نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسنده
استادیار گروه حقوق دانشکدۀ علوم انسانی دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، قزوین، ایران.
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسنده [English]
Introduction
One of the fundamental and determining institutions in the structure of legal systems is the concept of legal personality. In a way, the skeleton of any legal system can be considered the concept of legal personality. According to a long-standing tradition, humans have been defined in the legal framework as persons. In contrast, other non-human entities have been identified as other concepts, such as objects or property. With the progress of societies and economic and social changes, the concept of legal personality and its included instances have undergone transformation. This includes the emergence of companies, offices, and non-governmental organizations, which led to the classification of legal personality into real (natural) and legal (artificial) persons. With the emergence of environmental changes and the growing tendency to protect animals and other natural phenomena on the one hand, and advances in robotics and artificial intelligence on the other, the issue of recognizing non-human entities as subjects of rights and as having legal personality has expanded more than ever. Movements such as animal rights and nature rights have taken firm steps towards recognizing non-human living entities as legal persons with rights. What has received less attention in the meantime is the identification of the foundations of human legal personality and the feasibility of recognizing these foundations in the case of animals and manifestations of nature. Research conducted in domestic works so far has focused on animal rights, and there is no work that examines the foundations of human legal personality and the feasibility of animals having legal personality. Accordingly, in this innovative and pioneering research, we seek to identify these foundations in humans and assess the capacity of non-human entities to enjoy these fundamental components.
Method
The research was conducted in a descriptive-analytical manner. The required sources and data were collected through library research and by consulting websites and reputable domestic and foreign databases.
Conclusion
The traditional (orthodox) theory of legal personality includes a rights/duties-based approach that attributes legal personality to entities with the capacity to hold rights and/or duties. This approach, from the past to the present, across all legal systems influenced by the two theories of benefit and will, has considered only humans and human-created institutions (such as companies, offices, and non-governmental organizations) worthy of legal personality. In the legal works of traditional theories, two indicators have been introduced to identify legal personality: legalism and realism. According to legalism, legal personality is a title created by law, and the legislator can grant it to any entity he deems necessary, based on interests. Therefore, being human and possessing human characteristics do not necessarily entail legal personality. In contrast, realists believe that the existence of certain primarily human-centered characteristics (such as intelligence, will, self-awareness, and holiness) is the basis for having legal personality. However, in recent decades, with the expansion of movements to protect the rights of animals and natural phenomena, the traditional, anthropocentric foundations of legal personality have been reinterpreted and revised. The design of a Bundle Theory legal personality by Visa Korki, emphasizing the ability to be placed in certain legal situations, as well as the nature-centric reinterpretation of the theories of benefit and will, has paved the way for the gradual acceptance of legal personality for animals. In addition, among the indicators for identifying legal personality, the legality indicator, by adopting a non-human-centered approach and emphasizing the legislator's authority in determining legal personality, is more appropriate for recognizing the legal personality of animals. Meanwhile, the nature-centered reading of the realist index and the acknowledgment that animals (at least some animals such as primates and dolphins) possess human mental characteristics (such as will, intelligence, and emotional perception of pleasure and pain) provide a suitable basis for recognizing the legal personality of animals.
کلیدواژهها [English]
منابع
آقا مهدوی، اصغر؛ حبیبیان، مهدی (1393). بررسی اهلیت شخص حقوقی در فقه و حقوق. پژوهشنامۀ فقه اجتماعی، 2 4: 27-50، doi: 10.30497/fiqh.2014.2433
الماسی، نجادعلی؛ جلیلی، میرجمیل (1401). مقایسۀ شخصیت حقیقی و حقوقی با شخصیت مجازی از منظری اخلاقی در حقوق ایران. فصلنامۀ اخلاق در علوم و فناوری، (17)، 1-8/ http://ethicsjournal.ir/article-1-2835-fa.html (1خرداد 1405)
امامی، سید حسن (1382). حقوق مدنی. تهران: کتابفروشی اسلامیه.
جعفریتبار، حسن (1392). بهسوی روزن چشم در حقوق نفسانی. فصلنامۀ تحقیقات حقوقی، 16(61)، 131-161. (1خرداد 1405)
خوشیاری حاجیبابا رزاق، مجدی علی (۱۳۹۲).حمایت از حیوانات در قوانین ایران و اسناد بینالمللی. مجلۀ حقوق پزشکی. ۷ (۲۶)،۱۷۱-۱۹۲، http://ijmedicallaw.ir/article-1-167-fa.html (1خرداد 1405)
رمضانی قوامآبادی، محمدحسین (1388). حمایت کیفری از گونههای جانوری در ایران. فصلنامۀ علوم محیطی، 7(2): 77-93، https://envs.sbu.ac.ir/article_95730 (1 خرداد1405)
شهبازی، آرامش (1390). حقوق حیوانات: تأملی در نظریه و رویه. پژوهش حقوق عمومی، 14(36)، 27-56، https://qjpl.atu.ac.ir/article_2409.html?lang=fa (1 خرداد 1405)
صفاِئی، سید حسین؛ قاسمزاده، سید مرتضی (1385). حقوق مدنی اشخاص و محجورین. تهران: سمت.
