نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 استاد گروه حقوق خصوصی و اسلامی دانشکدة حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران
2 دانشیار گروه حقوق خصوصی و اسلامی دانشکدة حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران
3 استادیار گروه حقوق خصوصی دانشکدة حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
Abstract
This article provides a critical analysis of Note 2 of Article 14 of the Iranian Code of Criminal Procedure, adopted in 1392 SH/ 2014 CE, which vindicates the victim’s right to both blood money (diya) and civil compensation. The purpose of this study is to determine the scope of the above-mentioned Article and of the legality of the claim to financial and non-financial damages resulting from bodily injuries on top of the blood money. The research method is descriptive-analytical, and the data was collected in library method, with emphasis on the analysis and interpretation of legal texts, Islamic legal views and the opinions of legal scholars.
The answer to the question of whether the victim in bodily injuries can claim, in addition to blood money, the financial and non-financial damages stemmed from physical injuries or he is only entitled to receive blood money and is deprived of the right to receive any other type of damages depends, to some extent, on the rationale behind the blood money rule and on its subject and territory. It is, however, controversial among Islamic jurists, Imamis and Sunnis alike, Iranian Judicial opinions, and in the legal literature of Iran and other Islamic countries what kind of damages diya is intended to cover and whether or not it is compatible with financial and non-financial damages. In fact, the divergence over this issue in Iran, like some other Islamic countries, have reached its peak in recent years.
Nevertheless, a closer examination of the sources from which the blood money rule is derived, in particular the authentic tradition (hadith) of Ghiyath, the Qur’anic verse "We have given dignity to human beings" (17-70), the Islamic jurists’ opinions holding blood money as an indemnity for a human being’s soul or member (especially some explicit rulings by contemporary Imami and Sunni jurists), as well as the inherent equality of the value of people’s lives and bodies regardless of their social statuses, skills, education, and ages, indicate that blood money in the Islamic legal system is merely to compensate for the loss of life, organs, or their abilities and has nothing to do with material and spiritual damage caused by personal injury.
Hence, the financial losses resulting from bodily harm can be claimed in addition to the blood money and according to the general rules of civil liability, regardless of whether their amount is less or more than the blood money. Even if this view is not accepted, the sources on which the blood money rule is premised do not imply more than that the financial losses that were used to commonly result from personal injury in the early days of Islam, such as the costs of basic and simple treatment and the lost income, only to the extent of the average income of an ordinary worker, are included in the blood money. Damages beyond that, like the costs of today's complex surgeries are thus not covered by blood money and should be compensated independently.
Also, spiritual damages caused by physical injuries can be claimed independently of the blood money according to some Islamic jurists and legal authors, and based on the history of this rule and traditions pertaining to it. But even if this view is not accepted, although it is arguable that non-financial damages ordinarily caused by bodily harm, such as enduring pain or suffering or beauty defects within the reasonable limits, are included in the blood money and are compensated by paying the blood money, these damages should be compensated separately and in addition to the blood money if they exceed ordinary levels, especially if they reach the level of neurological and mental disorders, acute distress, depression, anxiety, severe physiological imbalance etc., even if the extent of loss is less than that blood money covers.
Accordingly, Note 2 of Article 14 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which prohibits claiming spiritual damages and possible lost profits (deprivation of the power to work) where blood money is payable or punishments stipulated in the sources (ta’zirat mansus) are to be inflicted will be objected in this article. The Note implies, on the other hand, that financial damages caused by personal injuries (except for the lost profits) will be compensable in addition to diya (blood money), which is an important evolution in the legal regime governing the collection of blood money and damages. In order to remedy the shortcomings of the rule stipulated in Note 2 and bring it in line with principles of Islamic law and national legislative system, the Note can be taken to include only spiritual damages within the ordinary extent (which is to be determined by forensic experts) as well as lost possible profits in the reasonable sense (such as the loss of the wages of an unskilled worker subject to the Labor Code), which
is covered by diya (blood money) and thus cannot be claimed in addition to it. However, if the said damages exceed the usual limits, they are not incorporated in the blood money and can be claimed separately. Also, the impossibility of receiving blood money and the lost profits in crimes with stipulated punishments has no logical justifications or rational bases. Therefore, this study suggests the necessity of amending Note 2 of Article 14 of the Code of Criminal Procedure based on the arguments here outlined.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
منابع
29.________ (1384). استفتائات قضایی، ج2، چ دوم، تهران: میزان.
47._____________ (1413ق). هدایة العباد، ج2، چ اول، قم: دارالقرآن الکریم.
48._____________ (1412ق). الدر المنضود فی أحکام الحدود، ج1، چ اول، قم: دارالقرآن الکریم.
)