mahdi shahabi; mohammadreza mohammadi; Mortaza dehghanNejad
Abstract
From Naseri era until Constitutional Revolution because of lack of Rule of law as a symbol of modern government, voluntarism or king’s volition was one of the most important basis of legal rule validation that had deep roots in traditional and intellectual background of Iranian society. This volition ...
Read More
From Naseri era until Constitutional Revolution because of lack of Rule of law as a symbol of modern government, voluntarism or king’s volition was one of the most important basis of legal rule validation that had deep roots in traditional and intellectual background of Iranian society. This volition received its legitimation from God’s will and people as peasants, by accepting this issue, considered this power transformation as a kind of charisma. However, because king’s volition came out of king’s characteristics, it was considered to have a variable basis and their derived rule had characteristics such as unpredictability, lack of equality element, uncertainty, lack of continuity and limitation. These features in contrast by modern legal paradigm could not have structure based on natural justice or legal justice and eventually led to the Constitutional Revolution. The major goal of this research is to analyzing the characters of traditional voluntarism frome the perspective of the modern voluntarism. Therfore, it would be possible to clarifing the structural challenges of the pre-revolutionary legal system.
Mehdi Shahabi
Abstract
Legal pluralism can be limited to formal and technical analyses; it could mean the governing of different legal mechanism to identical situations. Meanwhile, this meaning of legal pluralism hinders the judgment of all realities of the legal system and its development. Legal pluralism should not be investigated ...
Read More
Legal pluralism can be limited to formal and technical analyses; it could mean the governing of different legal mechanism to identical situations. Meanwhile, this meaning of legal pluralism hinders the judgment of all realities of the legal system and its development. Legal pluralism should not be investigated on the legal mechanisms level, but rather in the foundations and origins of the legal rules. This meaning of legal pluralism can be vertical or horizontal. Vertical pluralism is accepting several foundations in the same lenght, and lower foundation obtains its validity from higher foundation. It is horizontal when several foundations are in same width and no foundation doesn’t obtain its validity from other foundation and they are independent. In any case, both types of pluralism lead to substantive diversity of legal rules. Legal pluralism also provides for development in the legal system and most importantly justifies the evolution from traditional law to modern law and from modern law to postmodern law.
