Deputy of Education and Research of the General Justice Department of Tehran Province Judgment 1735-1227 26 126 2026 07 23 Normative Element in Civil Liability Normative Element in Civil Liability 1 20 736277 10.22034/judg.2026.2079114.1640 FA Ahmad Deylami Professor, Department of Private Law, Faculty of Law, University of Qom, Qom, Iran. A-Deylami@qom.ac.ir 0000-0002-4538-6969 Journal Article 2025 11 26 One of the important issues in civil liability is the question of the number, nature, role, and degree of importance of its constituent elements. However, the subject of this paper is the inquiry concerning the normative element, defined later in the text,as one of the constituent elements of civil liability. As follows: Is the existence of a normative element necessary for civil liability? What is its concept and nature? What is the degree of abnormality required in it and what are its different types? The purpose of this article is to answer these questions, which is carried out in a descriptive and analytical method. The reason for the necessity of this discussion is the various interpretations of the concept and nature of 'fault' as one of the pillars of civil liability. The benefit of this discussion is obvious, including in understanding the difference between non-contractual liability and contractual liability and civil liability resulting from the commission of a crime; and the relationship between civil liability and criminal and moral liability. Based on the findings of this study, the existence of the normative element is a necessary and permanent condition of civil liability, and not a guarantee of liability. Abnormality here simply means committing an act or omitting an unauthorized act that violates a general or specific duty, whether intentionally or unintentionally. Therefore, it has a clear boundary with the psychological element, Conditions of legal capacity for civil liability, the relationship between the act and the agent, and the causal relationship. One of the important issues in civil liability is the question of the number, nature, role, and degree of importance of its constituent elements. However, the subject of this paper is the inquiry concerning the normative element, defined later in the text,as one of the constituent elements of civil liability. As follows: Is the existence of a normative element necessary for civil liability? What is its concept and nature? What is the degree of abnormality required in it and what are its different types? The purpose of this article is to answer these questions, which is carried out in a descriptive and analytical method. The reason for the necessity of this discussion is the various interpretations of the concept and nature of 'fault' as one of the pillars of civil liability. The benefit of this discussion is obvious, including in understanding the difference between non-contractual liability and contractual liability and civil liability resulting from the commission of a crime; and the relationship between civil liability and criminal and moral liability. Based on the findings of this study, the existence of the normative element is a necessary and permanent condition of civil liability, and not a guarantee of liability. Abnormality here simply means committing an act or omitting an unauthorized act that violates a general or specific duty, whether intentionally or unintentionally. Therefore, it has a clear boundary with the psychological element, Conditions of legal capacity for civil liability, the relationship between the act and the agent, and the causal relationship. https://www.ghazavat.org/article_736277_aee2de92f12af309f15efeba5a14330c.pdf

Deputy of Education and Research of the General Justice Department of Tehran Province Judgment 1735-1227 26 126 2026 07 23 Legal Challenges in Judicial Proceedings for Addressing Crimes Committed Using Deepfake Technology Legal Challenges in Judicial Proceedings for Addressing Crimes Committed Using Deepfake Technology 21 34 735374 10.22034/judg.2026.2059297.1448 FA Mona Hoseinpouri Assistant Professor, Department of Law, Kermanshah Branch, Islamic Azad University, Kermanshah, Iran. hosseinpouri.m.1366@iau.ac.ir 0000-0001-5077-239X Journal Article 2025 04 29 Deepfake refers to technologies that, using deep learning and neural networks, manipulate audio, visual, or video content in a way that appears real but is entirely fabricated. This study, employing a descriptive-analytical method, examines the legal challenges of judicial proceedings in cases arising from crimes committed through deepfakes. The necessity of this research stems from the unprecedented challenges faced by judicial systems in determining criminal liability, proving the mental element, and validating evidence, where traditional approaches in criminal law are insufficient to address these complexities. Findings indicate that confronting these challenges requires the development of novel legal-technical frameworks. These frameworks should include drafting specialized laws for deepfake-related crimes, applying strict liability for producers, enhancing transparency of system operations through techniques such as digital watermarking, and providing judicial training and expertise in the field of deepfakes. The present study emphasizes that an intelligent integration of legal principles, advanced monitoring technologies, and ethical frameworks can create a safer and more equitable digital ecosystem. This integrated approach not only protects individual rights