legal provisions. The study systematically extracts and categorizes legal norms related to child protection by analyzing their textual content and normative structure. Given the textual nature of the sources, the research relies on classification as a foundational methodological tool, whereby child rights are first conceptually divided into distinct categories—provision, protection, and participation—and then further refined into subcategories, particularly physical protection rights. The analytical approach focuses on normative legal propositions, especially those that impose obligations on states or individuals. These duty-imposing provisions are examined to determine the extent and nature of legal protection afforded to children. Unlike purely theoretical or policy-oriented approaches, this study does not attempt to generate new normative rules outside the existing legal texts but rather aims to interpret and systematize existing norms. Comparative legal analysis is also employed to evaluate similarities and differences between the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Iranian legal system. This enables the identification of conceptual gaps, structural inconsistencies, and areas of convergence or divergence. Results and Discussions The findings of the study demonstrate that contemporary child rights discourse increasingly recognizes a tripartite structure consisting of provision, protection, and participation rights. Within this structure, protection rights function as a negative safeguard mechanism designed to prevent harm rather than to create material benefits. This distinction is crucial, as it directly influences the nature of state obligations: provision rights require active intervention and resource allocation, whereas protection rights primarily require legislative prohibition and enforcement mechanisms. The study further reveals that physical protection rights of children can be systematically categorized into several core components. These include the right to live with parents except in exceptional circumstances, protection against all forms of violence, protection against trafficking, protection against illegal drug use, and protection against torture or inhuman punishment. These rights collectively aim to safeguard the child’s bodily integrity and ensure survival, dignity, and security during the formative stages of life. A key finding is that the Convention on the Rights of the Child, while comprehensive in scope, does not explicitly adopt a fully structured theoretical framework of child rights based on the provision–protection–participation model. Instead, it articulates rights in a dispersed and article-based manner. Nevertheless, through interpretive analysis, it is possible to reconstruct such a framework and identify implicit categories of protection rights within the Convention. The comparative analysis shows that Iranian law, although substantively aligned with many principles of the Convention, lacks a systematic and holistic conceptual framework for child rights. Instead, it addresses child-related issues in a fragmented manner across various legal instruments. This absence of macro-level conceptualization results in inconsistencies and interpretive ambiguities in practice. Moreover, the study highlights that some western legal scholarship has increasingly criticized the insufficient implementation of child protection rights, describing children as a marginalized and structurally disadvantaged group. Such critiques emphasize systemic inequalities and call for stronger legal and institutional reforms to address power imbalances between adults and children. Another important finding is the theoretical significance of distinguishing physical from non-physical protection rights. While physical protection rights are relatively universal and consistent across legal systems, non-physical protection rights—related to psychological, emotional, and cognitive well-being—are more context-dependent and influenced by cultural and normative values. This distinction provides a more nuanced understanding of child rights and enhances the analytical precision of legal interpretation. Finally, the study underscores that the absence of a coherent legal framework in Iran for categorizing child rights has led to both progressive developments in certain areas and persistent gaps in others. This fragmented approach limits the effectiveness of legal protection and complicates judicial and legislative interpretation. Conclusion In conclusion, the study demonstrates that child rights in contemporary legal systems are best understood through a structured tripartite model consisting of provision, protection, and participation rights. Among these, protection rights—particularly physical protection rights—play a crucial role in safeguarding children from harm and ensuring their fundamental security and dignity. The findings indicate that while international instruments such as the Convention on the Rights of the Child provide a broad normative foundation, they lack a fully systematic classification framework. Iranian law, although substantively engaged with child protection issues, similarly suffers from conceptual fragmentation and the absence of a comprehensive theoretical structure. The study ultimately concludes that a clearer distinction between provision and protection rights, along with a further subdivision of protection into physical and non-physical dimensions, can significantly enhance the coherence and effectiveness of child rights systems. Such a framework not only facilitates better legal interpretation but also supports more consistent legislative and policy development. از جدیدترین دسته‌بندی‌های حوزه حقوق کودک، تحلیل این حقوق به‌ حق تأمین، حق حمایت و حق مشارکت است. حق حمایت در مقابل حق تأمین، وجهه سلبی و منفی از حقوق کودکان است که مانع از دست‌اندازی دیگران به این حقوق می‌شود. در حوزه حق حمایت، می‌توان این حق را به‌حق حمایت جسمانی و غیرجسمانی تقسیم کرد. براساس روش توصیفی - تحلیلی و ناظر بر متون راجع به کنوانسیون حقوق کودک می‌توان حق زندگی با والدین مگر در موارد استثنایی، حق حمایت در برابر تمام اشکال خشونت‌ها، حق حمایت کودک در مقابل قاچاق، حق حمایت در برابر استفاده از مواد مخدر و حق حمایت در مقابل شکنجه را از موارد حق حمایت جسمانی از کودک دانست. از ثمرات تفکیک حق تأمین از حق حمایت، لزوم فراهم‌سازی و ایجابی حق و ملزومات آن در حق تأمین است، درحالی‌که در حق حمایت، به‌جهت ماهیت سلبی آن، وضع قوانین ثانوی جهت حفاظت از این حقوق، وافی به مقصود به‌نظر می‌رسد. درخصوص مصادیق مذکور، نظام حقوقی ایران در هریک از موارد و به فراخور موضوع، رویکردی خاص اتخاذ کرده که به‌صورت تفصیلی در متن بدان پرداخته شده ‌است.

