Journal of Historical Research, Law and Policy

The management of criminal records within the Iranian legal system, despite reform-oriented approaches reflected in higher-level policy documents, has become one of the principal obstacles to the realization of criminal justice and the prevention of recidivism. Employing a descriptive–analytical method and grounded in labeling theory, this study examines the pathology of the gap between “law in the books” and “law in action.” The central issue concerns analyzing the causes underlying the inefficiency of Articles 25 and 26 of the Islamic Penal Code (2013) in eliminating the adverse consequences of criminal records, as well as investigating the process through which “legal punishment” transforms into “permanent social exclusion.” The findings indicate that the duality between “legal rehabilitation” and the perpetual retention of information within law-enforcement databases, combined with indiscriminate occupational restrictions and employers’ risk-averse practices, has resulted in the blockage of reintegration pathways and the emergence of “secondary deviance” among convicted individuals. In effect, the criminal justice system, by preserving what may be described as an institutional “memory of dangerousness,” unintentionally contributes to the reproduction of criminal cycles. To overcome this structural impasse, the present article proposes a model of “hybrid penology,” grounded in a transition from “mechanical exclusion” toward “intelligent risk management.” Key policy solutions include the legal recognition of the right to be forgotten, the specialization and proportionalization of social disabilities, and the smart modernization of the criminal record system based on an access-level classification model. The study concludes that sustainable security lies not in the exclusion of offenders but in their reintegration through data-driven mechanisms and post-penal support measures.

This article examines the role of artificial intelligence in situational crime prevention with particular emphasis on privacy challenges. Situational crime prevention focuses on reducing criminal opportunities by modifying environmental, technological, and organizational conditions that facilitate crime. Artificial intelligence has expanded this preventive model through predictive analytics, smart surveillance, biometric identification, cyber threat detection, automated risk assessment, and data-driven criminal justice management. These technologies can improve the speed, accuracy, and efficiency of preventive interventions by identifying crime patterns, detecting suspicious behavior, supporting resource allocation, and strengthening responses to both physical and cybercrime. However, the use of artificial intelligence in crime prevention also creates serious legal and ethical concerns. Because AI systems depend on extensive data collection and algorithmic processing, they may threaten informational privacy, increase mass surveillance, enable discriminatory profiling, reduce transparency, and weaken accountability. The article argues that the preventive benefits of AI cannot justify unrestricted monitoring or automated suspicion. Instead, AI-based situational prevention must be governed by legality, necessity, proportionality, transparency, explainability, human oversight, data minimization, purpose limitation, independent auditing, and effective remedies. The study concludes that artificial intelligence should function as a supportive tool for human decision-making rather than a substitute for legal judgment. A legitimate model of AI-based crime prevention must reduce criminal opportunities while preserving privacy, dignity, equality, and the rule of law.

Environmental hazards have made human life highly vulnerable and profoundly affected in the contemporary era. The expansion of instrumental power transformed the world into two groups of countries: developed countries and developing countries. Unrestrained development resulting from inequality prompted environmental scholars to establish a new concept of development known as sustainable development. The principal components of sustainable development include attention to the environment, environmental justice, environmental ethics, intergenerational justice, fairness, and the spiritual advancement of human beings. Environmental justice concerns the equitable distribution of environmental risks and benefits among all people, regardless of race, skin color, nationality, or income. On the other hand, globalization processes have led non-state actors to become an inseparable component of global governance. An increasing number of non-state actors participate in various steering and regulatory activities, as can be observed in the field of climate change. These actors have undertaken effective efforts at both international and regional levels toward the formulation, establishment, and monitoring of environmental regulatory obligations, thereby contributing to the expansion and development of environmental justice.

In light of the acceptance of the principle of performance of obligations and contracts as a necessary condition of religiosity and one of the most fundamental theoretical foundations of Islam, performance of obligation (fulfillment of contractual commitments) in both the Iranian and Iraqi legal systems is recognized as the most natural legal institution for the execution of obligations. This institution produces an effect that is interpreted in Iranian law as the extinction of obligation and in Iraqi law as the termination of obligation. The Iranian Civil Code regulates performance of obligation under Articles 265 to 282 as one of the causes of extinction of obligations, while the Iraqi Civil Code addresses performance of obligation in the first chapter of Book Five, entitled “Termination of Obligation,” under Articles 375 to 398. Nevertheless, the civil codes of both countries remain silent regarding the legal nature of performance of obligation, thereby necessitating reliance on legal doctrine and judicial practice. Determining the legal nature of performance of obligation carries not only analytical and theoretical significance but also substantial practical consequences. If performance of obligation is classified as a juridical act, irrespective of whether it constitutes a contract or a unilateral juridical act, it requires the intention of the actor and a constitutive declaration of will; consequently, performance carried out by an incompetent person—such as a prodigal, an insane person, or any legally incapacitated individual—would lack legal effect. Conversely, if it is considered a legal transaction, identifying its specific type entails distinct legal conditions and implications. Accordingly, this study adopts a descriptive–analytical method to clarify the legal nature of performance of obligation in the Iranian and Iraqi legal systems. The findings indicate that, in both systems, what occurs in the course of performance of obligation is fundamentally the manifestation of human will, the result of which is the extinction of the obligation. The legal characterization of performance of obligation varies depending on the subject matter within each legal relationship. A simple performance of obligation constitutes a legal fact that, in principle, does not require a constitutive intention of the parties. However, where performance of obligation necessitates the execution of another juridical act, its nature depends on the accompanying legal act: if fulfillment of the debt requires mutual consent, performance of obligation takes the form of a contract; if it is accomplished solely through a single will, it constitutes a unilateral juridical act; and where no will influences its realization and it occurs solely by operation of law, it is classified as a legal fact.

