perUniversity of Judicial Sciences and Administrative Services - Academic Association of University of Judicial Sciences and Administrative Servicesفصلنامه علمی قضانامه2025-1224213articleAfsaneh Hajilooafsanehhajiloo@gmail.com1Department of International Law, Faculty of Law, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran, Iran<p>This article examines the role of e-commerce in combating corruption and money laundering. By analyzing the cases of two companies, Kourosh Company and Chabi Dabash, the article highlights the benefits of using digital systems in business transactions, specifically in terms of increasing transparency and reducing financial risks. Additionally, this paper, which uses a library research methodology and a review of relevant documents, also discusses the challenges and obstacles facing the digital transformation in the trade sector. Finally, it presents policy recommendations for accelerating and facilitating this transformation to enhance its effectiveness in the fight against corruption and money laundering.</p>http://aujsas.ir/Article/52348E-commerce transformation corruption money laundering transparency transaction traceability.perUniversity of Judicial Sciences and Administrative Services - Academic Association of University of Judicial Sciences and Administrative Servicesفصلنامه علمی قضانامه2025-12241422articleMohammad Saleh AlamimsAlami@gmail.com1Amirreza NikmaneshAnikmanesh@gmail.com2Department of Law, Faculty of Law and Political Science, University of Tehran, Tehran, IranDepartment of Law, Faculty of Law and Political Science, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran<p>Diplomatic and consular premises are among the most significant means of establishing political communication at the international level. The protection and supervision of these premises reflect the goodwill of the host country and the continuity of friendly relations between two countries, as established under Articles 22 of the 1961 Convention and Article 31 of the 1963 Convention. These provisions offer immunity and must not be subject to attacks or violations by the host country or any other states. However, the Israeli regime, by disregarding the laws and international regulations, has openly ignored the goals and principles of the United Nations Charter and international human rights law, especially regarding human rights. On April 3, 2023, Israel attacked the Iranian Consulate in Syria, leading to the martyrdom of several commanders of the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps. Furthermore, the Islamic Republic of Iran, acting within the framework of self-defense and following the principle of proportionality, launched a retaliatory military operation on April 25, 2023, targeting Israel. In this article, the authors analyze the historical background of the two countries' interactions, the political and legal aspects of the attacks, and how the principles of international law apply to these events. They employ a library research method to examine the issues discussed in the article.</p>http://aujsas.ir/Article/52349Diplomatic and consular premises political communication 1961 and 1963 conventions preemptive self-defense proportionality in self-defenseperUniversity of Judicial Sciences and Administrative Services - Academic Association of University of Judicial Sciences and Administrative Servicesفصلنامه علمی قضانامه2025-12242334articleAli Shabaniashabani@gmail.com1Judicial Intern, Training Department, Judiciary, Islamic Republic of Iran<p>Judging has always been one of the most difficult tasks across all countries throughout history. Even in the sacred Islamic jurisprudence, the role of judges is viewed as a prestigious position, with the highest honor attributed to the Prophet&rsquo;s successors, especially Imam Ali (PBUH). Different theories have been advanced regarding the judicial process, with some emphasizing that judgment is not merely a task but a role endowed with special responsibilities. Therefore, in all the legal systems worldwide, including Islamic law, specific conditions are set for the selection of individuals for the judicial office, and if these conditions are not met, it results in fundamental issues within the judicial system of that country. Article 163 of the Iranian Constitution also outlines specific criteria for judges, referring to the necessity of fulfilling religious and legal standards. One of the most important obligations a judge must adhere to, in addition to legal provisions, is the adherence to the principles and procedures of fair trial, which are essential for ensuring justice in a legal system. The violation or disregard of these procedures not only disturbs the fairness of the judicial process but also undermines the judicial authority and credibility. Given the significance of maintaining these principles in judicial practice, this research employs a library-based methodology to analyze the principles of a fair trial in the Iranian legal system. The study examines various standards and procedural regulations that are critical for preserving fairness, such as the right to a public hearing, the right to a defense, and the independence of the judiciary. Violating these rights leads to substantial legal consequences for the accused and judicial officials. The objective of this investigation is to highlight the importance of observing these standards for the legal system and society at large.