Public Law
Javad Yahyazadeh; Mohammad Mohammadi Gorgani
Abstract
Introduction
Universalism stands as a cornerstone in the realm of human rights, representing both a fundamental and contentious principle. Its significance lies in being foundational, shaping the minimal framework of international human rights law and influencing various international documents and ...
Read More
Introduction
Universalism stands as a cornerstone in the realm of human rights, representing both a fundamental and contentious principle. Its significance lies in being foundational, shaping the minimal framework of international human rights law and influencing various international documents and declarations. However, it also sparks controversy due to the fact that human rights often reflect a specific perspective, rooted in the modern, liberal, democratic, and secular traditions of the West. It can be argued that constitutionalism, the prevailing paradigm in contemporary legal systems, is an accomplishment resulting from the historical evolution of the conceptof right, human experiences during the Age of Enlightenment, and, notably, the technological advancements spurred by the Industrial Revolution in the West.
Nonetheless, constitutionalism confronts substantial challenges in the contemporary era. For example, unamendable rules are the institution acknowledged in most constitutions. Noteworthy instances include the recognition of human dignity in Germany, republicanism and secularism in France, theocracy in Iran and Afghanistan, the separation of powers in Greece, territorial integrity in Madagascar, and political pluralism in Portugal and Romania. In “Constitutional Handcuffs,” Richard Albert, a preeminent scholar in this field, states: “The advent of the written constitution has given rise to an enduring tension in constitutional statecraft pitting constitutionalism against democracy” (2017, p. 18). However, the constitutional unamendability, facilitated through entrenchment clauses, entails the freezing of certain constitutional articles or fundamental values, potentially sidelining democratic principles and popular choice.
The present study aimed to explore the relation between constitutional unamendability and the universal values of human rights. The pivotal question revolves around whether constitutional designers have the authority to shield any value from popular amendment, potentially compromising democracy to a significant extent. The acknowledgment of a relation between the universal values in human rights and the incorporation of unamendability in the constitution would imply that constitutional designers are only allowed to entrench the universal values by superconstitutional provisions, thus imposing restrictions on democracy.
Literature Review
There are significant contributions about universality of human rights and unamendable constitutional rules. Notable among these are: the book titled Contemporary Human Rights written in Persian by Mohammad Qari Seyed Fatemi and the English paper titled “Origins and Universality in the Human Rights Debates: Cultural Essentialism and the Challenge of Globalization” by Michel Goodhart (2003). Richard Albert’s outstanding book titled Constitutional Amendments: Making, Breaking, and Changing Constitutions (2019) also serves as a key reference about constitutional unamendability. Despite these valuable contributions, there remains a gap in research concerning the relation between universalism of human rights and constitutional unamendability. Furthermore, it seems there is not a serious study addressing the approach of the Islamic Republic of Iran in this regard. Consequently, the present article stands as an innovative endeavor, as it seeks to delve into the unexplored relation and sheds light on the unique perspective of the constitutional designers in the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Materials and Methods
This study falls within the category of normative legal research. Normative legal theory seeks to offer a pure, self-sufficient explanation of the law, analyzing values, concepts, principles, rules, models, and argumentations in the legal doctrine. In this line, the present analysis relied on relevant theories and doctrines to examine the relation between universalism of human rights and constitutional unamendability.
Results and Discussion
The origins of the emergence of universalism principle in contemporary human rights can be traced back to the profound debates between two trends in philosophy and ethics: deontological ethics and utilitarianism. In Kant’s philosophy, the concept of right is articulated in a manner synonymous with human rights, warranting the characterization of Kant’s philosophy as a philosophy of human rights in the exact sense of the word. Kant ascribes a transcendental status to morality, giving rise to the notions of transcendental human and universal human rights. According to Kant, moral rules grounded in duty possess absolute generality akin to natural laws; in other words, they cannot be taken as exceptions. This is where Kant introduces the concept of the absolute in his philosophy. His most explicit proposition in this context was formulated as follows: “Act only in accordance with that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it become a universal law”.
Nevertheless, the philosophical perspective of utilitarianism challenges Kant’s approach and presents thoughtful criticisms. Hegel, for instance, underscored the formal and abstract character of Kant’s philosophy, contending that social ethics finds no place in Kant’s intellectual framework. Hegel acknowledged the impracticality of Kant's philosophy, asserting its incapacity to formulate practical rules. Drawing from philosophical hermeneutics, Gadamer similarly scrutinized Kant’s concept of the absolute and his idea of universalizability. Gadamer actually placed emphasis on the spatiotemporal understanding of humanity and regarded a transhistorical and transgeographical understanding as, at the very least, contentious.
