Instituto de Estudios Políticos y Derecho Público "Dr. Humberto J. La Roche"
de la Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Políticas de la Universidad del Zulia
Maracaibo, Venezuela
Esta publicación cientíca en formato digital es continuidad de la revista impresa
ISSN-Versión Impresa 0798-1406 / ISSN-Versión on line 2542-3185Depósito legal pp
197402ZU34
ppi 201502ZU4645
Vol.39 N° 71
2021
ISSN 0798- 1406 ~ De pó si to le gal pp 198502ZU132
Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas
La re vis ta Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas, es una pu bli ca ción aus pi cia da por el Ins ti tu to
de Es tu dios Po lí ti cos y De re cho Pú bli co “Dr. Hum ber to J. La Ro che” (IEPDP) de la Fa-
cul tad de Cien cias Ju rí di cas y Po lí ti cas de la Uni ver si dad del Zu lia.
En tre sus ob je ti vos fi gu ran: con tri buir con el pro gre so cien tí fi co de las Cien cias
Hu ma nas y So cia les, a tra vés de la di vul ga ción de los re sul ta dos lo gra dos por sus in ves-
ti ga do res; es ti mu lar la in ves ti ga ción en es tas áreas del sa ber; y pro pi ciar la pre sen ta-
ción, dis cu sión y con fron ta ción de las ideas y avan ces cien tí fi cos con com pro mi so so cial.
Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas apa re ce dos ve ces al año y pu bli ca tra ba jos ori gi na les con
avan ces o re sul ta dos de in ves ti ga ción en las áreas de Cien cia Po lí ti ca y De re cho Pú bli-
co, los cua les son so me ti dos a la con si de ra ción de ár bi tros ca li fi ca dos.
ESTA PU BLI CA CIÓN APA RE CE RE SE ÑA DA, EN TRE OTROS ÍN DI CES, EN
:
Re vicyhLUZ, In ter na tio nal Po li ti cal Scien ce Abs tracts, Re vis ta In ter ame ri ca na de
Bi blio gra fía, en el Cen tro La ti no ame ri ca no para el De sa rrol lo (CLAD), en Bi blio-
gra fía So cio Eco nó mi ca de Ve ne zue la de RE DIN SE, In ter na tio nal Bi blio graphy of
Po li ti cal Scien ce, Re vencyt, His pa nic Ame ri can Pe rio di cals In dex/HAPI), Ul ri ch’s
Pe rio di cals Di rec tory, EBS CO. Se en cuen tra acre di ta da al Re gis tro de Pu bli ca cio-
nes Cien tí fi cas y Tec no ló gi cas Ve ne zo la nas del FO NA CIT, La tin dex.
Di rec to ra
L
OIRALITH
M. C
HIRINOS
P
ORTILLO
Co mi té Edi tor
Eduviges Morales Villalobos
Fabiola Tavares Duarte
Ma ría Eu ge nia Soto Hernández
Nila Leal González
Carmen Pérez Baralt
Co mi té Ase sor
Pedro Bracho Grand
J. M. Del ga do Ocan do
José Ce rra da
Ri car do Com bel las
An gel Lom bar di
Die ter Nohlen
Al fre do Ra mos Ji mé nez
Go ran Ther born
Frie drich Welsch
Asis ten tes Ad mi nis tra ti vos
Joan López Urdaneta y Nil da Ma rín
Re vis ta Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas. Av. Gua ji ra. Uni ver si dad del Zu lia. Nú cleo Hu ma nís ti co. Fa-
cul tad de Cien cias Ju rí di cas y Po lí ti cas. Ins ti tu to de Es tu dios Po lí ti cos y De re cho Pú bli co
“Dr. Hum ber to J. La Ro che”. Ma ra cai bo, Ve ne zue la. E- mail: cues tio nes po li ti cas@gmail.
com ~ loi chi ri nos por til lo@gmail.com. Te le fax: 58- 0261- 4127018.
Vol. 39, Nº 71 (2021), 767-788
IEPDP-Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Políticas - LUZ
Recibido el 14/08/2021 Aceptado el 25/11/2021
The Relationship Between the Right
to Security and the Right to Freedom in
Islam and the Study of Formal Rules for
Relinquishing these Rights in Iran
DOI: https://doi.org/10.46398/cuestpol.3971.47
Saeed Ayoobi Yazdi *
Seyed Mehdi Mansouri **
Mohammad Reza Rahmat ***
Abstract
This article raises fundamental conceptual questions about
the relationship between the right to security and freedom,
from the point of view of Islam. Also, in criminal law in Iran, the
relationship between freedom and security is examined in all
formal laws adopted after the Iranian Revolution. This study was
conducted with a descriptive-analytical method using sources and
documentary texts with the aim of explaining the relationship between the
right to security and freedom in Islam and, at the same time, analyzing the
formal rules of renunciation of these rights in formal laws and regulations.
It is concluded that in Islam three types of minima, intermediate and
maximum relations between security and freedom are conceivable. These
three proportions, in addition to fullling the existence of security and
freedom; introduce dierent types of relations between the two rights
referred to according to the conditions that can be implemented. Likewise,
when examining the formal norms, it can be recognized that the Code of
Criminal Procedure, approved on 23.02.2014, has eliminated all the defects
and ambiguities of the previous law in the eld of the right of persons to
liberty and personal security.
Keywords: right to security; right to freedom; legal relations; formal
rules; iranian criminal law.
* PhD Student in Law, Faculty of Humanities, Islamic Azad University, Yazd, Iran. ORCID ID: https://
orcid.org/0000-0002-7212-9482
** Assistant Professor of Law, Faculty of Humanities, Islamic Azad University, Yazd, Iran. ORCID ID:
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8769-3959 (Corresponding Author).
