https://www.ghazavat.org/ Judgment en daily 1 Thu, 23 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0330 Thu, 23 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0330 https://www.ghazavat.org/article_736277.html 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_735374.html 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_736285.html 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_736278.html 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.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.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_729809.html 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_735371.html 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_738132.html 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_735370.html 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_729295.html A trick in a petition refers to the action of the petitioner using the capacity of formal rules to write a favorable petition in order to secure more benefits in the proceedings. Gaining profit does not imply violating the substantive and formal rights of the litigant. It is essential to understand the guarantees for the implementation of such tricks, as they can have a significant impact on the proceedings of lawsuits. The present study, employing a descriptive-analytical method, utilizing library-based data and an examination of judicial precedents, seeks to identify and analyze these legal effects. Changing the local jurisdiction of the court, expanding the jurisdiction of the lawsuit, finalizing the verdict at the initial stage, and converting the original verdict into a decision to reject the lawsuit at the appeal stage are among the main guarantees for the implementation of tricks in the petition. Essentially, these tricks are not the result of weaknesses in the law and should not be considered illegitimate or immoral acts; rather, the artistic use of formal rules, while observing the existential philosophy of these rules, can contribute to the development of civil procedure. https://www.ghazavat.org/article_729810.html Sometimes, due to the actions of an employee, damage is inflicted on another party, raising the issue of their civil liability. This article analyzes the civil liability of government employees through a descriptive-analytical method by examining legal theories and judicial rulings. The review of legal theories indicates that no single theory can serve as the sole basis for the civil liability of government employees or the responsibility of the state. When an employee, while performing their duties, causes damage to a client due to negligence, they bear civil liability. However, if the damage is related to a deficiency in the administrative tools, the responsibility for compensation lies with the administration. Furthermore, holding an employee accountable can hinder their creativity, as fear of liability may prevent them from performing their duties correctly. Solely holding the state responsible can also lead employees to work carelessly. It is essential to distinguish between damages caused by employees' negligence and those arising from administrative negligence, attributing responsibility to the party whose fault caused the loss. The state is responsible for organizational deficiencies and weaknesses in its administrative structure, while the employee is accountable for their own negligence. In cases of gross negligence and when malice is established, responsibility should rest with the employee. However, in other cases, civil liability should be determined according to legal standards. In instances of loss, according to general civil liability rules, the employee is liable unless the loss results from deficiencies in government resources or if a cause stronger than that of the direct agent is present. Additionally, in cases where specific laws apply, we refer to and act according to those laws, such as the liability of judges who are personally liable in cases of intent or gross negligence that is treated as intent; otherwise, the public treasury compensates. One potential solution is to extend this principle to employees. https://www.ghazavat.org/article_735356.html The most important and desired outcome for the prevailing party from the lawsuit and the proceedings is the issuance and, more importantly, the enforcement of the final judgment. For this reason, the legislator, by passing a special Act for the enforcement of civil judgments, has stipulated the principles and procedures for enforcement and has specified in numerous articles (including Article 24 of this Act) the continuation of enforcement operations and the prohibition of stopping or delaying their implementation, except in exceptional cases specified by law. One of the assumptions that arises in the enforcement of a final judgment is that the judgment is related to the return of the property to the prevailing party and that at the time of the court's request, the property "is in the possession of someone other than the convicted person"; In such an assumption, which itself can have different instances, numerous questions and challenges arise in terms of enforcement operations (field of enforcement). Among them, what does third-party possession mean? Is the property limited to immovable property or does it also include movable