Moreover, unamendable constitutional rules are those roles that are by no means subject to modification and change as understood by the founders of a given legal–political system. Essentially, the only way to amend these rules involves a fundamental transformation in the nature and foundational values of the legal–political regime. As evident, there exist shared principles regarding the substance of unamendable constitutional rules in progressive legal systems, all converging on the central notion that values emanating from constitutionalism and universalism should be entrenched and safeguarded against amendment.
Conclusion
According to the research findings, acknowledging the universality of human rights hinges on recognizing the unique nature of the human and its capacity for transhistorical and transcultural thinking. Additionally, unamendable constitutional rules, as a pivotal aspect of the constitution, pose a significant challenge to constitutionalism. Aimed at safeguarding the achievements of constitutionalism, these rules restrict citizens from exercising their right to self-determination. Examples of such rules include human dignity, fundamental rights, democracy, separation of powers, and political and religious pluralism. The present research indicated that unamendable constitutional rules in modern constitutions are the logical-cum-historical consequence of the principle of universalism, all sharing common core elements. Consequently, global constitutions are not allowed to define the content of unamendable constitutional rules as contradictory to the values of constitutionalism and universalism. This phenomenon has propelled a shift towards transnational constitutionalism. Furthermore, the research findings shed light on the approach of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Article (177), in a contradictory and somewhat paradoxical stance, acknowledges certain core elements of unamendable constitutional rules aligned with the principle of universalism. Meanwhile, it recognizes several subjects, which diverge from universalism, given their distinct intrareligious and intralegal values. This inevitably necessitates efforts towards amendments and integration, propelling a move towards transnational constitutionalism.
Keywords: Universalism of Human Rights, Unamendable Constitutional Rules, Transnational Constitutionalism
International Law
Mahdi Mohebirad; Mehryar Dashab
Abstract
IntroductionFollowing Qatar’s diplomatic crisis in 2017, the UAE implemented a series of measures against Qatar. In response, Qatar filed an application against the UAE at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), citing a violation of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms ...
Read More
IntroductionFollowing Qatar’s diplomatic crisis in 2017, the UAE implemented a series of measures against Qatar. In response, Qatar filed an application against the UAE at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), citing a violation of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) and claiming racial discrimination based on the national origin of Qataris. In its order dated July 23, 2018, the ICJ, in accordance with Article 22 of the ICERD, held primary jurisdiction to handle the case. The Court determined that the dispute between the parties was related to the interpretation or application of the Convention. Previous descriptive–analytical examinations show significant disagreements about the scope of racial discrimination during preliminary negotiations, with the term national origin being the focus of debates. It can be inferred that national origin, as included in paragraph 1 of Article 1 of the ICERD, entails discrimination based on current nationality. In this respect, the present research aimed to investigate the relationship between racial discrimination based on national origin and discrimination based on current nationality as elaborated in the ICERD. Literature ReviewWhile many studies have examined the ICERD and its committee, a conspicuous gap exists in the available literature concerning racial discrimination based on national origin. Moreover, given that ICJ judgment was issued in 2021, there is no serious monograph or article on this specific subject, except a few tangential studies in the legal scholarship. The two articles closely related to the topic are: “Application of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Qatar v. United Arab Emirates): So Far, So Good?” (Owie, 2020) and “The Role of Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination in the Development of Concepts and Provisions of International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination” (MirAbbassi & Hassani, 2020). Materials and MethodsThe current study relied on a descriptive–analytical method, using library research to collect the data from various sources.Results and DiscussionResearch indicates significant differences in the scope of racial discrimination between the premilitary negotiations and the eventual inclusion of the term national origin in Paragraph (1) of Article (1) of the Convention. It can be inferred that this term in the Convention includes discrimination based on current nationality, hence an instance of national origin. The ICERD, which is the main international human rights document combating racial discrimination, defines racial discrimination and outlines its scope and instances. The definition comprises two elements. First, it shall involve “any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference . . . which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms” (UN General Assembly resolution 2106, p. 2). In other words, actions must lead to discriminatory behavior. Second, discrimination shall be based on prohibited grounds, including “race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin” (UN General Assembly resolution 2106, p. 2). However, ambiguities persist regarding the scope and interpretation of the term national origin, as one of the prohibited grounds in the Convention. Disagreements have actually existed among state representatives since drafting the Convention, leading to the ongoing challenges and ambiguities.The Court’s narrow interpretation of national origin and the necessity to address the impact of measures taken against Qatar have drawn criticism. The measures taken by the UAE against Qatari nationals can be considered unilateral coercive measures, violating their rights such as the right to freedom of movement and freedom of communication. Such adverse and negative effects are deemed illegal, as acknowledged by the international documents and reports by the UN Special Rapporteur on the negative impact of the unilateral coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights. Moreover, since the Convention aims to eliminate all forms of racial discrimination, confirming that the term national origin encompasses current nationality aligns with the Convention’s overall purpose. Conversely, dissenting interpretations that exclude current nationality from the scope of the Convention contradict and undermine the purpose of the ICERD. 6. ConclusionDespite Qatar’s failure in this case, another legal opportunity remains, that is, the decision of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD). In parallel with similar facts, Qatar filed an application to the CERD. In contrast to the ICJ, the committee upheld its jurisdiction in Qatar’s case against the UAE, which is currently under consideration. The Court’s non-compliance with the CERD’s proposal and the ensuing divergent stances of the two judicial and quasi-judicial bodies introduce a new dimension to the issue. In conclusion, the ICJ shall be recognized as the UN’s primary judicial organ with the authority to settle disputes over the interpretation of the Convention. However, the conflicting views between the ICJ and the CERD, particularly following the Qatar–UAE dispute, necessitate judicial dialogue between the two bodies.