The Umayyad Caliphate represents one of the most significant periods in the political and cultural history of Islam, during which the Islamic realm rapidly expanded and evolved into a heterogeneous society composed of diverse ethnicities and cultures. Using a descriptive–analytical method and drawing upon historical sources and contemporary studies, this research examines the influence of Iranian culture on the culture of Muslim Arabs during the Umayyad era. The findings indicate that despite the official Umayyad policy emphasizing Arab superiority, in practice many Iranian cultural, administrative, and political elements penetrated the structure of the government and Islamic society. The transfer of bureaucratic systems, the continuation of the Sasanian taxation structure, the influence of courtly rituals, and the role of Iranian secretaries were among the most prominent manifestations of this influence. This cultural interaction laid the groundwork for the formation of a centralized model of governance within Islamic civilization. The significance of this issue lies in the fact that the Umayyad period constituted an intermediary stage between the simple caliphal tradition of early Islam and the complex caliphal system of later periods, particularly during the Abbasid Caliphate. Examining this period demonstrates how Iranian elements were absorbed, reinterpreted, and institutionalized within the framework of the Islamic Caliphate and what role they played in shaping the civilizational model of Islam.

Developments in Iraq after the fall of the Baath regime in 2003 turned the country into one of the most important arenas for the redistribution of power in the Middle East and created the conditions for simultaneous competition and interaction between Iran and Turkey. Influenced by geopolitical imperatives, security considerations, economic interests, and historical ties, these two actors have pursued multidimensional strategies in response to Iraq’s newly emerging political structure. Within this framework, the present study was conducted with the aim of examining competition and interaction between Iran and Turkey in Iraq and analyzing their impact on the balance of power in the Middle East. Iran, viewing Iraq as part of its surrounding security environment, has sought to contain potential threats and enhance its strategic depth in West Asia by strengthening the stability of Baghdad’s political structure, expanding security cooperation, and developing relations with Shiite actors and some Kurdish groups. By contrast, Turkey, with a focus on managing threats related to the Kurdish issue, expanding economic influence, establishing trade networks, and engaging with Sunni and Turkmen communities, has adopted a balancing strategy toward Iraq’s domestic and regional developments. The interaction between these two countries in Iraq has a multilevel nature and is reproduced at governmental, party-based, ethno-religious, economic, and security levels. This has caused the pattern of Iran–Turkey relations to move away from direct confrontation and toward a form of managed competition and strategic fluidity. The consequences of this pattern have extended beyond Iraq’s borders and have affected the formation of the balance of power in the Middle East, the configuration of regional alliances, and the pattern of influence exercised by extra-regional actors. Accordingly, the study of post-2003 Iraq has become a basis for analyzing the changing nature of power, competition, and cooperation in the contemporary Middle East.

The Paduspanians were a dynastic lineage whose rulers belonged to families claiming descent from the Sasanian Empire. This dynasty was established in 643 CE by Gil Gavbara and his son Paduspan I in the province of Ruyan, and its rule continued until 1597 CE. In 864 CE, the people of Ruyan and their Paduspanian ruler, Abdullah ibn Wanda Omid, who had become deeply dissatisfied with the oppression imposed by the representatives of the Tahirid governors of the Abbasid Caliphate, namely Muhammad ibn Abdallah al-Tahiri and Muhammad ibn Aws, sought assistance at the suggestion of Muhammad ibn Ibrahim Kiya Dabiri from Hasan ibn Zayd, who himself had migrated to the city of Ray due to pressure from the Abbasid administration. The outcome of this request was the uprising and establishment of the Zaydi state in northern Iran in the same year, a polity that endured until 928 CE. The present study addresses the question of how the relations between the Paduspanian dynasty and the Zaydi movement were formed and developed. Based on the hypothesis that the Paduspanians played a significant and constructive role in this relationship, the study aims to examine the early interactions between these two political entities. Employing a descriptive–analytical method and relying on library-based data collection, this research analyzes and interprets the nature of these relations. The findings demonstrate that the Paduspanians played an initial and substantial role in the establishment and continuation of the Zaydi movement.

An assistant prosecutor, as one of the judicial authorities of the public prosecutor’s office, is not independent vis-à-vis the prosecutor and, acting as the prosecutor’s representative, may—beyond conducting preliminary investigations in criminal cases—perform other duties of the prosecutor as well. Although the assistant prosecutor is not independent of the prosecutor and has no right to formally oppose the prosecutor’s opinion, not all decisions made by the assistant prosecutor require the prosecutor’s express opinion or approval. The lack of independence of the assistant prosecutor and the obligation to follow the prosecutor’s directives do not arise solely from, nor are they limited to, the type or nature of the duty entrusted to the assistant prosecutor. Rather, regardless of which duty the assistant prosecutor undertakes pursuant to the prosecutor’s referral, the assistant prosecutor is obligated to comply with the prosecutor’s authority. The role of the prosecutor’s representative in examining cases varies depending on the subject matter of the case, even in similar offenses. The representative reports the course of proceedings to the prosecutor, thereby keeping the prosecutor informed of developments in the case. In criminal cases, the prosecutor’s representative appears as the public claimant to supervise the correctness of the adjudicative process and to defend the enforcement of law and public rights; the representative’s presence is mandatory and serves a role comparable to that of a judge in safeguarding legal standards, rather than acting as a party to the dispute. Accordingly, the presence of the prosecutor’s representative in criminal courts is compulsory, as the representative is responsible for supervising case proceedings and the proper application of law, protecting public rights and the complainant’s claims, and submitting opinions and briefs in defense of the public interest in criminal cases. Even where there is a private complainant, the prosecutor or the prosecutor’s representative attends to ensure compliance with the law and the order of the court. Therefore, the legal basis for the representative’s presence is to guarantee the observance of justice.