*** Assistant professor of Law, Faculty of Law, Meybod University, Meybod, Iran. ORCID ID: https://
orcid.org/0000-0003-4434-6954
768
Saeed Ayoobi Yazdi, Seyed Mehdi Mansouri y Mohammad Reza Rahmat
The Relationship Between the Right to Security and the Right to Freedom in Islam and the Study
of Formal Rules for Relinquishing these Rights in Iran
La relación entre el derecho a la seguridad y el derecho
a la libertad en el islam y el estudio de las reglas formales
para renunciar a estos derechos en Irán
Resumen
En el presente artículo se plantean cuestiones conceptuales
fundamentales sobre la relación entre el derecho a la seguridad y a la
libertad, desde el punto de vista del islam. También en el derecho penal en
Irán, se examina las relaciones entre libertad y seguridad en todas las leyes
formales adoptadas después de Revolución iraní. Este estudio se realizó con
un método descriptivo-analítico utilizando fuentes y textos documentales
con el objetivo de explicar la relación entre el derecho a la seguridad y la
libertad en el islam y, al mismo tiempo, analizar las reglas formales de
renuncia a estos derechos en las leyes y regulaciones formales. Se concluye
que en el islam son concebibles tres tipos de relaciones mínimas, intermedias
y máximas, entre seguridad y libertad. Estas tres proporciones, además de
cumplir la existencia de seguridad y libertad; introducen diferentes tipos
de relaciones entre los dos derechos referidos según las condiciones que
se pueden implementar. Asimismo, al examinar las normas formales, se
puede reconocer que el Código Procesal Penal, aprobado el 23.02.2014, ha
eliminado todos los defectos y ambigüedades de la ley anterior en el campo
del derecho de las personas a la libertad y seguridad personal.
Palabras clave: derecho a la seguridad; derecho a la libertad; relaciones
jurídicas; normas formales; derecho penal iraní.
Introduction
Security is the absenteeism of psychological and physical threat to the
individual and society. If freedom has been the voice of man for many
centuries, it can be said that security has been the equal desire of man and
animal in all times and places. The quest for security is based on human
nature, and apart from the fact that security is the necessity of social life or
the establishment of the state; but from the very beginning of creation, it has
always been one of the desires of human beings. But when “security” comes
into society, it has a more advanced meaning because, from an individual
point of view, security includes the protection of rights and freedoms and
human security in providing the necessary conditions for human health,
but from a social point of view, in Friedman, view. “Security in the objective
sense determines the absence of threat against the acquired values and in
the mental sense determines the fear of attacking the values” (Friedman,
1999: 246). This is where national security and international security come
into play to preserve these values.
769
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 39 Nº 71 (2021): 767-788
In the modern sense of security, we also speak of the security of the
dependencies of human life, which are inanimate things; including money
security, cyberspace security and communication network security; “The
idea of security can be applied to comfortable objects of people” (Buzan and
Weaver, 2007: 79).
For example, the security of money in a bank is subject to calculations
related to certain threats in terms of its unauthorized relocation or the
possibility of the eects of ination on value. But the security of individuals
cannot be simply dened. Factors such as life, wealth, social status, health,
and freedom are very complex and many of them are irreplaceable in case
of loss (Dinarvand et al., 2021).
Now, considering broad meaning of word and its similarity can be less
found in other words, it is necessary to know its characteristics in order
to gain a more accurate understanding in examining the relationship
between this concept and freedom. In total, there are two characteristics
of security that open the way for governments to always prioritize security
over freedom in “emergencies” (Forouzan Far, 2021).
First, security is inherent. Man is equal to animals in his pursuit of
security, and apart from how and to what extent, they both escape threat
and insecurity, while this cannot be claimed with respect to freedom, and
it is only man who seeks freedom; Because “if a creature does not have
intellect, freedom and lack of freedom are the same for him” (Soroush,
1992: 59). But security is rooted in the course of human life. Although
human beings have realized for thousands of years that the secret of their
survival is collective life and the instituting of the state, but much later they
sought to gain freedoms and rights. This shows that the rst human need is
security, not freedom (Soroush, 2009).
1. Recognizing the Concept
In any scientic research, it is necessary to rst discuss the concepts and
denitions of the key words of the research. In the present study, we rst
try to address this issue and examine the two main concepts of this paper,
which are “security” and “freedom”.
1.1. The concept of security
Humans and animals, both in terms of inner perception, always avoid
external threats and therefore turn to collective life for their survival. This
collective life brings some security, but it does not eliminate insecurity.
To avoid insecurity in social life, here the human path is separated from
the animal and, from wisdom; he establishes a system of domination and
770
Saeed Ayoobi Yazdi, Seyed Mehdi Mansouri y Mohammad Reza Rahmat
The Relationship Between the Right to Security and the Right to Freedom in Islam and the Study
of Formal Rules for Relinquishing these Rights in Iran
obedience, the result of which is the establishment of the state. The tendency
towards security and the establishment of a government to protect it; It has
both a sociological and a psychological face.
The sociological approach to security was developed by Mirahmadi,
considers security as the reason for the establishment of the government
and its end. He writes in Leviathan:
The ultimate goal, purpose and desire of human beings (who naturally love
freedom and domination over others) is to restrict themselves (which is to live
within the state), to be far-sighted about self-preservation and to Consequently,
providing a more satisfying life (Mirahmadi, 2012: 113).
In Shakeri, viewpoint, natural laws such as justice, fairness, moderation,
compassion, and doing what we do not like about ourselves towards others
can in no way guarantee human security (Shakeri, 2006).