International Law
Alireza Jabbari; Mohammad-Reza Parvin; Shahrouz Shokraie
Abstract
IntroductionTrade dress, as an instance of nontraditional trademarks, encompasses the overall visual image of a product, including elements such as size, shape, color or combinations thereof, packaging, textures, graphics, and even specific sales techniques. However, to qualify for legal protection ...
Read More
IntroductionTrade dress, as an instance of nontraditional trademarks, encompasses the overall visual image of a product, including elements such as size, shape, color or combinations thereof, packaging, textures, graphics, and even specific sales techniques. However, to qualify for legal protection in many countries, trade dress must be nonfunctional. A feature is deemed functional if it is essential to the product’s use or purpose, or if it impacts the product’s cost or value. Nowadays, size, shape, color, and color combinations have emerged as crucial branding tools within the pharmaceutical industry. Indeed, the distinctive shapes, colors, and other visual characteristics of medications can be significant, especially when utilized during the patent term. Nevertheless, in certain instances, a drug’s appearance may serve functional or practical purposes, such as uniquely identifying a specific medication, preventing dosing errors through color-coded drug doses, and enhancing patient compliance. In such cases, trade dress provides an additional mechanism to establish exclusive rights over drugs and health technologies beyond the scope and term of patent protection. This can result in gratuitous and complex litigations, hindering generic companies from entering the market, impeding access to healthcare for patients, and negatively impacting patients’ health. Therefore, fundamental questions arise: When does the shape and color of drugs become functional? Do the current laws and regulations in Iran exclude functional features from the scope of registrable trademarks? What are the effects of failing to establish a clear legal barrier to registering functional trademarks on patients’ health and competition in the pharmaceuticals?The present study aimed to review and compare the legislative approaches adopted by Iran and other selected countries regarding the registrability of trade dress in pharmaceuticals. It sought to examine the effectiveness of the functionality doctrine in preventing anti-competitive effects and risks associated with patients’ health.First, the research provided a brief explanation of the scope of trademark protection in pharmaceuticals, followed by a discussion on the functional doctrine, conceptual requirements, and various legal approaches in select countries. Then, the functional doctrine in pharmaceuticals was examined in detail, along with the adverse effects stemming from a lack of explicit legal prohibitions against registering functional trademarks, including its impact on patients’ health, competition, and generic substitution. Then, the study analyzed the effect of alternatives on the registration of functional features as well as the admissible evidence for proving the functionality of trade dress in both courts and trademark offices. Materials and MethodsBased on an analytical–comparative method, the present study used the library research and note-taking techniques to collect the data from various documents, books, and articles. Results and Discussion Concerning the functionality doctrine in the legal systems of Iran and other countries, the study found it challenging to establish clear principles for determining precisely when a feature is deemed functional. Nevertheless, a global trend and consensus exist in advocating for legal prohibitions to prevent the protection and monopolization of such features. The majority of WTO members have embraced this perspective by explicitly excluding functional features from trademark protection. They have instituted legal constraints on the registration of functional trademarks, irrespectiveof whether such trademarks meet another distinctiveness requirement (Handler, 2018). However, the functionality doctrine has not been effectively integrated into Iranian trademark law for a long period. Although there is no specific provision excluding functional features from the scope of trademark protection, Articles (32) of the Act on Patents, Industrial Designs, and Trademarks Registration of 2008 (IRI), as well as Article (105) of the new Industrial Property Protection Plan, allow for the registration of trade dress for pharmaceuticals. It seems necessary to review and amend existing regulations, considering the paramount importance of patients’ health and the necessity to prevent undue hindrances to competitors in accessing and utilizing functional features such as shape, color, and other pharmaceutical signs.According to the research findings, certain design features of pharmaceutical products (e.g., the shape, size, and color of medicines) may evolve into functional features over time. This functionality is not the traditional utilitarian type but a therapeutically-based functionality, as patients come to consider these visual cues an integral part of their treatment (Calboli, 2020). For instance, individuals taking multiple medications daily become deeply familiar with the appearance of their medicines. Particularly, elderly patients rely on the size, color, and shape of drugs to distinguish between various medications or different doses of the same medication. Moreover, patients who have grown accustomed to the appearance of their drugs over many years associate the effectiveness of the treatment with the visual characteristics of the medication. They may have doubts about the efficacy of drugs with a different appearance. In such cases, transitioning from a brand name to generic products with distinct physical features may impact patient adherence, compliance, and the acceptance of medication regimens, potentially leading to medication errors. Additionally, medical service providers may need to invest significant time reassuring patients when prescribing generic medicines with different appearances, as some patients feel doubts about the effectiveness of such medicines. On the other hand, generic producers are unable to replicate the designs of brand-name medicines after the patent expires—due to trade dress protection. They thus find themselves at a distinct competitive disadvantage compared to the original manufacturers, encountering formidable obstacles when attempting to enter the market. ConclusionIran’s Act on Patents, Industrial Designs, and Trademarks of 2008, as well as the new Industrial Property Protection Plan, have embraced a broad and inclusive definition of mark. This definition notably encompasses elements such as packaging, shape, or color. However, it does not explicitly address nontraditional functional trademarks. To address concerns related to potential anti-competitive consequences and risks to patients’ health, it is recommended that signs exclusively comprised of specific qualities be considered absolute grounds for refusal or invalidity in the existing laws and regulations. The qualities are: a) the shape or another characteristic inherently derived from the nature of the goods; b) the shape or another characteristic crucial for achieving a technical result; c) theshape or another characteristic that substantially contributes value to the goods.