property? https://www.ghazavat.org/article_735377.html The main condition for the Qasamah process is the existence of "luth". Luth is a meaning of evidence and evidence that creates suspicion for the ruler that the murder is attributed to the accused, such as the presence of blood on his clothes or the possession of a bloody weapon. There are various questions about luth, such as its legitimacy, generality in the soul and limbs, the exclusiveness or allegoricality of the examples of luth... But the subject of this article is to determine the degree of belief that is achieved by the ruler through the Luth. Most jurists of both sects consider the realization of suspicion sufficient, but our claim, presented with a descriptive-analytical method in the context of contemporary jurisprudence, is that mere absolute suspicion is not sufficient to achieve Luth and execute the ruling by the Qasamah, and the ruler must definitely obtain ordinary knowledge (certainty). Our evidence is as follows:Prohibition of acting on suspicion except for what is spent on evidence, the violation of the rule of oath in terms of the use of oath by the claimant, the wisdom of mentioning Luth in narrations, the existence of opponents of the validity of Luth, caution in temperature, the rule of Dara, the possibility of acquiring ordinary knowledge for the ruler with new tools. https://www.ghazavat.org/article_736275.html Adopting an interdisciplinary approach, this article examines the impact of social crises, including armed conflicts and civil protests, on authors’ moral rights: attribution, disclosure, and integrity of the work. Drawing on sociology and public law, it argues that expansive interpretations of concepts such as “state of emergency” and “exceptional circumstances” may enable the disregard of moral rights, even where human rights standards do not justify suspending state obligations. The study analyzes international instruments, including the Berne Convention and the TRIPS Agreement, alongside the French and German legal systems as representatives of Romano-Germanic traditions. It highlights the personality-based foundation of moral rights protection and emphasizes mechanisms such as the right of withdrawal as safeguards against ideological or distortive exploitation of works during crises. Regarding Iran, although moral rights are recognized under the 1969 Law for the Protection of Authors, Composers, and Artists, neither the right of withdrawal nor a framework for emergency exploitation has been established. The article proposes recognizing the right of withdrawal in domestic legislation and adopting regulatory guidelines for the use of literary and artistic works during social crises to balance public interests with the protection of authors’ moral rights. https://www.ghazavat.org/article_736276.html In Iranian Civil Procedural Law, Generally, stating at least one claim and one cause of action is sufficient for filing a lawsuit. For example, a plaintiff who alleges that the defendant has borrowed his vehicle but refuses to return it may bring an action with the claim of “restitution of the vehicle” and on the ground of “being deemed usurpation”. However, there are cases in which the plaintiff is unaware of certain factual circumstances, and this lack of knowledge leads him to formulate multiple claims in an alternative manner. For example, in the foregoing case, the plaintiff may have no information as to whether the vehicle still exists or has been destroyed. Consequently, in the remedy sought section, he may demand the return of the vehicle, and in the event of the destruction or loss of the vehicle, deliver its equivalent. This situation, which has given rise to the term “alternative statement of claim” in civil procedure law, is accompanied by the following questions: First, is the remedy sought the sole factor leading to the emergence of an alternative statement of claim, or can another element—such as the cause of action—also give rise to a different conception of an alternative statement of claim? Second, what relationship exists between the concept of an alternative statement of claim and related concepts, namely the “doubtful claim” and the “uncertain claim”. Third, what is the sanction of an alternative claim? https://www.ghazavat.org/article_736280.html Personal security, as a fundamental right and a criterion for assessing the legitimacy of public power, despite legal recognition in Iran’s legal system, faces serious shortcomings at the implementation stage. Normative recognition has not necessarily resulted in effective guarantees in legislation and adjudication, leaving individual freedoms exposed to extensive and sometimes unnecessary interventions. From this perspective, this study adopts a critical–analytical approach to explain the persistence of the gap between normative commitments to personal security and its practical realization, a gap reproduced in the absence of clear standards for assessing the legitimacy of intervention and binding institutional safeguards. Analysis of the shared foundations of constitutional and criminal law shows that this condition is not incidental, but the combined outcome of conceptual ambiguity in criminalization, the dominance of security-oriented interpretations of public interest, and weaknesses in institutional enforcement