</p>http://aujsas.ir/Article/52350Judgment Fair Trial Trial Principles Trial Procedures Judicial IntegrityperUniversity of Judicial Sciences and Administrative Services - Academic Association of University of Judicial Sciences and Administrative Servicesفصلنامه علمی قضانامه2025-12243556articleMojtaba Yavarimojtabayavariyazdi@gmail.com11. Senior Levels and Kharej Level of the Seminary, Qom Seminary, Qom, Iran<p>Judicial independence and the independence of the judiciary are two interconnected but distinct concepts, both emphasized in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Judicial independence refers to the autonomy of a judge in handling cases and issuing rulings without interference or pressure from external forces. The Constitution provides multiple guarantees to ensure judicial independence, as seen in Articles 57 and 156, which discuss the concept of independence. In these articles, judges are obligated to adhere to justice and independence in their handling of cases. The Code of Criminal Procedure also includes rules and regulations to ensure the independence of judges, such as prohibiting interference in judicial matters and requiring judges to maintain impartiality. Islamic jurisprudence places a strong emphasis on the independence of judges, asserting that judges should only follow Sharia law and justice when adjudicating cases. International documents, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, also stress the importance of judicial independence, considering it one of the foundational pillars of a fair legal system. The Judicial Transformation Document also outlines various programs and actions to strengthen the independence of the judiciary. Despite these guarantees and programs, several challenges exist in achieving judicial independence, including political interference, budgetary and resource shortages, administrative and judicial corruption, weaknesses in judge training and empowerment, and the absence of clear and effective laws and regulations. To overcome these challenges, multiple actions need to be taken, including strengthening the structural and functional independence of the judiciary, enhancing the social and economic status of judges, combating corruption, purifying the judicial system, developing training and empowerment programs for judges, creating transparent and effective laws and regulations, and encouraging public and civil society participation in overseeing the judiciary's performance.</p>http://aujsas.ir/Article/52351Judicial Independence Independence of the Judiciary Constitution Code of ProcedureperUniversity of Judicial Sciences and Administrative Services - Academic Association of University of Judicial Sciences and Administrative Servicesفصلنامه علمی قضانامه2025-12245768articleErfan Mousazadehe_mousazadeh@aujsas.ir1Sayyed Nima Norouzin.nima1376@gmail.com2Master of judicial Sciences, University of judicial Sciences and Administrative Services, Tehran, IranDepartment of Jurisprudence and Private Law, Faculty of Sciences and Knowledge, Al-Mustafa International University, Qom Seminary, Qom, Iran<p>Article 313 of the 1979 Civil Procedure Code is one of the key provisions in the realm of provisional orders. It allows requests to be submitted either in writing or orally, introducing flexibility into Iran&rsquo;s judicial system. The primary philosophy behind this article is to provide immediate protection of individuals' rights in situations where delays in litigation could result in the loss of rights or irreparable damage. According to this provision, an oral request is only valid if it is documented in the court&rsquo;s minutes and signed by the petitioner, which grants it official status and legal validity. This article, through a descriptive-analytical approach, reviews and analyzes the text of Article 313, comparing written and oral requests, and highlights the advantages and limitations of each. Furthermore, using judicial sessions and practical court procedures, it critiques challenges such as the disagreement over the necessity of filing a petition, the ambiguous boundary between securing a claim and provisional orders, and the potential misuse of oral requests. The findings suggest that while Article 313 is an effective tool for achieving prompt justice, its implementation without clear guidelines could lead to inconsistent rulings. The study concludes with the recommendation to develop executive guidelines, explicitly distinguish similar institutions, and design standardized forms to enhance the effectiveness and consistency of the judicial process while preserving the supportive philosophy of provisional orders.