Public Law
Mohammad Bahadori Jahromi; Hamid Feli; Mahdi Ebrahimi
Abstract
IntroductionThe Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, particularly Principle (4), puts the emphasis on upholding Islamic standards in all legal norms. However, a priori sharia supervision over parliamentary approvals shall be exercised by the faqihs (Islamic jurists) of the Guardian Council ...
Read More
IntroductionThe Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, particularly Principle (4), puts the emphasis on upholding Islamic standards in all legal norms. However, a priori sharia supervision over parliamentary approvals shall be exercised by the faqihs (Islamic jurists) of the Guardian Council concerning the specific laws outlined in Principles (94), (95), and (96) of the Constitution. Other approvals, notably the regulations specified in Principle (4), lack constitutional provision. To ensure optimal implementation of Principle (4), there is a need for an effective mechanism that can guarantee adherence to Sharia standards in regulations. The current Sharia-based supervision mechanism is executed through the Court of Administrative Justice, but this approach has several shortcomings. First, it does not ensure Sharia compliance for all regulations since it is not comprehensive, only addressing the contested aspect of regulations. Moreover, regulations may possess significant importance based on inclusion, hierarchy of legal norms, authority level, and their impact on citizens’ rights and duties, leading to prolonged violations of citizens’ rights even when there are no complaints. In this respect, the present research aimed to examine the feasibility of establishing a mechanism for a priori Sharia supervision over key regulations, addressing the challenges associated with its implementation. The study is based on the hypothesis that there are factors favoring a priori Sharia supervision over other types of monitoring when it comes to some aspects of regulations. Although most challenges are manageable, certain challenges make it both desirable and achievable to implement such a mechanism. Literature ReviewThe literature has offered solutions, suggesting the mandatory submission of government regulations and approvals from the Supreme Council of Cultural Revolution to the Guardian Council before their implementation—which can ensure supervision over regulations from both a Sharia and constitutional perspective (e.g., Amjadian, 2012; Haji Ali Khamseh et al., 2021). Another proposed solution involves the establishment of boards specialized in Islamic jurisprudence and legal matters, overseen by the Guardian Council faqihs tasked with proactive monitoring subsequent to the enactment of regulations (Fe’li, 2020). The novelty of the present study lies in its detailed analysis of the feasibility and challenges associated with a priori Sharia supervision over regulations. Materials and MethodsThe study relied on a descriptive–analytical method, using library research to collect and analyze the data. Results and DiscussionA priori Sharia supervision over regulations can viably be applied after the regulations are approved and before they take effect—similar to the supervision over Majlis approvals. A priori Sharia supervision is more aligned with the objective of Principle (4) of the Constitution, so it is favored over other forms of supervision, especially retrospective supervision. Furthermore, it is essential that Sharia-based supervision be applied in advance or a priori to the implementation, at least for critical regulations that are not subject to appeal in the Court of Administrative Justice. Moreover, for the sake of legal security of citizens and the prevention of rights violations, a priori supervision is preferable over alternative types of monitoring because it is difficult to claim and restore the rights of citizens that might have been infringed upon in the past, especially if regulations are retroactively annulled long after their implementation. ConclusionThe challenges related to the principles of continuity and acceleration in delivering public services do not pose a significant obstacle to a priori Sharia supervision because it is feasible to set a deadline for expressing opinions and the Guardian Council faqihs have opinions aimed at guaranteeing these principles. Furthermore, certain regulations that are not allowed to be delayed in their approval and implementation can exceptionally be subjected to Sharia supervision outside a priori Sharia supervision mechanism. It is plausible that the structure and organization of the Guardian Council may not be entirely conducive or equipped to implement such a mechanism, given the unique responsibilities of the faqihs. However, it can be limited to a priori Sharia supervision of critical regulations, and it is not challenging as such, given the reforms aimed at reducing the Court of Administrative Justice’s inquiries from the Council (e.g., the ability to refer to the procedure of the Council’s faqihs in similar cases), and a comprehensive revision of the Council’s organization to lay the ground for a priori Sharia supervision. Additionally, the Head of the Judiciary and the President of the Court can notify the Guardian Council faqihs of cases conflicting with Sharia in order to eliminate the structural defects of the Guardian Council that render it incompatible with supervising important regulations. It is worth noting that Note (1) of Article (87) of the Law of the Court of Administrative Justice (1402/2023) also lays the groundwork for establishing a suitable structure for Sharia supervision over regulations.