کاتوزیان، ناصر (1371). قواعد عمومی قراردادها. تهران: شرکت سهامی انتشار.
موسیزاده رضا (1384). حقوق اداری. تهران: میزان.
مشهدی، علی؛ کشاورز، اسماعیل (1391). تأملی بر مبانی فلسفی حق بر محیطزیست سالم. مجلۀ پژوهشنامۀ حقوق اسلامی، (2)،47-70 https://ilr.isu.ac.ir/article_1460.html (1خرداد 1405)
مظفری، خدیجه؛ میرشکاری، عباس (1396). مسئولیت مدنی ناشی از ورود زیان بدنی به متوفا. مجلۀ مطالعات حقوق خصوصی، 47(2)، 363-378، https://doi.org/10.22059/jlq.2017.62620
نیازی، عباس؛ جوهر سعید (1401). اهلیت تجاری در حقوق ایران و فرانسه. مجلۀ حقوقی دادگستری، 86 (118)، 369-388. https://doi.org/10.22106/jlj.2021.538664.4396
References
Almasi, N,. & Jalili, M, J. (2023). Comparison of Real and Legal Personality with Virtual Personality from a Moral Perspective in Iranian Law. Ethics in Science and Technology; 17 (4),1-8, URL: http://ethicsjournal.ir/article-1-2835-fa.html (Accessed22Mey2026). [In Persian]
Bharti, A., & Kaur, G. (2024). Legal Personhood Of Artificial Intelligence: A Contemporary Perspective On Juristic & Electronic Personality. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 2024, 30(5), 10395-10400, http://dx.doi.org/10.53555/kuey.v30i5.4755
Bishop, P. (2007). Analytical Psychology and German Classical Aesthetics": Goethe, Schiller, and Jung, Vol. 1, The Development of the Personality. Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203960882.
Cruft, R (2013). Symposium on Rights and the Direction of Duties Introduction. Ethics 123(2) 195-201,
https://doi.org/10.1086/668796
Doomen, J. (2023). The Artificial Intelligence Entity As a Legal Person. Information & Communications Technology Law, 32(3),1-11, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13600834.2023.2196827
Dremliuga, R., Pavel, K., & Mamychev, A. (2019). Criteria for Recognition of AI as a Legal Person. Canadian Center of Science and Education Journal of Politics and Law, 12(3):105-105, http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/jpl.v12n3p105.
Edfast, E. (2022). Sentient Objects — A Theoretical Analysis of the Potential of Animals as Legal Subjects. Department of Law, University of Gothenburg Master of Laws Programme.
Elvia, A. Q. A. (2015). The Natural Person, Legal Entity or Juridical Person and Juridical Personality. Penn State Journal of Law & InternationalAffairsAffairs, 4(1), 363-391,
https://insight.dickinsonlaw.psu.edu/jlia/vol4/iss1/17 (Accessed 22 Mey 2026)
Favre, D. (2024). LAW Should Nonhuman Animals Be Recognized Legally as Persons?. AMA Journal of Ethics, 26(9), 696-700, https://doi.org/10.1001/amajethics.2024.696
Fischer-Lescano, A. (2020). Nature as a Legal Person: Proxy Constellations in Law. Law & Literature, 32(2), 237-262, https://doi.org/10.1080/1535685X.2020.1763596
Jafaritabar, H. (2023). Soul-like Law On the joint essence of rights between human beings, animals, and robots. Society, Development and Commercial Law review, 1(1), 52-65.
https://journals.ut.ac.ir/article_91288.html (Accessed 22 Mey 2026)
Gray, J. (1997). The Nature and Sources of the Law, The Macmilan Company.
Griffin, J. (2008). On Human Rights. (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.
Hermansson, J. (2023). Structuring concepts of legal personhood On legal personhood as a cluster property. Revus - Journal for constitutional theory and philosophy of law, 51, https://doi.org/10.4000/revus.9933
Horsman, Y, Korsten, (2016). Introduction: Legal Bodies: Corpus /Persona /Communitas. Law & Literature. 28 (3), 277–285, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1535685X.2016.1232924
Jane Kotzmann, J., Stonebridge, M., & Christiaenssen, P. (2023). Evolving Conceptions of Legal Personhood: What might Recent Legal Developments Herald for Non-human Animals in Australia?, UNSW Law Journal, 46(2), 347-380,
https://doi.org/10.53637/dktu6447
Katherine, S. (2018). Beyond Human Ownership’? Property, Power and Legal Personality for Nature in Aotearoa New Zealand. Journal of Environmental Law ,30 (1), 207-234,
https://doi.org/10.1093/jel/eqx029
Katouzian, N. (1992). General Rules of Contracts, Tehran,Enteshar Publication. [In Persian]
Khoshyari Hajibaba R., & Majdi A. (2013). The Protection of Animals by Iranian Law and International Documents. Medical Law Journal; 7 (26), 171-192, http://ijmedicallaw.ir/article-1-167-fa.html (Accessed22Mey2026). [In Persian]
Kramer, MH. (2013). Some Doubts About Alternatives to the Interest Theory of Rights. Ethics, The University of Chicago Press, 123(2), 245-263, https://doi.org/10.1086/668705.