So, despite the natural laws, if not enough power is established to ensure
our security, then everyone can and will really rely on their own power and
skill to be cautious in front of others, and wherever people are within the
dynasty, small tribes and clans have lived, looting and plundering each
other has become a work and profession and has never been considered
contrary to the law of nature (Mirahmadi, 2012).
In Shakeri, viewpoint, security does not come from the unity of groups,
no matter how many. Even if these groups come to power at critical times
when security is threatened, such as war, they still do not achieve security.
The only way to obtain and maintain security:
That can protect people from the invasion of strangers and from each other’s
harms and protect them so that they can nourish themselves through their own
eorts and through the fruits of their land and live well and happily. It is to delegate
all their power and authority to one person or group of people (Shakeri, 2006: 748)
Indeed, this has always been the case to this day, so the government
is considered as the framework and system of social life, whose essence
protects both individual security and social security (Shakeri, 2006).
The psychological approach to security is that of Earth Friedman, in his
view man has felt lonely and insecure no matter how much he steps towards
freedom. The more man is freed from the bondage of primitive oneness with
other people and nature, and the more he nds himself, the more he will
nd himself faced with the choice that he is compelled to surrender himself
to love and productive work and thus unite with the world or pursue a kind
of safety that is the product of dependencies on the world that do nothing
but destroy freedom and self-righteousness (Friedman, 1999).
Mirahmadi, contrasts individuality with security, saying, as long as one
is a complementary part of this world and unaware of one’s possibilities
and responsibilities, there is no need to be afraid of it. But when one nds
771
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 39 Nº 71 (2021): 767-788
individuality, one must stand alone against the world and its dangerous and
powerful aspects (Mirahmadi, 2012).
According to Mirahmadi, to achieve security and escape from freedom,
“there are two main ways in society: in fascist countries, submission to a
leader and in democracy, obsession to be with others” (Mirahmadi, 2012:
113).
That is, one of the fundamental roots of fascism in Germany was
security-orientation, and the German people accepted this security, even
though it was accompanied by Nazi dictatorship. Mirahmadi, considers this
simultaneous tendency of the Nazis and the German people to be close to
the sadistic and masochistic tendencies:
Sadism means the desire for unlimited power over someone else, and this
desire is sometimes mixed with a sense of destruction. Masochism means the
desire to change to the powerful power and to share in its power and glory. Both
sadistic and masochistic talents are both the result of the single person’s inability
to bear loneliness and his need for a coexistence that overcomes this loneliness
(Mirahmadi, 2012: 113).
Secondly, security has a contractual aspect. Being contractual is in long
with being natural of security. Here security is limited not only to man but
also to society. In fact, the establishment of the state always expresses a
meaning of security that is related to sovereignty (power). In this sense,
“the contract is the footstone of security. With the institutionalization
of the contract, the power of establishment and security is provided and
maintained” (Shakeri, 2006: 748). If we express power and security in two
scales, the fulcrum that determines the balance of power and security is
the contract. According to Hobbes, power can guarantee security when it is
the product of a contract. The power of an individual who is not bound by
a contract conict with security, and personal power is always considered a
threat to security (Shakeri, 2006).
1.2. Recognizing the Concept of freedom
Ashour, has a broad and general meaning, and at rst sight it refers
to the situation of a person who is not a deterrent to his actions, words,
and thoughts. The meaning of this word is close to the meaning of the two
words authority and will, and since all three of these words are relative and
general, no clear boundary can be drawn between them.
The rst meaning of freedom must be examined from a religious point
of view, on the basis of which man is created free and independent, and
some thinkers have put the manifestation of freedom at the forefront of
creation and mentioned the devil’s disobedience to God’s command as the
fundamental origin of freedom; After the expulsion of the devil from the
court of God, he swears to mislead man, and this “presence and action of
772
Saeed Ayoobi Yazdi, Seyed Mehdi Mansouri y Mohammad Reza Rahmat
The Relationship Between the Right to Security and the Right to Freedom in Islam and the Study
of Formal Rules for Relinquishing these Rights in Iran
devil on man as a force or opposite pole to the instinctual force of creation
and reason and expediency, leave us in temptation and confusion; That is,
it amazes and confuses us” (Ashouri, 2008: 40).
This is the same authority, freedom, position, and gift that God has given
to mankind. From the point of view of divine rituals, freedom begins with
the choice of the devil or God, and the freedom and slavery of man follows
which one he chooses. It is clear that going to God is freedom from the
bondage of the devil. Such freedom cannot be neglected; since one of the
fundamental reasons for the liberation was the chains that religious rulers
and leaders were tied to human feet. They used the pretext of religion or the
fattening of its precepts to try to enter the most hidden parts of human life
and lead them in a way they love. That is, the desire for liberty in Europe
began with enmity with the church (Ashouri, 2008).
The religious view of freedom marginalizes man and seeks obedience
and servitude only from it, and philosophers and thinkers saw that religious
rulers and powerful people sat in the place of God and took man to a third
path between God and the devil which ended on their own, and to escape
from this vast trap, they put forward philosophical and legal freedom,
focusing on man himself.
From a philosophical point of view, various views have been put forward
due to the ambiguity of the position of freedom or authority. The rst
question of thinkers in this eld is whether the existence of freedom or
free will is necessary or whether freedom is based on the link of causality?
Leibniz seeks to establish a place for freedom by distinguishing between
absolute necessity and probable necessity by turning to destiny. The
action of substance relies on the necessity of God’s decision on which the
existence is on its basis, but it is possible. It means that it is practiced freely.
Therefore, determining the essence is not practical, but is an increasingly
continuous tendency towards what will happen and what will not happen
(Hatzenberger, 2007).