but also provides the necessary space for the growth of transformative technologies and can serve as a model for addressing future challenges posed by emerging technologies. Deepfake refers to technologies that, using deep learning and neural networks, manipulate audio, visual, or video content in a way that appears real but is entirely fabricated. This study, employing a descriptive-analytical method, examines the legal challenges of judicial proceedings in cases arising from crimes committed through deepfakes. The necessity of this research stems from the unprecedented challenges faced by judicial systems in determining criminal liability, proving the mental element, and validating evidence, where traditional approaches in criminal law are insufficient to address these complexities. Findings indicate that confronting these challenges requires the development of novel legal-technical frameworks. These frameworks should include drafting specialized laws for deepfake-related crimes, applying strict liability for producers, enhancing transparency of system operations through techniques such as digital watermarking, and providing judicial training and expertise in the field of deepfakes. The present study emphasizes that an intelligent integration of legal principles, advanced monitoring technologies, and ethical frameworks can create a safer and more equitable digital ecosystem. This integrated approach not only protects individual rights but also provides the necessary space for the growth of transformative technologies and can serve as a model for addressing future challenges posed by emerging technologies. https://www.ghazavat.org/article_735374_c0b335e65de8ad6de7189e29752fc891.pdf

Deputy of Education and Research of the General Justice Department of Tehran Province Judgment 1735-1227 26 126 2026 07 23 Re-examination of “Hoquqe Ammeh” in Statutory law: Seeking a Global Foundation Re-examination of “Hoquqe Ammeh” in Statutory law: Seeking a Global Foundation 35 58 736285 10.22034/judg.2026.2055652.1400 FA Samaneh Rahmatifar Associate Prof, Department of Law, Ha.c, Islamic Azad University, Hamedan, Iran. s.rahmatifar@iau.ir 0000-0002-4586-4748 Journal Article 2025 03 10 Abstract: The aim is to provide a new reading of “Hoquqe Ammeh” influenced by recent legal-executive developments, seeking similarities with a comparable global legal concept. The research method is descriptive-analytical, whereby the content of decrees and official documents is analyzed to clarify the legal system's interpretation of “Hoquqe Ammeh”. The results are then compared with similar concepts. The legal system has not yet reached a reliable definition of “Hoquqe Ammeh”. The most defensible definition is: a set of legal obligations of public legal person at micro or macro levels and in various internal domains, whose beneficiaries might be specific individuals (victims of motor accidents), unspecified individuals (those harmed by environmental destruction), or even the state. In the restoration stage, the judiciary comes into play, providing an executive framework through formal communications or civil/criminal litigation by prosecutors. Judicial control in this matter is active, contrary to natural practices. The concept of “Hoquqe Ammeh”, as it has manifested in the legal system of the Islamic Republic, is not the same as any of its close concepts (including public interest, common good, and public rights); however, it generally represents all these concepts. Abstract: The aim is to provide a new reading of “Hoquqe Ammeh” influenced by recent legal-executive developments, seeking similarities with a comparable global legal concept. The research method is descriptive-analytical, whereby the content of decrees and official documents is analyzed to clarify the legal system's interpretation of “Hoquqe Ammeh”. The results are then compared with similar concepts. The legal system has not yet reached a reliable definition of “Hoquqe Ammeh”. The most defensible definition is: a set of legal obligations of public legal person at micro or macro levels and in various internal domains, whose beneficiaries might be specific individuals (victims of motor accidents), unspecified individuals (those harmed by environmental destruction), or even the state. In the restoration stage, the judiciary comes into play, providing an executive framework through formal communications or civil/criminal litigation by prosecutors. Judicial control in this matter is active, contrary to natural practices. The concept of “Hoquqe Ammeh”, as it has manifested in the legal system of the Islamic Republic, is not the same as any of its close concepts (including public interest, common good, and public rights); however, it generally represents all these concepts. https://www.ghazavat.org/article_736285_7487a38fee24fd488b8f28796aa5e748.pdf

