عنوان مقاله [English]
This article deals with the hofeld’s framework of the concept of rights; studies privilege, claim, power and immunity; and criticizes will and benefit theories of rights. Each of these theories is seeking to present a coherent theoretical framework so that include all the hofeldian concepts. However, sometimes different structure of them is so far from each other that gathering them under those theories will be difficult. Will theory, considers right holder as a person who can choose performance or non performance of a duty. In other words, it recognizes rights as protected choices. In this theory, focusing on the agency amounts to ignore some familiar rights such as unwaivable rights, children's rights and the rights of adults who are unable to choose. Interest theory, considers rights as a guarantee to its beneficiaries and regards obligator’s duty to do or not to do, dependent on the right holder’s interest. Despite the fact that the interest theory fills in the gaps of the will theory, focusing too much on the interest, makes it too loose and results in its inefficiency. Finally, although the recent versions of the will theory, to some extent remove the traditional theory’s defects and entrench those versions, but are far from the common language of rights. So, we suggest that by appealing to the interest theory, a new and moderated version of the will theory presented so as to fill in its gaps. Hence, the interest theory just becomes as a complementary of the will theory of rights.Keywords:Hofeldian Concepts, Theories of Rights, Will Theory, Interest Theor.