International Law
Amirsaed Vakil; Ahmad Ebrahimi
Abstract
Introduction
The joy and excitement that sports bring to fans worldwide, together with the principles of fairness and sportsmanship, requires that the results of sporting events should remain unpredictable and be determined solely based on the skill and will of the athletes, free from any interference ...
Read More
Introduction
The joy and excitement that sports bring to fans worldwide, together with the principles of fairness and sportsmanship, requires that the results of sporting events should remain unpredictable and be determined solely based on the skill and will of the athletes, free from any interference by corrupt entities. The pervasive issue of match-fixing stands out as a significant threat, undermining the very essence of unpredictability in sports results. Now considered as a modern symbol of corruption in the field of sports, match-fixing has evolved into a transnational and cross-border problem as it is associated with gambling, sports betting, and international organized crime. The commercialization of sports, together with the influx of substantial financial resources and wide media coverage, has increased the significance of sports results for both legal and illegal financial companies (Primorac & Pilić, 2020). Consequently, no sport or sports stakeholder remains immune to the consequences of manipulation of results. A report released by Sportradar shows a concerning trend in 2022, revealing the identification of 1212 suspected cases of match-fixing across 12 sports and 92 countries (Sportradar, 2023). In light of this alarming scenario, there is an urgent need to address match-fixing thoroughly by relying on the collective efforts and cooperation of all stakeholders in the field of sports.
Literature Review
A dominant theme in the mainstream literature on match-fixing is the relation between match-fixing and international organized crime, gambling, and legal and illegal betting platforms (e.g., Tweedie & Holden, 2022). There are also case studies focused on specific countries (e.g., Hessert & Goh, 2022). Therefore, the proposed conclusions often advocate for the adoption of criminal laws and regulations within national legal frameworks to address match-fixing (Smith, 2023). Concerning the related literature in Persian, there are a few studies within the sports law. These works predominantly dealt with match-fixing within the scope of domestic law rather than international law or specific sports fields (e.g., Sadati-Fallahabadi, 2021). The studies also offered non-legal solutions (e.g., Mallaei &
Afroozeh, 2021), or addressed the topic from the perspective of sports management and preventive strategies, proposing solutions such as education and the increased awareness to combat match-fixing (see Cheragh-Birjandi et al., 2020). The present study stands out by attempting to identify and analyze the legal nature of match-fixing as both a national and a transnational issue. By focusing on the structures of international sports law (e.g., the Court of Arbitration for Sport), this research aimed to provide a more accurate and nuanced assessment of regulations and the guarantees of their implementation, thus laying the groundwork for effectively confronting and addressing the issue of match-fixing.
Materials and Methods
The current study used a descriptive–analytical method to examine match-fixing, framing the topic within the international sports law and delving into both national and transnational dimensions.
Results and Discussion
According to the Macolin Convention (Council of Europe, 2014), match-fixing involves a multifaceted process with multiple actors that occurs due to sports-related motives—regardless of financial elements—or due to the motives of betting, gambling, or corruption. An analysis of match-fixing in international documents, such as the UN Conventions against Corruption and Transnational Organized Crime, reveals that while these conventions have established a significant international legal framework for corruption-relatedcrimes, they are applicable only when match-fixing is associated with offenses like bribery and organized crime. Moreover, even the Macolin Convention, specifically addressing match-fixing, has not yet achieved global recognition and serves only as the viable option to address the issue (Chappelet, 2015).