https://lawresearchmagazine.sbu.ac.ir/article_107108_83a99aab2dc74307c15285f3ad10bceb.pdf

دانشگاه شهید بهشتی فصلنامه تحقیقات حقوقی 1024-0772 29 2 2026 07 23 A Reflection on the Difficulty of Constitutional Amendment In Iran ‌تأملی در مسئلۀ دشواری بازنگری قانون اساسی در ایران 283 302 104201 10.48308/jlr.2024.230235.2428 FA صابر الماسی خانی کارشناس‌ارشد، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران (نویسنده مسئول) saber.almasi@ut.ac.ir 0000-0003-2699-0033 علی سهرابلو دکتری، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران Journal Article 2023 01 13 Introduction Constitutional amendment is a mechanism for repairing imperfections in a foundational text, adapting it to social and political change, and enabling pacifying change without revolution or adoption of an entirely new constitution. Yet a constitution must also resist transient political pressures if it is to preserve supremacy, stability, and authority. The central problem is therefore not a binary choice between flexibility and rigidity, but the design of a balanced degree of amendment difficulty that protects constitutional continuity while preventing amendment stasis and obsolescence. This question is especially significant in Iran, where the Constitution of the Islamic Republic has been formally amended only once, in 1989, and where “constitutional amendment difficulty” has received little independent treatment in Persian legal scholarship. This study aims to clarify the concept, identify its codified and nontextual factors, and evaluate the Iranian constitutional order accordingly. It asks what amendment difficulty means, which factors shape it, and how Iran’s rules and practices should be assessed. The study hypothesizes that amendment difficulty in Iran is high because the formal amendment rules of Article 177 interact with a limited amendment history and a political culture that treats constitutional revision as exceptional. Methods The study employs a descriptive-analytical method and an observation-oriented approach. It first reconstructs amendment difficulty and its relationship with constitutional flexibility and rigidity through constitutional-law scholarship and theories of the design of amendment rules. It then classifies the determinants of difficulty into written and non-contextual sources. The written dimension includes procedural stages, institutional competences, amendment thresholds, referendums, and temporal limitations and unamendability, with particular attention to Article 177 of the Iranian Constitution. The unwritten dimension covers temporal variability, amendment experience, political structure, party competition, norms of constitutional change, constitutional veneration, amendment cultures, and informal change. Comparative examples from the United States, India, Germany, New Zealand, Japan, Canada, Colombia, and selected African and Caribbean jurisdictions demonstrate that difficulty is relative and context-dependent. Finally, the four stages established by Article 177—initiation, deliberation and approval, confirmation, and referendum—are evaluated quantitatively and qualitatively. The inquiry combines doctrinal reading of constitutional provisions with critical comparison and distinguishes normative amendment design from its design and operation. The consequences of high difficulty are also examined through the interpretive practice of the Guardian Council, the General Policies concerning Article 44, and constitutional provisions identified as requiring formal reform. Results and Discussions Amendment difficulty denotes the degree of procedural and practical hardship faced by reformers seeking formal constitutional change; it cannot be inferred solely from codified amendment rules. Flexibility and rigidity lie on a continuum, and measuring difficulty merely by counting amendments or scoring formal thresholds is inadequate. The scope of each change, nature of party competition, historical circumstances, political conventions, and the amendment culture of the constitution affect how identical rules operate. Amendment difficulty is therefore contextual, temporally variable, and produced by interacting causes. Written causes include multiple procedural stages, concentration of the initiation power, supermajority requirements, compulsory referendums, and temporal or substantive restrictions. Unwritten causes include the demands of a historical period, institutional composition, pluralism, previous success or failure in reform, and public attitudes toward constitutional change. The article distinguishes an “amendment culture as acceleration,” which turns amendment into a rapid instrument of political objectives; an “amendment culture