structures. Based on a comparative study of international human rights instruments, judicial practices, and selected legal systems, a three-level framework is proposed to reconstruct and guarantee the legal protection of personal security, centered on the four-part test of legitimacy of intervention. This test operates as a limiting standard in legislation, an analytical obligation in adjudication, and a mechanism of accountability and enforcement in oversight. The findings indicate that transforming fundamental principles of public law from abstract commitments into enforceable and reviewable obligations is essential for making personal security a real measure of the legitimacy and effectiveness of public power. https://www.ghazavat.org/article_736281.html Article type: Scientific Article One of the topics alwayss considered in the fields of humanities is the difference and transformation in theoretical structures when transitioning to practical structures. The requirements of the procedural system of the International Criminal Court (ICC) are no exception. Therefore, as an instance of attention to the aforementioned topic, this research investigates the case of Jean-Pierre Bemba, focusing on how the ICC conducted the trial of his case. Jean-Pierre Bemba is a familiar name not only to the people of Congo but also to many African countries. He led the rebel group known as the Movement for the Liberation of Congo and conducted armed operations against the central government in the forests of the country. Ultimately, a case against him was brought before the ICC, a process that will be discussed in detail. In this research, through a descriptive-analytical method and by utilizing library resources, the principles and procedures of the ICC in Bemba's case are examined. This includes aspects such as the subject-matter jurisdiction of the court, the manner of prosecution, the role of the Pre-Trial Chamber at all stages of the proceedings, adherence to fair trial principles, and respect for the rights of the accused In the court. It appears that despite adhering to many necessary principles and elements during the trial process, there were deviations from some statutes and the application of political perspectives was evident. https://www.ghazavat.org/article_736282.html The order of dismissal without prejudice (non-hearing of the lawsuit) is a type of formal definitive decision where the court refrains from entering into the merits, refraining from proceedings due to the lack of legal conditions for hearing the case or the existence of a normative obstacle. This institution, unlike an order of dismissal with prejudice (rejection of the lawsuit) which implies the determination of the plaintiff's lack of right, pertains to the refusal of substantive consideration due to the conflict of the lawsuit with mandatory rules, public order, or jurisdictional and contractual requirements. The present research, adopting an analytical-descriptive approach and relying on legal doctrine and judicial practice, examines the foundations for issuing this order in Iranian law. The findings indicate that the most significant grounds for issuing a non-hearing order include: the conflict between the subject matter of the claim and mandatory laws or registration regulations; the necessity to safeguard the potential rights of third parties; the validity of arbitration agreements and contractual stipulations based on the principle of party autonomy; the futility of the proceedings and the lack of practical effect of a judgment; and the priority of quasi-judicial authorities and the requirement to follow the prescribed legal procedure. At the same time, distinguishing between irremediable substantive obstacles and remediable procedural objections requires the court, within the framework of the principle of access to justice, to refrain from unjustifiably expanding the scope of this order. https://www.ghazavat.org/article_736283.html One of the duties of the Land Registry and Deeds Administration is to execute the provisions of enforceable documents. Regarding the competent authority for objecting to enforcement actions after the expiration of the time period specified in Article 172 of the "Executive Bylaw for Enforcing Official Enforceable Documents," there is a difference of opinion in judicial precedent and legal doctrine. Some fundamentally deny the possibility of an objection, while others consider the registration authority to be competent. Another group seeks to resolve the issue through civil liability, and yet another spectrum believes that the judicial courts have the authority to nullify the transaction. The findings of this research, which is written in a descriptive-analytical manner and based on a library research method, show that the objection to enforcement proceedings must be brought together with a claim that falls within the jurisdiction of the judicial courts, such as an action for annulment or rescission of the transfer. After establishing its jurisdiction, and in view of its lack of inherent competence to hear the said objection, the judicial authority must examine whether, in light of the relevant provision, there exists a matter that justifies the jurisdiction of the registration authority. If the answer is in the affirmative, and since adjudication of the judicial