Prominent bodies in international sports law, such as the International Olympic Committee and the Court of Arbitration for Sport, have dedicated special attention to the issue of match-fixing. The International Olympic Committee has implemented numerous rules and regulations for preventing, educating, monitoring, and combating match-fixing, as outlined in the Olympic Charter. Following the measures of the International Olympic Committee, international sports organizations have taken significant measures in recent years to combat match-fixing. These efforts generally manifest as ethical and behavioral guidelines, information systems, early warning systems, integrity units, and educational programs (see Criminal Law Provisions for the Prosecution of Competition Manipulation: UNODC-IOC Study, 2016). The jurisprudence of the Court of Arbitration for Sport indicates the development of ratione materiae and personal jurisdiction in addressing match-fixing cases in recent years. To deal with match-fixing cases, the Court adopts a zero-tolerance approach, observing legal principles such as the legality of punishment, proportionality, non-interference, and the prohibition of double trial.
Conclusion
An examination of the performance of various international sports institutions reveals that, from the perspective of international sportslaw, match-fixing is inherently of a disciplinary nature and is treated as a violation of disciplinary standards. In essence, greater emphasis is placed on addressing match-fixing instances driven primarily by sports motives, be they financial or non-financial. This approach avoids associating stakeholders with other criminal activities.
Concerning Iran’s sports law, it is suggested that the shortcomings in the federation regulations be amended by providing a precise and consistent definition of match-fixing, making clear the instances of match-fixing, and developing ratione materiae and personal jurisdiction within the federations. To improve the prosecution process, a series of measures can also be taken, such as establishing a universal standard of proof for proving match-fixing violations, broadening the range of acceptable evidence, and adopting a coherent two-step procedure involving disciplinary and criminal proceedings (with due consideration of legal conditions)—akin to the model observed in UEFA.
Furthermore, the research highlighted notable gaps in international sports law, despite the efforts to establish a suitable international legal framework by the UN, the International Olympic Committee, and the Court of Arbitration for Sport. First, UN conventions, as globally accepted documents, do not specifically address the issue of match-fixing. Second, other declaration documents fall short of covering all forms of match-fixing. Even the Macolin Convention has yet to achieve universal acceptance. Third, the Court of Arbitration for Sport possesses limited executive power and holds a secondary responsibility in this regard. Therefore, it is suggested that the issue of match-fixing be explicitly introduced into international conventions in order to provide a rigorous legal framework for addressing it.
Public Law
Mahdi Moradi Berelian; Mohammad Ghsem Tangestani
Abstract
IntroductionIn recent decades, significant advancements in biomedicine have paved the way for the establishment of biobanks, serving as repositories for individual samples crucial in biological research. These samples are instrumental in identifying genetic diseases and developing appropriate treatments. ...
Read More
IntroductionIn recent decades, significant advancements in biomedicine have paved the way for the establishment of biobanks, serving as repositories for individual samples crucial in biological research. These samples are instrumental in identifying genetic diseases and developing appropriate treatments. Nevertheless, a pivotal concern within the domain of public law revolves around how governments address the challenges posed by biobanks and institute the necessary regulatory frameworks. Different legal systems adopt different models of biobank governance. Some legal systems have enacted specific laws, while others have embraced a combination of self-regulation and general government rules. As biobanks continue to expand, a novel form of governance is emerging, wherein biobanks wield influence over political decisions. The present study aimed to examine how Iran’s legal system regulates biobanks and navigates the associated challenges, including the absence of a comprehensive act and the multiplicity of regulatory norms and bodies. These distinctive characteristics may have impacts on transparency, efficiency, accountability, and the establishment of clear-cut mechanisms for sample collection, sample access, and data protection. Focusing on Iran’s legal system, the study addressed the following research questions: What is the model for management of biobanks and their interactions with the government in the legal systems under study? What are the defining characteristics of the regulation of biobanks in Iran’s legal system? What challenges exist in this field, and what potential solutions can be proposed to address them?Literature ReviewPersian literature includes several articles that touch upon this topic, yet they neither provide a comprehensive examination of the regulatory model nor analyze the topic within the context of Iran’s legal system. Instead, they predominantly concentrate on the ethical challenges posed by biobanks.Materials and MethodsEmploying a descriptive–analytical research method, the study relied on library and Internet sources to offer a description of biobanks and delineate their characteristics and various types, while conducting an analysis of selected legal systems to identify models of biobank governance. As a case study, the research meticulously evaluated all laws and regulations pertaining to biobanks within Iran’s legal system. Drawing upon the results of a comparative analysis, it analyzed the regulatory model for biobanks in Iran as well as its challenges.Results and DiscussionThe advancements in biomedical knowledge and the establishment of banks for storing human tissue and genes represent significant achievements as well as challenges for the modern state. The challenges arisen from legal, ethical, security, and commercial considerations associated with the collection and storage of human samples, donor consent, and privacy and data protection all have elevated the regulatory role of the state to a new and specialized level. Traditional laws and rules (e.g., public law, civil law, private ownership, privacy and even penal norms) certainly fall short of providing adequate solutions to the challenges arising from biobanking. Biobanks should be considered as emerging and complex objects of state governance. To deal with this complexity, some governments have adopted a model of regulation in order to design a comprehensive legal framework inclusive of (non-)institutional mechanisms concerning the regulation of biobanking. The adoption of the model assumes large-scale, governmental management capabilities to strike a balance between public interests, individual rights, and commercial interests resulting from biobanking; create integration and transparency in biobanking; and ensure public accountability in this regard. Alternatively, some other governments have opted for decentralized