Kurki,V. (2023). Legal Personhood. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, Helsinki Legal Studies Research Paper No. 82 , (Accessed 22 Mey 2026) https://ssrn.com/abstract=4669283
Kurki, V. (2017). Why Things Can Hold Rights: Reconceptualizing the Legal Person. In Book: Legal Personhood: Animals, Artificial Intelligence and the Unborn, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53462-6.
Kurki, V. (2021). Legal Personhood and Animal Rights. Journal of Animal Ethics. 11(1), 47–62,
https://doi.org/10.5406/janimalethics.11.1.0047
Luhmann, N. (1995). Social Systems. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press,
MacCormick, N. (1988). Persons as Institutional Facts in Ota Weinberger and Werner Krawietz (eds), Reine Rechtslehre im Spiegel ihrer Fortsetzer und Kritiker 371.
MacDonald Glenn, L. (2018). What Is a Person In book: Posthumanism: the Future of Homo SapiensMacmillan Reference USA, 229-246
Mashhadi, A., & Keshavarz, E. (2013). Reflections on Philiosophical Fundations of Right to Healthy Environment. The Journal of Islamic Law Research, 13(2), 47-70.
doi: 10.30497/law.2013.1460. [In Persian]
Momin, S. (2025). Ascertaining the Legal Personality of Artificial Intelligence. International Journal of Law Management & Humanities 8 (2), 5529-5548,
https://doij.org/10.10000/IJLMH.119609
Mozafari, K., & Mirshekari, A. (2017). Harm to corpus of deads. Law Quarterly, 47(2), 363-378.
https://doi.org/10.22059/jlq.2017.62620 [In Persian]
Mouss, M. (1985). A category of the human mind the notion of person the notion of self. in book Category of the Person. Cambridge University Press
Musazadeh, R. (2005). Administrative Law. Tehran: Mizan. [In Persian]
Naffine, N. (2009). Law’s Meaning of Life: Philosophy, Religion, Darwin and the Legal Person. Hart Publishing
Nieswandt, K. (2019). Authority and Interest in the Theory of Right. In Toh Kevin, Plunkett David & Shapiro Scott, Dimensions of Normativity: New Essays on Metaethics and Jurisprudence. New York: 315-334.
Pranshu, P. (2020). A Study of Animals as Legal Persons. Indraprastha Law Review, 1(1), 1-10 https://indraprasthalawreview.in/archives (Accessed 22 Mey 2026)
Pietrzykowski, T. (2017). The Idea of Non-personal Subjects of Law. In Book: Legal Personhood: Animals, Artificial Intelligence and the Unborn, Visa Kurki and Tomasz Pietrzykowski (eds.), 49–67, 51, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53462-6_4
Preda, A. (2012). Group Rights and Group Agency. Journal of Moral Philosophy, l61(2), 250-266
http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/174552412X625736
Ramazani Ghavamabadi, M. H. (2009). The Protection of Animal Species under Criminal Law in Iran. Advanced Environmental Sciences, 7(2), 77-94, https://envs.sbu.ac.ir/article_95730 (Accessed 22Mey 2026).
Regad, C., & Riot, C. (2024). Animal law in France: Positive law, prospective law and learning the law of the living. Journal of Animal Law, Ethics and One Health (LEOH),(2024), 24-34.
Safai, S. H., & Qasemzadeh, S. M. (2006). Civil Law, Persons and Persons Under Legal Incapacity. Tehran, Samt Publications. [In Persian]
Simmler, M., & Markwalder, N. (2019). Guilty Robots? – Rethinking the Nature of Culpability and Legal Personhood in an Age of Artificial Intelligence. Criminal Law Forum, 30(1), 1-31. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10609-018-9360-0 (Accessed 22 Mey 2026)
Shahbazi, A. (2011). Animals rights:Tamil in theory and behavior. Public Law Researsh, 14(36), 27-56. https://qjpl.atu.ac.ir/article_2409.html?lang=fa )Accessed 22 Mey 2026( [In Persian]
Singer, P. (1990). Animal Liberation. 2nd ed. London: Jonathan Cape,
Spaak,T (2021). Animal Law: Human Duties or Animal Rights? Scandinavian Studies in Law. (67), 225– 254
https://scandinavianlaw.se/pdf/- (Accessed 22 Mey 2026)
)