Kant also considers the autonomy of the will as the highest principle
of morality and the only principle of all moral laws and duties of
confrontation. If there is no freedom, one can neither learn from moral
behavior and authority to follow or disobey the law, nor from the possibility
of the absolute. In his view, “there is only one absolute thing, and that is to
act only on that rule by which you can at the same time want this rule to
become general” (Copleston, 2013: 141).
In contrast, utilitarian’s do not believe in the originality of freedom.
Hume, for example, takes the step of destroying freedom with the vision of
belief. Although he separates free will or free will from the will in general,
in any case, he considers free will or freedom (free will) as a means of
rejecting necessity or accident. According to him, “necessity is the essential
773
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 39 Nº 71 (2021): 767-788
component of causality, and as a result, freedom, by removing necessity,
also removes causes, and is exactly the same as accident” (Copleston, 2016:
173). Because it is often thought that accident requires contradiction and at
least is directly opposite to experience, there are always the same arguments
for rejecting free will.
For Hume, therefore, free behavior is behavior that has no cause;
Because he recognized only one kind of causal relation in which it is to some
extent a linguistic problem, that is, although freedom must be denied, it can
be acknowledged if it is dened in such a way as to impede necessity, if it is
dened in another way. For example, if freedom is taken with the same with
spontaneity, there is freedom; because it is clear that many human actions
arise as rational actors without external coercion to reject work. Indeed,
spontaneity is the only form of freedom that we must strive to acknowledge
(Copleston, 2016).
Ashouri, natural rights advocates see rights as pre-legal and the law as
the only means of nding and enumerating rights as well as supporting
them, in the end what is the criterion of right is that the law recognizes it as
right and hence the origin of freedom is the law. The law congures freedom
in two ways. The rst is to predict the patterns of freedom and the second is
to determine its size and boundaries. so it is the law that nurtures freedom
and separates it from identical meanings such as chaos, selshness, and
permissiveness. Although the most prominent criterion of wise freedom is
not to harm others, the same should be known of the law. Therefore, the
background of freedoms should be sought in laws or documents.
International law and documents have never been involved in dening
dynamic words such as justice, freedom, order, and security, but it is not
clear how the proponents of the French Declaration of Human Rights and
Citizenship of 1789 how have come to believe in the need to dene freedom.
Article 4 of this declaration states: “Freedom is the ability to do anything
that does not harm others” (Ashouri, 2008: 40).
The idea of freedom is a Western product and not something that
Europeans have learned from the East. The ground for freedom has been
laid since the Enlightenment in Europe, and it has been reected in the
minds of philosophers of the continent, especially Britain, who are led by
John Locke and John Stuart Mill. Among Muslim countries, most those
who travel to foreign countries sought freedom, but the people and political
power were neither able to accept it nor knew it well. In Iran, the idea
of freedom was founded shortly before the constitutional event and was
closely linked to this movement.
One of the origins of the constitution (as we will discuss in future
discussions) has been the writings and speeches made by thinkers who
travel to foreign countries about freedom. These ideas provided the bedrock
774
Saeed Ayoobi Yazdi, Seyed Mehdi Mansouri y Mohammad Reza Rahmat
The Relationship Between the Right to Security and the Right to Freedom in Islam and the Study
of Formal Rules for Relinquishing these Rights in Iran
of freedom in an Iran where traditionalism and religiosity were rampant.
Also known as liberalism, constitutionalism places Iran at the forefront of
countries that have strived for freedom and achieved great achievements
such as legislation and conditional government.
2. Methodology
This research, which has been done in a descriptive-analytical method,
using library sources and texts, with the aim of explaining the relationship
between the right to security and freedom in Islam and analyzing the formal
rules, deprives these rights in formal rules and regulations. Accordingly,
the required information will be collected using the library method. For
this purpose, the tool of taking notes and preparing a checklist will be used.
An attempt is made to accurately identify the available resources in the
country, including law books related to the subject, articles and dissertations
related to the discussion, as well as internal laws and regulations and, if
necessary, Internet sites such as the Comprehensive Humanities Portal and
Noor Islamic Studies Center after preparing a checklist and taking notes
from the found sources, collected the information and then started the work
of writing the article by logical analysis and summarizing the information.
3. The relationship between security and freedom in Islam
Considering that basically one of the most important sources of Iranian
law is jurisprudence and the teachings of Islam, so in this section we will try
to examine the situation and the relationship between security and freedom
in Islamic societies, as well as its relationship in the Islamic system.
3.1. Security and freedom in Islamic societies
Based on Islamic criteria, a theory can be put forward according to
which, in terms of substance and proof, there is basically no dierence or
conict between individual and collective interests, and in fact, each is on
two sides of the same coin. They complement each other. These rights, which
have the same origin and purpose, are based on religious teachings based
on human values and common rights such as justice and dignity, which
are accepted by human society. But what may happen is not an inherent
conict or contrast of individual or collective interests, but an antagonism
in their practical provision.
In other words, in terms of implementation, the operational scope of
protection, provision and guarantee of individual or collective rights that
have challenged criminal policy. In this way, according to the principles and
775
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 39 Nº 71 (2021): 767-788
religious teachings based on reason, narration, and revelation in a direction
in the direction of logic, law and rationality will be able to eliminate the
conict. Recognition and preparatory study of this ratio requires acceptance
of the assumptions, some of which are mentioned below.
3.2. Assumptions
Understanding the relationship between security and freedom in Islam
requires several basic assumptions that are derived from religious teachings
and accepted as assumptions.
3.3. The ultimate goal
The ultimate goal of any criminal strategy or policy that derives from
Islamic teachings should be to “move towards pure light” which is the series
of all causes and essence of the sublime and enlightenment and justice to
the attributes and ultimately the provision of good human life and material
and spiritual dimension in the light of Shari’a and rationality (verse 1 of
Surah Ibrahim)
These concepts are very important and basic because they determine the
destination and ultimately all actions and their direction. Other concepts
such as security, justice and freedom are considered as mediators to achieve
the ultimate goal.