Deputy of Education and Research of the General Justice Department of Tehran Province Judgment 1735-1227 26 126 2026 07 23 Claim for Dividend Payments in Joint Stock Companies Claim for Dividend Payments in Joint Stock Companies 59 81 736278 10.22034/judg.2026.2078671.1637 FA Mehdi AMINI Assistant Professor, Department of Law, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Shahrekord University, Shahrekord, Iran, (Corresponding Author): mehdi.amini@sku.ac.ir 0000-0002-7929-8617 Hossein Kaviar Associate Professor, Department of Law Faculty of Administrative Sciences and Economics, Arak University, Arak, Iran h-kaviar@araku.ac.ir 0000-0001-5699-4241 Journal Article 2025 11 23 Dividends constitute a portion of a company’s net profit that, once approved by the general assembly of shareholders, is distributed among them. The right to claim dividends is therefore regarded as one of the fundamental entitlements of shareholders in joint stock companies. Ensuring the timely payment of dividends holds significant importance within the framework of corporate law as well as securities regulation.<br><br>This article, adopting a descriptive analytical method and a critical approach, examines the legal conditions governing dividend claims, the competent adjudicatory authority, the applicable procedural rules, and the enforcement mechanisms.<br><br>The findings indicate that under Article 15 of the Law on the Development of New Financial Instruments and Institutions, the legislator shifted jurisdiction over dividend related disputes in listed companies from the ordinary courts to the Securities and Exchange Market Arbitration Board (as defined in Article 36 of the Securities Market Act). Moreover, it granted the Securities and Exchange Organization (SEO) a form of statutory representation to initiate dividend claims before the Arbitration Board. Both reforms, however, invite criticism: the former due to doubts about the “professional” nature of such disputes, the ambiguous legal character of the Arbitration Board, and the lack of a clear procedural framework; the latter because of numerous uncertainties regarding the scope and manner of the SEO’s representative authority—issues for which existing legislation provides no explicit answer. These shortcomings may, in practice, hinder the effective exercise of that statutory representation. Dividends constitute a portion of a company’s net profit that, once approved by the general assembly of shareholders, is distributed among them. The right to claim dividends is therefore regarded as one of the fundamental entitlements of shareholders in joint stock companies. Ensuring the timely payment of dividends holds significant importance within the framework of corporate law as well as securities regulation.<br><br>This article, adopting a descriptive analytical method and a critical approach, examines the legal conditions governing dividend claims, the competent adjudicatory authority, the applicable procedural rules, and the enforcement mechanisms.<br><br>The findings indicate that under Article 15 of the Law on the Development of New Financial Instruments and Institutions, the legislator shifted jurisdiction over dividend related disputes in listed companies from the ordinary courts to the Securities and Exchange Market Arbitration Board (as defined in Article 36 of the Securities Market Act). Moreover, it granted the Securities and Exchange Organization (SEO) a form of statutory representation to initiate dividend claims before the Arbitration Board. Both reforms, however, invite criticism: the former due to doubts about the “professional” nature of such disputes, the ambiguous legal character of the Arbitration Board, and the lack of a clear procedural framework; the latter because of numerous uncertainties regarding the scope and manner of the SEO’s representative authority—issues for which existing legislation provides no explicit answer. These shortcomings may, in practice, hinder the effective exercise of that statutory representation. https://www.ghazavat.org/article_736278_ddefa9e3b6376dc25fba27f3034f6a6f.pdf

Deputy of Education and Research of the General Justice Department of Tehran Province Judgment 1735-1227 26 126 2026 07 23 Conract Extension in the General Conditions of Contract (Publication No. 4311) and Its Relation to the Change of Duration Conract Extension in the General Conditions of Contract (Publication No. 4311) and Its Relation to the Change of Duration 82 104 729809 10.22034/judg.2025.2060420.1468 FA Mahin Sobhani Assistant Prof. , Department of Law, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran. (Corresponding Author): m_sobhani@guilan.ac.ir 0000-0002-5871-6242 Sahand Nejadi Ijadkar Ph.d. student in Private Law, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran. sahandnejadi69@gmail.com 0009-0006-8984-3910 Alireza Bazri Sharafshadi MA. In Criminal Law, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran. alibazri69lawyer@gmail.com 0009-0008-6235-4468 Journal Article 2025 05 15 Given that in government contracts governed by the 'General Conditions of Contract,' it is possible that the project may not be completed within the initial contract period, the extension, change of the duration, or renewal of the contract may be questioned. Pursuant to Article 30 of the General Conditions of Contract, titled "Change of Duration," the employer may only extend the contract by the amount of the contractor's authorized delays, the instances of which are enumerated in the ten cases listed in paragraph "A" of the mentioned article. Considering the title of the article and the possibility of both decreasing and increasing the duration, it is believed that the instances enumerated in this article pertain to changes in the contract duration and are different from the concept of extension. Also, in Article 30(A) (10) of the General Conditions of Contract, the employer is permitted, based on other circumstances which, in their own judgment, are beyond the contractor's fault, pursuant to paragraph (C) and at the end of the initial contract period, to extend or renew the contract. The main question is whether there is a