The civil codes of Iran and Islamic religions are unanimous in a murderer’s disinheritance whereas they mention a number of secondary details that implies conflicts and leads to split decisions made by jurists or based on judicial practice. For example, a court of
More
The civil codes of Iran and Islamic religions are unanimous in a murderer’s disinheritance whereas they mention a number of secondary details that implies conflicts and leads to split decisions made by jurists or based on judicial practice. For example, a court of law orders disinheritance upon any type of murdering, but large discrepancy exists among religions and their jurists. Moreover, juristice and legal ambiguities still can be found in the inheritance after abetment, the extent of inheritance deprivation in the absence of criminal intent, the effect of murder of Hajeb (someone who disinherits) as well as the prerequisites of inheritance deprivation and its range in various types of murders.The current study independently examines each view and extracts different viewpoints after analysis and criticism. Since Islamic jurists either take a dumb approach to some issues like abetting murderer, murder of Hajeb, and murdering without criminal intent, or do not provide sufficient explanations, the way must be paved by jurisprudence or inference of courts upon legal gaps. Some suggestions have been offered to overcome the problem.
Manuscript profile