3.4. Intermediate goal
In order to create the right balance between security and freedom, it
is necessary to consider a kind of alignment between the mediating goals.
Regarding this alignment, it should be emphasized that all intermediate
goals should be the basis for achieving the ultimate goal and in their internal
relations should not be conicting or contradictory, but all of them should
be assumed to complement each other, which means that justice is a better
guarantee for society.
It is secure and also provides the basis for the realization of other
concepts. Proper understanding of the hierarchy and position of each
concept is a kind of closeness and proper relationship between theoretical
and practical wisdom. In this regard, if we believe in the hierarchy between
mediating concepts. Freedom is at the peak of this process. Freedom is the
main point of man’s descent from heaven and at the same time the main
possibility of man’s return to heaven (Mirahmadi, 2012).
776
Saeed Ayoobi Yazdi, Seyed Mehdi Mansouri y Mohammad Reza Rahmat
The Relationship Between the Right to Security and the Right to Freedom in Islam and the Study
of Formal Rules for Relinquishing these Rights in Iran
4. Existence of value system
In Islam, we should not look at the elements of religious interests and
values independently or as an island, but it should be noted that the set
of interests and values in a systematic, logical, and coordinated system
and in a meaningful relationship and together form the Islamic system.
And in fact, the constituent elements and basic concepts that make up
Islamic knowledge are placed together in regular and codied thoughts
and nd meaning. This systemic approach will be more comprehensive
than the traditional view and will be able to respond more to the incidents
(Mirahmadi, 2012).
Security and freedom are not considered as single and independent
values, but in various forms are prerequisite and not sucient conditions
for the realization of the desired political system in Islam. Therefore, other
superior Islamic ideals in Islam should not be sacriced for security. At the
same time, the existence of a system of other values in Islam is considered,
which in a coordinated system and in a completely interrelated manner,
provide the conditions for achieving the desired goal. Justice and dignity
are among these values that will be present together as measure to measure
their accuracy throughout the rout.
It is based on the necessary minimum, middle and maximum relationship
between security and freedom in Islam.
4.1. Minimal relationship
This ratio depends on the political and social conditions in which
Muslims live, in which no social group is dominant in terms of population.
Due to the existence of safe contexts, individual freedoms are possible, and
it is in the light of these freedoms that Muslims can achieve their faith and
religious goals in a minimal and individual way. In this regard, the basis of
action is based on the law and based on equality and freedom and is similar
to the teachings of the Republicans on freedom in which not only do people
not harm each other (security) and provide them with the opportunity to
live freely and participate.
In this regard, while respecting the “specic” approaches to social
construction, the government domain is “neutral” and the public arena is
based on “public good”.
In such a society, there is a eld of cultural tolerance, and no group
attacks the other and they all live together according to the law and
framework. The bond of Muslims in this system is due to the provision of
appropriate security and freedom for holding religious ceremonies, as well
as the possibility of trying to prevent the approval of anti-Islamic laws. This
provides the minimum living conditions for Muslims.
777
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 39 Nº 71 (2021): 767-788
In this situation, Muslims must reach a kind of compromise with other
groups to maintain security, justice, and freedom in terms of political and
social construction. Also, the Muslim community in this type of society is
conned to a specic area and with specic actions. There is no legal solution
to the conict between the social issues of Muslims and non-Muslims.
Therefore, the minimum ratio between security and freedom is
necessary only for a suitable individual life and may not necessarily provide
a life in accordance with Islamic teachings. In this space, criminal policy
is present only in individual areas and will not be able to be present in
society. However, it must be emphasized that it provides minimal security
and freedom, and that such a society is better than an insecure, unjust, and
authoritarian one.
4.2. Intermediate Relationship
This relationship, which is the responsibility of the government, is to
provide the basic interests of the right to life, the right to faith, the right
to reason, etc., from the duties and responsibilities of the government and
from the rights of the people.
In this theory, there is a constructive interaction between security and
freedom. “Purposeful” and “limited” participation of the people should be
used as an eective source of security alongside the government; this action
makes it possible to lose the originality of security or freedom of subject
matter and somehow be able to combine between the two.
Belonging to these materials guarantees the fundamental freedoms of
individuals. Here, security and freedom from the form of public good that
was discussed in the previous relationship can be pursued as a duty of the
government and the fundamental right of the people, and the legitimacy of
the Islamic government in pursuing the ve basic interests of human life.
Here, sovereignty is a means to ensure the security and freedom of
the Muslim community, and the main sovereignty of God, therefore, is
the original issue of security and freedom of individuals; Man, as the
divine caliph on earth, must be the trustee of the government to achieve
the divine goals. This makes Muslims wary of tyranny and arrogance but
ensuring security and individual freedoms will require the existence and
maintenance of the security of the Islamic government.
If these things are achieved in the Islamic government, the Islamic
society will move in the direction of its sublime goals, namely faith in God
and happiness, because if the government provides basic human rights
and freedoms, the ground will be prepared for the realization of good
and authority for Muslims. Human beings, due to their rationality and
responsibility, as well as the existence of a suitable social context, will know
the God better.
778
Saeed Ayoobi Yazdi, Seyed Mehdi Mansouri y Mohammad Reza Rahmat
The Relationship Between the Right to Security and the Right to Freedom in Islam and the Study
of Formal Rules for Relinquishing these Rights in Iran
This particular social context can only be ignored if there is some kind
of reform. Correction or the process of assessing expediency refers to
a good or a harm that is in line with the purposes of the Shari’a and the
requirements of common sense. According to Al-Ghazali, the purposes of
Shari’a are to protect the ve intrinsic values, namely religion, modesty,
intellect, generation, and property. Any action that guarantees these values
is in the scope of expediency and anything that violates them is corrupt, and
stopping the latter is also a useful expediency (Kamali, 2002).
