Iranian law

Corruption in the public sector, characterized by the misuse of public office for personal gain, has become a complex issue that has garnered significant attention since the 1990s. Recognized as a crucial component of good governance, the detrimental impacts of corruption are particularly evident in public administration, policy, and governance. Corruption not only leads to financial losses but also undermines the principles of good governance, erodes public trust in institutions, and distorts the allocation of public resources. This research aims to comprehensively analyze Iran's initiatives in combating corruption within the realms of public administration, policy, and governance. Over the past two decades, Iran has established numerous anti-corruption institutions and enacted relevant laws. However, similar to many other developing countries, Iran's experience highlights the limited effectiveness of institutionalization in curbing corruption. Reports from Transparency International indicate a simultaneous increase in the number of anti-corruption institutions and the severity of Iran's corruption ranking in recent years. To address this challenge, it is recommended that Iran focus on ensuring transparency and accountability, adhering to the principles of good governance, and empowering civil society. By embracing these measures, Iran can make significant progress in combating corruption and promoting effective public administration.

The concept of prescription, or limitation of time for initiating legal proceedings, was first addressed The Statute of Limitations for Movable Properties, approved on July 2, 1929 It was later articulated in a more general language in Iran’s 1939 Code of Civil Procedure (CCP). Article 731 defined prescription as a period after which courts would no longer hear claims, while Article 737 established a ten-year limitation for property-related and debt claims, unless otherwise provided by specific laws. This legal framework remained valid until 1983, when the Guardian Council—responsible for ensuring the compatibility of legislation with Islamic jurisprudence—declared the provisions on prescription contrary to Islamic law and therefore null and void. Consequently, Iranian courts ceased to recognize prescription as a defense, and the new CCP enacted in 2000 omitted any reference to it. Despite the general invalidation of prescription under civil law, certain specific provisions in other legal codes—such as the Commercial Code, the Insurance Code, and the Islamic Criminal Code—have remained operative. Furthermore, in 1992 and 2008, the Guardian Council clarified that its 1983 decision did not apply to claims brought by foreign nationals against Iranian citizens if the claimant’s national legal system recognized prescription. In such cases.

Introduction: Forgery is a reprehensible and immoral behavior that usually aims at financial gain, but may be done to influence the opinion of one person, deceive another, or simply to cause harm. Given the technological developments and the expansion of the use of digital tools, computer forgery has become one of the serious challenges in legal systems. Therefore, the aim of the present study is to examine the ethical dimensions of forgery and comparative analysis of computer forgery and traditional forgery in Iranian and Iraqi law. Material and Methods: This study used reliable sources and international scientific articles in the field of ethical consideration of forgery and comparative analysis of computer forgery and traditional forgery. Conclusion: Since the emergence of writing and the beginning of the use of writing to convey intentions and thoughts, distortion and alteration of lines and words have been recognized as immoral, undesirable and criminal acts. In Islamic law, forgery is recognized as one of the examples of Ta’zir crimes, and the Holy Quran has also considered this act immoral and reprehensible and has included it among the sins. With the comparative analysis presented regarding computer forgery and electronic documents in Iranian and Iraqi law, general and practical conclusions can be reached. This study showed that both legal systems, despite similarities in the main concepts and objectives of the laws, have different approaches in formulating and implementing regulations related to forgery and electronic documents.