claim is contingent upon the determination of the objection to the enforcement proceedings, the said authority must issue an order of stay. Accordingly, upon receipt of the final decision of the registration authority, the court shall render the judgment. https://www.ghazavat.org/article_736284.html In the judicial system, the concept of "taking" (as the material element of the crime of theft) has always faced challenges in interpretation and application. Ambiguity in determining the precise boundaries of "taking" and distinguishing it from similar acts such as usurpation, breach of trust, and wrongful possession has led to discrepancies in judicial rulings and diverse theoretical understandings of the nature of theft. The main issue of this research is to identify which elements play a fundamental role in the realization of "taking" as a condition for the occurrence of the crime of theft, and how its boundaries can be distinguished from similar offenses. This study, adopting an analytical–descriptive approach and examining legal texts, current laws, and judicial procedures, investigates two essential conditions of "taking": the "prior legitimate dominion of the owner or lawful possessor over the property" and the "absence of prior dominion by the thief." The findings indicate that a simplistic interpretation of "taking" as "carrying away property without permission" has led to the conflation of legal concepts and created judicial challenges in identifying instances of theft. A precise redefinition of the affirmative and negative conditions of "taking," particularly the role of prior legitimate possession, is essential for theoretical coherence and the reform of judicial practice https://www.ghazavat.org/article_736336.html There are many problems and dilemmas in the pre-implementation stage of the extra-urban cadaster. However, in the implementation stage, due to the vastness of the country's extra-urban lands, its implementation has been accompanied by problems such as human resources, high costs, a lot of time, etc., so the present study has attempted to provide a new path for the cadaster project's executive officials by presenting new methods and tools and their technical validation and legal pathology. In the meantime, the importance of the extra-urban land cadaster for resolving disputes is twofold, as it has been the subject of numerous cases in the judicial authorities due to its non-implementation or incorrect implementation. The aim of this study is to present new practical solutions for the implementation of the extra-urban land cadaster, considering the comparative data review of land coordinate systems and remote sensing in order to issue cadastral ownership documents and establish ownership of extra-urban lands. The present research method is a descriptive-analytical method that combines field studies from expert court cases and library studies to ultimately achieve an acceptable analysis from a legal and technical perspective. Finally, the review of studies conducted to use modern methods such as remote sensing in implementing the cadaster of non-urban lands confirmed the convergence of the results obtained with other traditional tools for preparing cadastral maps, and in terms of legal and technical value, there were no problems or errors in using these findings to implement the cadaster of non-urban lands. https://www.ghazavat.org/article_737517.html The contemporary world witnesses situations where portions of Islamic territories fall under non-Muslim dominion, while non-Islamic currents challenge Muslim sovereignty over Islamic domains. Under such circumstances, elucidating Islamic jurisprudence's perspective on independence movements assumes strategic importance, potentially forming coherent sovereignty and independence theories based on jurisprudential foundations. This research extracts and explicates jurisprudential rulings related to sovereignty and independence in the Islamic world. The investigation examines traditional geographical divisions into Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Kufr, analyzing Sharia-based principles governing independence movements by Muslims and non-Muslims within these geographical-jurisprudential domains. Independence movement issues from Islamic jurisprudence perspectives possess paramount judicial significance due to their direct impact on involved individuals' and groups' legal status. These rulings determine independence movements' legitimacy and play decisive roles in determining actors' criminal status, financial rulings, and courts' judicial competence. The research findings are: First, Muslim endeavors to establish Islamic governance and liberation from taghut dominion constitute religious obligations when conditions permit. Second, any Muslim separatism from Islamic government in Islamic territories is prohibited (haram). Third, non-Muslim independence movements within Islamic territory are forbidden, abrogating dhimma covenants or treaties. Fourth, Muslim liberation from infidel government dominion in non-Islamic territories is obligatory based on nafy al-sabil principles. Fifth, regarding non-Muslim independence movements in non-Islamic territories, jurisprudential rulings depend on existing sovereignty status and independence-seeking groups. This research presents a comprehensive