difference between the concepts of "change of duration," "extension of duration," and "renewal of contract" in the General Conditions of Contract. Are the instances mentioned in Article 30 regarding extension, change, or renewal exhaustive? This research with a descriptive and analytical method, concludes that paragraph (C) of Article 30 implies no difference between the concepts of "change of duration" and "extension of duration." However, considering the formalities involved in entering into a new contract, this article cannot be interpreted as referring to the renewal of the contract. Although the legislator has attempted to enumerate the cases of contract extension, the existence of paragraph 10 of Article 30 has opened the way for the indefinite expansion of contract extension cases. Therefore, it is recommended that the legislator precisely limit the cases of contract extension. Given that in government contracts governed by the 'General Conditions of Contract,' it is possible that the project may not be completed within the initial contract period, the extension, change of the duration, or renewal of the contract may be questioned. Pursuant to Article 30 of the General Conditions of Contract, titled "Change of Duration," the employer may only extend the contract by the amount of the contractor's authorized delays, the instances of which are enumerated in the ten cases listed in paragraph "A" of the mentioned article. Considering the title of the article and the possibility of both decreasing and increasing the duration, it is believed that the instances enumerated in this article pertain to changes in the contract duration and are different from the concept of extension. Also, in Article 30(A) (10) of the General Conditions of Contract, the employer is permitted, based on other circumstances which, in their own judgment, are beyond the contractor's fault, pursuant to paragraph (C) and at the end of the initial contract period, to extend or renew the contract. The main question is whether there is a difference between the concepts of "change of duration," "extension of duration," and "renewal of contract" in the General Conditions of Contract. Are the instances mentioned in Article 30 regarding extension, change, or renewal exhaustive? This research with a descriptive and analytical method, concludes that paragraph (C) of Article 30 implies no difference between the concepts of "change of duration" and "extension of duration." However, considering the formalities involved in entering into a new contract, this article cannot be interpreted as referring to the renewal of the contract. Although the legislator has attempted to enumerate the cases of contract extension, the existence of paragraph 10 of Article 30 has opened the way for the indefinite expansion of contract extension cases. Therefore, it is recommended that the legislator precisely limit the cases of contract extension. https://www.ghazavat.org/article_729809_f3da110689080c9225b9e6486ee49e90.pdf

Deputy of Education and Research of the General Justice Department of Tehran Province Judgment 1735-1227 26 126 2026 07 23 The Position and Authority of the Central Headquarters for Combating the Smuggling of Goods and Currency in Iran's Criminal Policy System The Position and Authority of the Central Headquarters for Combating the Smuggling of Goods and Currency in Iran's Criminal Policy System 105 130 735371 10.22034/judg.2026.2071792.1595 FA Omid Rostami Ghazani Assistant Professor of Criminal Law and Criminology, Faculty of Law and Political Science, Ahlul Bayt International University (A.S.), Tehran, Iran. (Corresponding Author): rostamighazani@abu.ac.ir 0000-0003-3148-7491 Salman Emrani Assistant Professor of Criminal Law and Criminology, Faculty of Islamic Knowledge and Law, Imam Sadiq University (A.S.), Tehran, Iran. emrani@isu.ac.ir 0000-0001-6296-679X Journal Article 2025 09 16 The smuggling of goods and currency is an inevitable consequence of governments imposing restrictions or prohibitions on the export and import of goods and currency; accordingly, all societies face it to a greater or lesser extent. The multitude and diversity of factors contributing to the occurrence of smuggling on one hand, and the broad scope of the effects of smuggling in various domains on the other, cause the offense of smuggling to be both influenced by the performance of various governmental and societal institutions and, simultaneously, to influence their performance. This necessitates the interaction and coordination of all these institutions in implementing proactive and reactive measures to confront the offense of smuggling goods and currency. Accordingly, the Central Headquarters for Combating the Smuggling of Goods and Currency was established as a specialized supra-organizational entity to manage the proactive and reactive measures against smuggling. This article, using a descriptive-analytical method, examines the structure and legal status of the Headquarters' resolutions, its authority in the areas of policy-making, planning, coordination, and supervision of the proactive and reactive measures of related institutions, and its authority in adjudicating cases of smuggling goods and currency. Based on the conducted research, challenges facing the Headquarters include: ambiguity regarding the legal status of its resolutions due to its supra-branch and governmental-societal structure; doubts about the accuracy of the statistics presented by the Headquarters since the Headquarters