as redirection,” which transfers change from the formal route to interpretation, convention, or substitute practices; and an “amendment culture as incapacitation,” which deprives formal amendment rules of practical authority. High difficulty has ambivalent consequences. It may preserve institutional stability, protect fundamental rights, and prevent opportunistic manipulation. Beyond a reasonable level, however, it makes amendment rules ineffective, leaves provisions obsolete, reduces responsiveness to social transformation, restricts political dialogue, and encourages opaque informal amendment. Excessive flexibility creates the opposite risk by reducing the constitution to a statute and enabling partisan revision. No universally optimal degree of rigidity therefore exists; amendment design must reflect constitutional purposes and the importance of the provision concerned. Article 177 establishes four cumulative stages in Iran: initiation by the Leader after consultation with the Expediency Council; deliberation and approval by the Constitutional Revision Council; confirmation by the Leader; and final approval by an absolute majority of referendum participants. Their multiplicity creates substantial structural difficulty. Expediency controls initiation and confirmation, making difficulty contingent on political judgment, while the Constitution specifies no voting threshold for the Revision Council. Compulsory referendum for every amendment, without distinguishing transformative changes from minor changes, imposes the same demanding route on unequal subjects. The formal arrangement thus combines severe rigidity with ambiguity or unjustified flexibility. Unwritten factors intensify this burden. The sole amendment experience of 1989 covered numerous structural matters and entrenched an understanding of amendment as an exceptional, comprehensive event rather than a mechanism for a needed fix. The result is an environment approaching constructive unamendability. The Guardian Council’s interpretation of Article 113, its 2021 resolution prescribing qualifications for presidential candidates, and the practical transformation of Article 44 through general policies are presented as instances approaching informal constitutional alteration. These developments resemble a redirection culture, as change occurs outside the procedure designed for it. Interpretation may resolve ambiguity, but it cannot provide the procedural legitimacy, public participation, and clarity of formal amendment and may create rules beyond the text. It also identifies matters requiring formal reform, including local councils, legislative delegation, the Guardian Council’s rule-making position, and state broadcasting. Written obstacles, historical experience, and interpretive substitution therefore combine to produce an unreasonable degree of constructive unamendability. Conclusion The study concludes that amendment difficulty in Iran has moved beyond a defensible equilibrium. Formal obstacles and historical-cultural factors reinforce one another, obstruct necessary reform, and redirect constitutional change toward less transparent practices. The appropriate response is not to abolish rigidity or simplify all amendments uniformly, but to redesign Article 177 as a multi-track, subject-sensitive procedure. Fundamental provisions concerning constitutional identity and basic rights should retain demanding protections, while minor and non-fundamental changes should follow a clearer, less burdensome route. Precisely defined initiators, amendment thresholds, and procedures for each category would preserve stability while restoring necessary change to a lawful, transparent, and participatory process. دشواری بازنگری، بایستۀ استواری قانون اساسی است و ازاین‌رو، اصل بر دشواری امکان بازنگری است. اما هیچ متنی بی‌عیب‌ونقص نیست و گذشت زمان مثبت این امر است؛ بنابراین، میزان دشواری بازنگری قانون اساسی باید حد مشخصی داشته باشد و اگر چنین نباشد، آثار سوء آن در سلامت قانون اساسی رخ می‌نماید. ازاین‌رو لازم آمد طی پژوهشی مجزا، مسئلة دشواری بازنگری قانون اساسی و ابعاد مختلف آن بررسی و نظری به وضعیت نظام حقوقی ایران شود. نگارندگان با روش تحلیلی - توصیفی و برپایۀ رویکرد مشاهده‌محور، ابتدا مسئله دشواری بازنگری را تشریح کردند و سپس وضعیت دشواری قواعد بازنگری در ایران را سنجیدند. نتیجه آن شد که میزانِ دشواری قواعد بازنگری در ایران بالاست و همین، موجب ناکارآمدی قواعد بازنگری، پیدایش گونه‌ای نامناسب از «فرهنگ جهت‌دهی مجدد» و متروک شدن برخی از قواعد قانون اساسی شده است. ازاین‌رو، پیشنهاد شد که شاکلة قواعد بازنگری دگرگون شود؛ این‌گونه که بازنگری از حالت تک‌مسیره به درآید و وضعیت چند‌مسیره و چندموضوعه به خود گیرد

https://lawresearchmagazine.sbu.ac.ir/article_104201_1657cf51b7e39162aae9faec0da71f18.pdf