The dierence between this system and the rst type is that these
fundamental rights and freedoms are inferred from the teachings of the
Shari’a; Humans have a role to play in legislation; the system seeks to
implement the teachings of Sharia. Unlike the rst type, subjects and laws
cannot go beyond the religious realm, so they are considered religious. In
other words, the measure is Shari’a, but the public space is free to study the
subject (Nezhad, 2020).
4.3. Maximum Relationship
The main relationship that can be considered between security and
freedom, then, is the maximum ratio between them. In the rst relation,
the instant purpose of this system of human life was dened in agreement
with each other and away from any oppression and in the personal realm
of individuals. In the second ratio, based on the religious teachings of the
Islamic government, it acts to establish a relationship between security and
freedom and to provide basic interests. In this system, security and freedom
are the same. In the third relation, which is the maximum relationship
between security and freedom, security and freedom are dened in another
way.
Security is not only the protection of the ve interests, but also religious
and faith security (Akhoondi, 2005), and freedom is considered here in
the form of complete freedom. Because the little basis of the movement
of the world is towards monotheism. Criteria for assessing security and
freedom should also be drawn based on the trend of short life. This makes
human beings know and evaluate each other’s performance with a more
appropriate criterion.
In this process, security and freedom are not limited to the material world,
but also include the hereafter of human beings. so there is no substantive
conict between them in the material and spiritual worlds, although we may
encounter conict in their operational realization. Therefore, it is justiable
that during jihad, some people have to sacrice their lives for the safety of
other people. Therefore, the practical goal is to realize the good life of this
world and the hereafter and the mutual happiness of the individual and
society in the light of religious and intellectual teachings.
779
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 39 Nº 71 (2021): 767-788
This new structure can be oered in three forms: First, in the form of
free will, in which man can freely choose his religion (No reluctance in
religion) based on his rationality and responsibility. This aspect, the aspect
of goodness, is dened in the Islamic system and in individual domain. The
second form, is the realm of right, in which security and freedom emerge in
the collective realm in a participatory manner. The third form is the realm
of purpose, which is the security of faith, and freedom means submission
and servitude. The concepts of security and freedom at this stage go beyond
the means of good and right and approach the realm of duty. These forms
show that Islam, despite being a perfect religion, but at the same time, the
interference and conict between external authority and freedom and duty
in Islam will disrupt this good system.
In this sense, security and freedom have a denite purpose and freedom
is a kind of servitude. Therefore, in Islam, freedom is associated with
submission and servitude, and this submission, which is accompanied by
the voluntary acceptance of religious restrictions, is accompanied by an
apparent reduction of freedom, followed by security.
In the same way, when man enslaves God, he not only achieves more
complete security and freedom in the shadow of the law, but also frees
himself from belonging to anything other than God. Therefore, in this
situation, there is no paradox between freedom and servitude, and in fact
submission and servitude are the same as freedom. Another important
point is that these three realms of authority, right and duty in Islam should
not interfere with each other. The domain of authority is a personal matter
and in the social domain it does not function properly, and its actions cause
the imposition of opinions and sometimes the violation of the rights of
others. Issues in this realm include freedom of choice, freedom of authority,
freedom of personal decision, and freedom of creation (Govich, 1974).
This domain is related to the individual realm of individuals and cannot
be extended to the public domain, and therefore entering into social domain
in this domain restricts the right of human beings to privacy and the private
domain of individuals. At the same time, the domain of authority that is
attached to the personal realm is dierent from the domain of right and
the domain of duty. Since the social realm is the realm of right, it cannot be
described on the basis of good and free will, but it is described on the basis
of duty, because right and duty are related to each other.
It is this heterogeneity that, if the domain of individual authority increase
in relation to the responsibility of the origins of primordial theories, will
lead to improper justications in the domination of security and freedom
over each other. Human beings are inherently equal, but the responsibility
of individuals is also dened in terms of the extent to which they enjoy
social rights such as the right to sovereignty.
780
Saeed Ayoobi Yazdi, Seyed Mehdi Mansouri y Mohammad Reza Rahmat
The Relationship Between the Right to Security and the Right to Freedom in Islam and the Study
of Formal Rules for Relinquishing these Rights in Iran
Thus, the social domain is the domain of the reciprocal relationship
of rights and responsibilities, not their one-way relationship. Just as the
individual has the right and responsibility, so does the ruler have the
right and responsibility. Failure to combine rights and duties will result
in nothing but rebellion. Finally, the realm of faith in God is the realm of
education and servitude, and indeed the realm of duty.
The scope of the task will be due to the interrelationship with the eld
of rights and comprehensive authority of the minimal and intermediate
systems. The Islamic system has succeeded only when it can establish a
logical proportion between the three aforementioned components, which
is authority, right and duty, and when this proportion is not achieved and
in other words, an imbalance (departure of objects from their positions)
occurs, it aects the good system, and we move away from the desired
system as much.
5. Formal rules of temporary deprivation of the right to liberty
and security
As stated in the previous section, according to international human
rights instruments, the deprivation of the right to liberty and security of
persons must necessarily be carried out in accordance with the law, and
in addition to the legal authorization for deprivation of the right to liberty
and security of individuals, it is necessary that this matter be based on the
observance of formal rules and regulations, including the deprivation of
the mentioned right by the judiciary and its limitation. Individuals’ right
to liberty should be exercised in the case of illegal extradition, which is
also recognized in domestic law. Therefore, we will discuss the mentioned
issues in order to clarify the degree of compliance of these laws with the
international human rights instruments in this eld.