monitoring of biobanks by relying on self-regulatory mechanisms that are mostly based on the norms and principles set by non-governmental institutions as well as a few governmental regulations. The decentralized, self-regulatory approach may lack transparency and public accountability but offer adaptability to the rapid transformations in biotechnology, avoiding issues related to macro-bureaucratic governmental management. In any case, effective governance of biobanks requires appropriate methods to address the multifaceted challenges.ConclusionThe establishment and development of biobanks have ushered in a new era of bio-politics, focusing on individual dissected body parts rather than the body as a whole. Biobanks actively shape biological policies, functioning as subjects of governance rather than passive objects. It seems that ensuring effective network governance and safeguarding public rights and interests require a delicate balance between integrated regulation through legislative norms and self-regulation mechanisms. Governments must strike this balance to play a pivotal role in navigating network governance and guaranteeing its essential functions. Relying solely on integrated regulation through legislative norms can result in an inflexible governance structure that struggles to adapt to changing nature of biomedicine and biobanking. However, certain aspects of biobanking activities must be regulated to ensure efficiency, secure public interests, and maintain accountability while incorporating self-regulatory mechanisms going on in the non-governmental sector.In Iran’s legal system, which is relatively young in the realm of biobanking with a history of less than two decades, biobank governance tends to align more with the model of governmental regulation. However, the Iranian legislator has not introduced specific regulations on banks of human samples. A set of laws, regulations, and documents established by various government agencies, primarily addressing banks of non-human samples, reflects a fragmented and mosaic-like regulatory framework. This approach has not delivered the anticipated benefits of large-scale, governmental management of biobanks, such as transparency, accountability, and the implementation of specific mechanisms related to collecting samples, safeguarding individual rights and privacy, and managing legal and ethical challenges.The legislative body is expected to define general principles and rules for collecting and using human samples, striking a balance between various competing interests. However, due to the specialized nature of the regulated field and limitations related to the legislator’s technical capacity, delving into intricate details may not be a reasonable expectation. It is essential to entrust the detailed regulation to executive statutes or independent specialized bodies.
International Law
Mohammad Reza Mogadasifar; Farideh Shaygan
Abstract
IntroductionAsylum-seeking has emerged as a critical social issue at the international level in recent decades. Every year, millions of refugees leave their home countries or places of residence, seeking refuge in other countries to escape economic, military, political, and social crises. Refugees embark ...
Read More
IntroductionAsylum-seeking has emerged as a critical social issue at the international level in recent decades. Every year, millions of refugees leave their home countries or places of residence, seeking refuge in other countries to escape economic, military, political, and social crises. Refugees embark on the arduous asylum process due to the fear of torture and persecution in their home country or place of residence, in pursuit of a life that aligns with the minimum standards of human rights. While some successfully obtain refugee status from the host country, some face deportation or repatriation after going through the legal process. In some cases, they may even be returned to a third country, where persecution awaits based on justified evidence. Returning them to their former country is certainly the worst-case scenario for asylum seekers or refugees. The international community has established a legal framework for refugee protection through the 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol. Certain rules and principles outlined in these documents are so fundamental that no reservations can be made to them. A notable example is the principle of non-refoulement which prevents the return of refugees to their home country or a third state where persecution is feared.The present study tried to answer the following question: What prevents the return or deportation of a refugee to their home country or a third state? While the treaties do not explicitly answer this question, the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights provides valuable insights into the meaning and legal nature of this principle, as well as methods for assessing the status of a refugee when deciding on repatriation. Although the European Court of Human Rights lacks the authority to review and apply the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, member states of the Council of Europe are obligated to ensure the respect of rights outlined in the European Convention on Human Rights for all individuals within their jurisdiction, including refugees and asylum seekers. At the intersection of the European Convention on Human Rights and the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, the European Court of Human Rights examines general conditions in the state concerned and the individual applicant’s situation to determine factors preventing repatriation or expulsion. To this end, the Court has set specific limits on the right of states to expel refugees and asylum seekers from their borders. The Court indirectly supports the principle of non-refoulement, aiming to ensure respect and prevent violations of relevant articles of the European Convention on Human Rights, particularly Article (3) which prohibits torture. This implies that the reservation cannot be applied to the principle of non-refoulement, which extends beyond the scope of the 1951 Convention.Literature ReviewWhile there are many articles addressing refugee protection and the non-refoulement principle under the European Convention on Human Rights, they have not explicitly delved into the prohibition of reservation to the non-refoulement principle. Therefore, the current study can be regarded as innovative in both its subject matter and content.Materials and MethodsAdopting a descriptive–analytical method, the present research examined national and international legal literature, the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, and pertinent international treaties.ConclusionThe European Court of Human Rights, functioning as a monitoring mechanism for the European Convention on Human Rights, has encountered numerous cases involving asylum seekers seeking refugee status. Its jurisprudence has significantly contributed to the development and evolution of laws pertaining to refugee protection. By establishing a connection between the European Convention on Human Rights and the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, the Court has effectively offered indirect support to refugees, safeguarding them against deportation, extradition, and repatriation. Its jurisprudence firmly prohibits the application of reservations to the non-refoulement principle.