framework for jurisprudential analysis of independence movement issues, designed on tripartite variables: "geographical territory nature," "independence-seeking peoples' religious identity," and "sovereignties' political status." The study distinguishes between "independence-seeking against taghut" and "separatism from Islamic government," proposing dualistic legitimacy theory for independence movements. https://www.ghazavat.org/article_737566.html Liquidity management is one of the main pillars of the stability of the banking system, which plays an important role in the optimal allocation of financial resources, providing the liquidity needed by banks, and preventing disruptions in the flow of payments. The Central Bank, as a monetary authority, monitors liquidity flow by utilizing policy and supervisory tools and tries to take steps to strengthen financial stability through their optimal application. This research, with a descriptive-analytical approach and based on library resources, focuses on the Central Bank Law of 1402 and seeks to answer the question: "What approach has the Central Bank Law of 1402 adopted towards selected supervisory tools in order to manage liquidity and financial stability?" The findings show that efficient supervisory tools can reduce the risks arising from a shortage or surplus of liquidity and increase the level of trust in the banking network. Also, the correct application of legal requirements related to liquidity management and financial stability on the one hand and coordination between the monetary and supervisory policies of the Central Bank on the other hand, have direct effects on optimizing liquidity management and strengthening financial stability in the banking system. However, the Central Bank Law 1402 has adopted a prominent and detailed approach to some of the instruments examined in this study, and some others have only been mentioned implicitly. https://www.ghazavat.org/article_737567.html Children and adolescents at risk face serious threats to healthy development and physical and mental safety due to situations such as domestic violence, parental neglect, lack of effective guardianship, addiction, parental mental illness, and other family, individual, and environmental trauma. In the meantime, early, multidimensional, and coordinated interventions play a key role in preventing the continuation of trauma and the formation of future delinquency or victimization. Based on a development-oriented prevention approach, the present study examines the performance of the "Shogh Zendige Complex in Mashhad" in supporting children and adolescents in risky situations. The research method is qualitative and based on the study of documents from welfare and judicial cases related to children at risk in the Shogh Zendige Complex in Mashhad. The data were collected and analyzed by reviewing the cases in cooperation with the judicial authority of this complex. The findings show that the Mashhad Shogh Zendige Complex, by purposefully utilizing judicial capacities and also effectively cooperating with other institutions, plays a pivotal role in shaping a judicial-support intervention cycle; in such a way that support based on judicial capacity includes measures such as separating children at risk and transferring them to safe centers, proposing a criminal complaint against the agent creating the risky situation, appointing a supervisor, and selecting an alternative family, and in addition, inter-institutional support is pursued through immediate intervention and social assistance, psychological and medical services, and educational support. https://www.ghazavat.org/article_737568.html Abstract The prosecutor's reaction, as the representative of society, to criminal phenomena must be swift, inevitable, and decisive, and pursuit of offenders must continue uninterrupted through all stages of litigation up to execution of sentence. However, when offender, by accepting verdict of court of first instance and submitting to determined punishment before the finality of judgment in the form of surrendering to verdict takes action; the prosecutor's pursuit must, due to disproportionality of punishment and under subject of clause (p) of Article 433 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, be based on the principle of discretionary prosecution. The public prosecutor has faced various challenges in dealing with the ambiguous and vague phrasing of Article 442 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which was formulated by adapting from Article 6 of the 1977 Law on Amending Certain Laws of the Judiciary. The main challenges facing prosecutor are: whether filing an appeal is a right or an obligation; status, presence, and role of the prosecutor in hearing session for applying mitigation of this lenient institution; the possibility of unilateral withdrawal or waiver of the appeal request; and the consensual nature of surrendering to the verdict with convicted person or their defense attorney. This research is of an applied type and has been compiled using an analytical-descriptive method. In this paper, first, by analyzing different viewpoints, practical guidelines for current situation are presented, and subsequently, necessary suggestions for amending law and adopting appropriate measures by judicial authorities are proposed.