5.1. The necessity of justifying and substantiating the temporary
deprivation of liberty
During the preliminary investigation, the judicial authority who has
sought evidence of the crime from the person being prosecuted, will limit,
or deprive the freedom of the human in accordance with the requirements
of the society and, contrary to the presumption of innocence. This decision
of the investigator is made on the basis of quia timet bill, the subject of
which may be a nancial obligation, such as the obligation to appear
with the determination of the obligation; Moral commitment, such as the
obligation to attend as promised; The power of distress, such as collateral
or sponsorship; Restriction of travel, such as the obligation not to leave the
jurisdiction; Finally, the most severe form of deprivation of liberty is called
detention or power of distress.
781
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 39 Nº 71 (2021): 767-788
Deprivation of the right to liberty of a defendant is an issue which has
been seriously criticized by jurists and the advanced rules of criminal
procedure; Because non-observance of the right to liberty and security of
person and non-observance of the equal rights of the parties to a criminal
case - what is known as the equality of arms - infringes on the right of the
accused to defend himself; and in this way only the rights and freedoms of
the accused are lost; especially that the probability of judicial errors due
to incomplete information of the decision-making authority at this time is
much higher than the judicial stage and pronouncement (Khaleqieh, 2014).
These issues have caused that governments both domestically and
internationally seek to establish rules and regulations that are consistent
with their obligations with respect to protection of individual rights and
freedoms and the conduct of a fair trial that according to which the reasons
for issuing a temporary detention order very limited and in that case, the
maximum facilities for providing and guaranteeing the freedoms and
preparation and defense of the accused should be provided to him.
For example, clause 2, article 9 of the Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights provides: Whoever is arrested must be informed of the reasons for
his arrest at the time of his arrest and (must) be informed promptly of any
charges against him. Elsewhere, declare the estate duty to bring the suspect
to the judiciary as soon as possible and to prohibit his detention during the
course of the preliminary investigation and proposed to the extent that is
possible to use alternatives actions of temporary detention. For this reason
(Ashouri, 2008), the judicial authority should, at the time of the arrest of the
accused, give detailed reasons as to why there are not enough alternatives
to keep the accused at his disposal, and the detention of the accused should
be considered as the only possible means (Ashouri, 2008).
On this basis, and with respect to guarantee of the rights of citizens
as much as possible and the prevention of arbitrary detention and the
protection of the right to liberty and personal security of individuals, the
Iranian legislature has always obliged the detention authorities to mention
the reasons for detaining and justifying the privation of liberty of citizen.
In the domestic law of Iran, in addition to Article 32 of the Constitution
of the Islamic Republic of Iran, which regulates the prohibition of illegal
detention. Article 437 of Judicial Procedure Code of the General and
Revolutionary Cou3rts has been approved in criminal matters approved in
1999 has considered the necessity of proving by reasoning and legal approve
of having temporary detention writ.
Accordingly, “the investigating judicial authority shall, in the event of
an attempt to secure a criminal conviction, have sucient evidence for the
occurrence of the crime and its attribution to the accused”.
782
Saeed Ayoobi Yazdi, Seyed Mehdi Mansouri y Mohammad Reza Rahmat
The Relationship Between the Right to Security and the Right to Freedom in Islam and the Study
of Formal Rules for Relinquishing these Rights in Iran
Clause 1 of the Law on Respect for Legitimate Freedoms and Citizenship
Rights 5, approved on 04.05.2004, also emphasizes the rationale and
documentation of the deprivation of the right to liberty of individuals. And
other provisions of the law regarding the provision of criminal justice goals
and the achievement of human rights standards and norms, including the
prevention of arbitrary detention and avoidance of unnecessary detention
of individuals and the reduction of the issuance of detention and protection
of the right to liberty and security of individual is of very importance. New
Code of Criminal Procedure 2013 has also considered the same provisions
of the previous laws regarding the necessity of justication of detention.
Subject to the provisions of these articles, Iranian law on the need to
justify a temporary detention writ is totally in accordance with international
human rights law, in particular Article 9 the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights, which is fully applicable in the civil and political
law of the country.
5.2. Limiting the period of detention and temporary deprivation
of liberty
One of the issues related to temporary detention, which has attracted
the attention of jurists, has long been that changing its title from detention
pending trial to temporary detention under French July law of 1970 also
conrms the temporary and limited nature of this provision. However,
when the period of detention is not provided for in the law, the accused,
who has been remanded in custody for a period of time, will in practice be
imprisoned for a long time due to the high density of the case or the need
to complete an investigation. and the detrimental and irreparable eects
of its reparation, especially when it becomes apparent that, due to lack
of sucient reasons, it will eventually lead to a connement prohibitory
function or acquittal, or that, if convicted, the defendant is sentenced to less
than a term of imprisonment (Khazaei, 1998).
Clause 3, article 9 of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights provides:
“Anyone arrested and/or detained on a criminal charge shall be promptly
brought before a judge or other authorized ocial to be tried and acquitted
by a law governing the jurisdiction of the judiciary during the reasonable
period” (Khazaei, 1998: 285). Detention and waiting for the trial of
individuals should not become a general rule ...”. Article 6 of the European
Convention on Human Rights provides: “The detention of the accused shall
not exceed a reasonable period of time” (Khazaei, 1998: 285).
It should be noted that the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights and other human rights instruments do not provide a specic period
of detention for the accused, but that the detainee should be released
immediately before a judge in a reasonable period.