Public Law
Mohammad Mohseni Rad; Ali Akbar Gorji Azandariani
Abstract
IntroductionLegal system is a legal concept that has been addressed less directly, except in a few cases. Legal order and later on legal system were initially introduced into legal literature by German jurists. In the first half of the 19th century, scholars of public law in Germany pioneered the discussion ...
Read More
IntroductionLegal system is a legal concept that has been addressed less directly, except in a few cases. Legal order and later on legal system were initially introduced into legal literature by German jurists. In the first half of the 19th century, scholars of public law in Germany pioneered the discussion on the concept of legal order, influenced by the philosophies of their predecessors, namely Kant and Hegel. Similarly, the concept of a legal system, denoting an organic and systematic set of rules, emerged concurrently with the concept of the rule of law in the scholarship on law. The concurrent emergence suggests that the prerequisite for the existence of a legal system is the prior establishment of the rule of law. In all likelihood, the concept of a legal system had held more significance for scholars in private international law, whose aim was to elucidate how the rules of one system could be applied in another. Therefore, recognizing the concept of a legal system seemed to be a precursor to delving into the core discussion of international law. Later on, the concept of a legal system fell into neglect and received scant attention until it regained its importance during the 20th century. However, the revival did not stem from the inherent significance of the legal system itself, but rather from a debate between positivists and anti-positivists regarding the concept of law. Neither Hart nor Fuller—as the great figures of positivism and anti-positivism, respectively—explicitly referred to something as of legal system; however, their formulation and theorization would inevitably end up in the concept of a legal system. In any case, legal system can be viewed as a cohesive set of all elements that significantly contribute to establishing the rights governing the life and functioning of any human society.In this respect, the present study aimed to investigate the nature of the concept of a legal system by addressing the following questions: Why is the concept of a legal system important to us? What is a legal system? What are its defining characteristics and constitutive components? How are the components intertwined? and What kind of relationship does the legal system impose on its internal environment? It is presupposed that a precise conceptual definition of legal system is essential to understand the relevance between ethics and the legal system. Accurate identification of constituent elements of the legal system, as well as a careful examination of the criteria for the system’s validity, are crucial steps to gain insight into the relationship between ethics and the legal system. Literature ReviewAs the legal system consists of a set of laws, understanding the legal system requires a detailed analysis of the nature of law. It is thus crucial to note that any conceptualization of law significantly influences the understanding of the legal system. In the literature on legal studies in Iran, it seems that that there is a dearth of research concerning the conceptual and philosophical definition of legal system. The concept of a legal system and its related notions have not been a focal point for Iranian jurists. Although a few significant translated works deal with the concept of law, there is no independent research specifically dedicated to the concept of a legal system. In the non-Iranian context, the English-language literature includes notable works published in the early 70s, such as The Concept of a Legal System by Raz (1970) and Normative Systems by Alchourron and Bulygin (1971).The concept of law, as a normative-cum-institutional system, has become a battleground for positivist and non-positivist doctrines. The discussions on the existence, elements, and purpose of the law form an integral part of the analysis of the concept of a legal system, with each jurist and scholar interpreting it based on their theoretical perspective. In general, a legal system is deemed to exist when its laws do exit. Therefore, to understand the legal system requires a keen understanding of the conditions under which the law exists. Materials and MethodsThe present research employed a descriptive, analytical, and conceptual methodology, relying on library research and internet resources to collect the data. ConclusionIn light of the research findings, it seems that the study of the theory of a legal system is still in its early stages, for neither the nature of associated issues nor its significance has been recognized and understood. The research highlighted that understanding the nature of law requires an understanding of the internal relationships among laws, emphasizing that every law is necessarily linked to a legal system. In summary, it appears that the analytical theory of a legal system suffers from two shortcomings. First, it neglects the problematic issue of content, thus offering an inadequate explanation of the legal system’s dynamics. Therefore, such a theory needs to be complemented by ethical considerations. Second, this doctrine falls short in giving adequate attention to all constituent elements of the legal system.