itself is a stakeholder; and the Headquarters' failure to achieve the targets set forth in the laws. The smuggling of goods and currency is an inevitable consequence of governments imposing restrictions or prohibitions on the export and import of goods and currency; accordingly, all societies face it to a greater or lesser extent. The multitude and diversity of factors contributing to the occurrence of smuggling on one hand, and the broad scope of the effects of smuggling in various domains on the other, cause the offense of smuggling to be both influenced by the performance of various governmental and societal institutions and, simultaneously, to influence their performance. This necessitates the interaction and coordination of all these institutions in implementing proactive and reactive measures to confront the offense of smuggling goods and currency. Accordingly, the Central Headquarters for Combating the Smuggling of Goods and Currency was established as a specialized supra-organizational entity to manage the proactive and reactive measures against smuggling. This article, using a descriptive-analytical method, examines the structure and legal status of the Headquarters' resolutions, its authority in the areas of policy-making, planning, coordination, and supervision of the proactive and reactive measures of related institutions, and its authority in adjudicating cases of smuggling goods and currency. Based on the conducted research, challenges facing the Headquarters include: ambiguity regarding the legal status of its resolutions due to its supra-branch and governmental-societal structure; doubts about the accuracy of the statistics presented by the Headquarters since the Headquarters itself is a stakeholder; and the Headquarters' failure to achieve the targets set forth in the laws. https://www.ghazavat.org/article_735371_6808d7f69890de871cb3983c5f8aad81.pdf

Deputy of Education and Research of the General Justice Department of Tehran Province Judgment 1735-1227 26 126 2026 07 23 A Comparative Study of Legal Protection under the Formal Registration System of Transactions in the Romano-Germanic Legal System (Germany and France) and the Iranian Legal System A Comparative Study of Legal Protection under the Formal Registration System of Transactions in the Romano-Germanic Legal System (Germany and France) and the Iranian Legal System 131 151 738132 10.22034/judg.2026.2065667.1522 FA Mehdi Johari Assistant Professor, Department of Private Law, University of Judicial Sciences and Administrative Services, (Director General of Judiciary Education, Deputy of Human Resources of the Judiciary) Tehran, Iran. johari@ujsas.ac.ir 0009-0004-9683-9421 Nima Norouzi PhD student in Private Law, Faculty of Science and Education, Al-Mustafa Al-Alamiyah University, Qom, Iran, (Corresponding author), n.nima1376@gmail.com 0000-0002-6475-507X Journal Article 2025 07 13 In Iran, unregistered immovable property transactions face challenges such as conflicting transactions, document forgery, and increased property disputes. The Law on Mandatory Registration of Immovable Property Transactions (2024) was enacted to address these issues, enhance ownership transparency, and strengthen public trust in the legal registration system. However, the full implementation of the law's objectives encounters several challenges, including the extensive scope of mandatory registration, inclusion of personal rights or contractual obligations, insufficient infrastructure, and high registration costs, which may affect the principles of contractual freedom and the country’s objective registration system. This study aims to examine the challenges and critique the new law, analyze the effects of official registration on legal security and transaction certainty, and propose strategies to improve the effectiveness of the immovable property registration system. The research employs an analytical approach, based on comparative studies with French law and the theory of the “condition of enforceability” in immovable property transactions. The results indicate that the broad obligation to register, conflicts between real rights and contractual obligations, ambiguity in the nature of the enforceability condition, and the continued limited validity of ordinary documents reduce transaction certainty and increase legal risks. Adopting a substantive interpretation of the enforceability condition and focusing the law on registering real rights, along with mechanisms such as temporary registration or priority reservation, can mitigate these issues. In summary, amending and revising the law in alignment with the principles of Iran’s registration system can effectively ensure legal security, reduce property disputes, and achieve the main objectives of the law, namely transparency, order, and certainty in immovable property transactions. In Iran, unregistered immovable property transactions face challenges such as conflicting transactions, document forgery, and increased property disputes. The Law on Mandatory Registration of Immovable Property Transactions (2024) was enacted to address these issues, enhance ownership transparency, and strengthen public trust in the legal registration system. However, the full implementation of the law's objectives encounters several challenges, including the extensive scope of mandatory registration, inclusion of personal rights or contractual obligations, insufficient infrastructure, and high registration costs, which may affect the principles of contractual