</p>http://aujsas.ir/Article/52352urgent litigation provisional and temporary measures principle of speed principle of correspondence legal request judicial minutesperUniversity of Judicial Sciences and Administrative Services - Academic Association of University of Judicial Sciences and Administrative Servicesفصلنامه علمی قضانامه2025-12246995articleSayyed Nima Norouzin.nima1376@gmail.com1Abolfazl Asheriaasheri@gmail.com2Department of Jurisprudence and Private Law, Faculty of Sciences and Knowledge, Al-Mustafa International University, Qom Seminary, Qom, Iran1. Lecture in Advanced Jurisprudence and Principles, Qom Seminary, Qom, Iran<p>Multiplicity and recidivism are among the most significant institutions in criminal law, playing a decisive role in aggravating punishments and shaping criminal policy. This study, through an analytical and comparative approach, examines these two concepts in Imami jurisprudence and Iranian criminal law. In Imami jurisprudence, multiplicity of crimes is generally governed by the rule of &ldquo;cumulative punishments,&rdquo; while recidivism&mdash;particularly in hudud crimes&mdash;is associated with progressive aggravation, ultimately leading to capital punishment at the fourth stage. The foundations of these rules are rooted in Qur&rsquo;anic verses, such as &ldquo;No bearer of burdens shall bear the burden of another&rdquo; (Qur&rsquo;an 6:164), and numerous traditions from the Imams. In Iranian criminal law, the Islamic Penal Code of 2013 (1392 SH) has established clear provisions: Articles 131 and 134 regulate multiplicity, while Articles 136 and 137 address recidivism. Nonetheless, certain differences exist between the two systems, such as the statutory cap for aggravation in multiplicity cases and the restriction of recidivism to first- to sixth-degree ta&rsquo;zir crimes. Findings reveal that Imami jurisprudence offers greater theoretical consistency, whereas Iranian law&mdash;through combining fiqh-based rules with modern criminal policy&mdash;provides more flexibility and social adaptability. It is concluded that further legislative reform is needed to clarify the boundaries of multiplicity and recidivism while enhancing both justice and efficiency.</p>http://aujsas.ir/Article/52353Multiplicity of crimes Recidivism Imami jurisprudence Iranian criminal law Aggravated punishment Criminal policyperUniversity of Judicial Sciences and Administrative Services - Academic Association of University of Judicial Sciences and Administrative Servicesفصلنامه علمی قضانامه2025-122496137articleSayyed Nima Norouzin.nima1376@gmail.com1Seyyed Samsameddin Qavamisa.choupanpisheh@gmail.com2Department of Jurisprudence and Private Law, Faculty of Sciences and Knowledge, Al-Mustafa International University, Qom Seminary, Qom, IranDirector of the Islamic Management Jurisprudence Foundation and External Lecturer, Qom Seminary, Qom, Iran<p>This research aims to explain the juridical and leadership-based tactics of eight key policymaking and decision-making strategies in the Islamic judicial system, through a comparative analysis of the principles of justice in Shia jurisprudence. The results indicate that justice, from the Shia perspective, is not merely a moral ruling but a structural leadership principle that encompasses both the content and form of adjudication. Based on jurisprudential rules such as the denial of hardship and harm (<em>Nafi' 'Asr wa Haraj</em>), denial of domination (<em>Nafi' Sabeel</em>), <em>Lā ḍarar</em> (no harm), prioritizing the more important over the less important (<em>Taqdīm al-Aham 'Ala al-Muhim</em>), and the obligation of judgment (<em>Wujub al-Qada</em>), each of these tactics holds both religious obligation and social wisdom. This study demonstrates that the acceptance of legitimate claims, the use of alternative dispute resolution methods, judicial independence, simplicity and speed in adjudication, proportionality between judgment and subject, procedural justice, matching the level of scrutiny to the importance of the case, and institutional transparency, are the pillars of sustainable justice in the Islamic judicial system. It is also shown that exceptions arising from public interests or confidentiality requirements are only legitimate within the framework of the supervision of the <em>Wilāyat al-Faqīh</em> (Guardianship of the Jurisprudent). As a result, the Islamic judicial system in Shia jurisprudence offers a comprehensive model of judicial governance that is based on leadership, rationality, and accountability, institutionalizing justice in its actions, structure, and decisions.</p>http://aujsas.ir/Article/52354Imami Jurisprudence Judicial Policy-Making Procedural Justice Judicial Independence Institutional Transparency