freedom and the country’s objective registration system. This study aims to examine the challenges and critique the new law, analyze the effects of official registration on legal security and transaction certainty, and propose strategies to improve the effectiveness of the immovable property registration system. The research employs an analytical approach, based on comparative studies with French law and the theory of the “condition of enforceability” in immovable property transactions. The results indicate that the broad obligation to register, conflicts between real rights and contractual obligations, ambiguity in the nature of the enforceability condition, and the continued limited validity of ordinary documents reduce transaction certainty and increase legal risks. Adopting a substantive interpretation of the enforceability condition and focusing the law on registering real rights, along with mechanisms such as temporary registration or priority reservation, can mitigate these issues. In summary, amending and revising the law in alignment with the principles of Iran’s registration system can effectively ensure legal security, reduce property disputes, and achieve the main objectives of the law, namely transparency, order, and certainty in immovable property transactions. https://www.ghazavat.org/article_738132_9dc0efdaeb143f27e123298a502af56c.pdf

Deputy of Education and Research of the General Justice Department of Tehran Province Judgment 1735-1227 26 126 2026 07 23 Artificial Intelligence as an Official Judicial Expert Artificial Intelligence as an Official Judicial Expert 152 177 735370 10.22034/judg.2025.2055221.1390 FA Muhammad Rasool Ahangaran استاد گروه فقه و مبانی حقوق اسلامی، دانشگاه تهران، دانشکدگان فارابی، قم، ایران، رایانامه: ahangaran@ut.ac.ir 0000-0002-7292-2210 Jamaladin Naseri MA Graduate in Regional Studies (North Africa), Official Judiciary Expert, Qom, Iran; Jamal.naseri.425@gmail.com 0009-0000-9315-687X Journal Article 2025 03 06 With the remarkable advancements in artificial intelligence in recent decades and the emergence of its novel applications in judicial systems, the question arises as to whether artificial intelligence can replace official judicial experts. This article, with an analytical-descriptive approach, examines the possibility of using artificial intelligence as an official judicial expert in our country's judicial system. By analyzing the capabilities and limitations of artificial intelligence in the role of an official expert, the article demonstrates that while AI-based technologies are capable of processing big data, providing objective analyses, and accelerating repetitive processes, serious limitations prevent this complete replacement. Limitations such as legal accountability for algorithmic errors, inability to understand the socio-cultural complexities of cases, biases stemming from training data, and a lack of transparency in decision-making are among the main obstacles. The findings indicate that artificial intelligence in its current state lacks the necessary competence to play an independent expert role. However, as a complementary tool alongside official experts, it can contribute to enhancing the quality of judicial services by automating routine tasks and increasing the accuracy and speed of proceedings. Realizing artificial intelligence as an official judicial expert requires the development of legal and ethical frameworks, investment in infrastructure, training of human resources, and the strengthening of collaboration among technology, engineering, and legal professionals so that replacing official experts with artificial intelligence can be achieved while preserving justice and public trust. With the remarkable advancements in artificial intelligence in recent decades and the emergence of its novel applications in judicial systems, the question arises as to whether artificial intelligence can replace official judicial experts. This article, with an analytical-descriptive approach, examines the possibility of using artificial intelligence as an official judicial expert in our country's judicial system. By analyzing the capabilities and limitations of artificial intelligence in the role of an official expert, the article demonstrates that while AI-based technologies are capable of processing big data, providing objective analyses, and accelerating repetitive processes, serious limitations prevent this complete replacement. Limitations such as legal accountability for algorithmic errors, inability to understand the socio-cultural complexities of cases, biases stemming from training data, and a lack of transparency in decision-making are among the main obstacles. The findings indicate that artificial intelligence in its current state lacks the necessary competence to play an independent expert role. However, as a complementary tool alongside official experts, it can contribute to enhancing the quality of judicial services by automating routine tasks and increasing the accuracy and speed of proceedings. Realizing artificial intelligence as an official judicial expert requires the development of legal and ethical frameworks, investment in infrastructure, training of human resources, and the strengthening of collaboration among technology, engineering, and legal professionals so that replacing official experts with artificial intelligence can be achieved while preserving justice and public trust. https://www.ghazavat.org/article_735370_0d4a13c4779856ab5d717d3c5c766961.pdf