783
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 39 Nº 71 (2021): 767-788
Setting a time limit for the detention of individuals is, of course, a
matter of expediting the expeditious conduct of the investigation by the
investigating authority within the time limit set. Therefore, the creation of
a time limit should be short-lived, as it is a matter for the law to detain
persons and to detain them in support of individual rights and is considered
an important step by the judiciary to prevent long-term detention.
Article 37 of Judicial Procedure Code of the General and Revolutionary
Courts in Criminal Aairs, adopted in 1999, stipulates that the status of the
detained defendant must be claried within one month, and he must be
released and must be released upon the issuance of an quia timet bill and,
if necessary, the quia timet bill shall be renewed, stating the reasons and
documents.
The Amendment to the Law on the Establishment of Public Courts and
the Revolution approved in 2002, which also entrusted the preliminary
investigation of all crimes to the investigator, in this regard, Article “T”
Article 3 stipulated that whenever in the crimes in question the jurisdiction
of the provincial criminal court is up to four months and in other crimes
up to two months due to the issuance of a quia timet bill, the accused is in
custody and If the case against him does not lead to a nal decision in the
court, the authority issuing the contract is obliged to consider or reduce the
quia timet bill of the accused.
Unless there are reasons for legal mitigation or justiable reasons for
the survival of the issued quia timet bill, in which case the reasons are
maintained and ..., “If the detention of the accused continues, the provisions
of this paragraph shall be applied every four months or every two months,
as the case may be” (Forum, 2006: 290).
Considering the dierence in the contents of the preceding articles, it
is considered that within the time limit, temporary detention and explicit
paragraph (T) of the above-mentioned law which states: “... The accused
has been detained and his case le has not led to a nal decision in court”
(Forum, 2006: 290), it should have been determined that if a temporary
detention order is issued in court, the court was obliged to comply with the
provisions of Article 34 mentioned above, and if this decision is issued in the
prosecutor’s oce, the interrogator should comply with the provisions of
clause (T) article 3 of the mentioned law for the investigator and prosecutor.
The new Criminal Procedure Code has adopted in 2003 a single
procedure in the courts and tribunals, and in Article 7242, the Iranian
legislature, in addition to the legal requirement of temporary detention
and its reasonableness, the minimum length of detention of accused in
proportion to the current law in major oenses reduce from two months to
one months. And the maximum time in which the accused is detained for
the crimes of deprivation of life and other crimes is also determined by the
784
Saeed Ayoobi Yazdi, Seyed Mehdi Mansouri y Mohammad Reza Rahmat
The Relationship Between the Right to Security and the Right to Freedom in Islam and the Study
of Formal Rules for Relinquishing these Rights in Iran
observance of the rights of the accused and a fair trial and the limitation
of the period of deprivation of liberty of accused and compliance with
international human rights instruments is also a key step in this regard
(Forum, 2006).
5.1.1. The right to request the review of the legality of the
temporary deprivation of liberty and the request for liberty
Since the principle of liberty of the accused while conducting preliminary
research is based on sovereignty the principle of innocence and deprivation
of liberty is contrary to the principle and only in exceptional cases may be
the subject of the verdict and that inevitable judicial errors are reminiscent
of the bitter experiences of depriving innocent people of their liberty.
The advanced rules of criminal procedure code, contrary to what has
prevailed in the past, in such a way that only the judicial authority issuing
the temporary detention order or his successors could reduce, convert or
cancel temporary detention order. The right of the defendant to appeal the
judicial decision has been accepted by the decision-making authority, if
necessary, with the exercise of judicial control and two-level trial.
Clause 3 of Article 3 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights recognizes this right: Anyone deprived of liberty as a result of arrest
or detention have the right to demand justice and in order for the court to
declare without delay that the detention is lawful and, if it is illegal to detain
him, to order his release.
Apparently, the basis for accepting this right is to reduce judicial errors
and, as a result, to limit any further eects of an act is in contrary to the
principle of the acquittal of the accused in the detention of the accused.
Cancel of detain writ or convert him at the request of the accused had
long been accepted in clause 4 of Article 38 of Criminal Procedure Code
of Iran, but with the approval of Law on the Establishment of Public and
Revolutionary Courts approved in 1994, the right to appeal against the
detention was revoked pursuant to paragraph (b) of Article 19 of the said
law that considered as infringes on the rights and freedoms of individual
of accused and violate the country’s international commitments in terms
of justice processing and granting the right to appeal to the accused and
followed the protests of lawyers and nally by approval Law on the Rules
of Procedure of Public Courts and the Revolution approved in 1999 and
accordance with Article 33 of this law, again the writ of temporary detain
was declared admissible in the provincial court of appeal. Pursuant to this
article, “... the deadline for appeal is 10 days and the competent court will
consider the request of the accused out of turn”. If the appellate court nds
the defendant’s objection hearable terminate the temporary detention writ
785
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 39 Nº 71 (2021): 767-788
and returns the case to the issuing court in order to obtain appropriate
security.
Another provision that was considered in the law to guarantee the rights
of the accused and to prevent the deprivation of liberty of individual in
violation of the law was the need to obtain the approval of the head of the
district jurisdiction or his deputy if the judge had ordered it.
In the Law Amending the Law on the Establishment of Public Courts
and the Revolution approved in 2002, the legislature adopted a more
appropriate mechanism for judicial control and objection to temporary
detention and did consider some duties for issuing authorities. In Clause
(H) of Article 3 of the mentioned law, the investigator who has the right to
issue a temporary detention writ for the accused, must be approved by the
prosecutor if a decision is issued by him, and if the reason for detention come
to an end, removing the detention must be by agreement of prosecutor.
also in this clause, the right of the accused to request the removal of his
detention if the reason for his removal was removed has been recognized.
Clause (T) of Article 3 of the said law the issuing authority shall also
temporarily suspend if the case does not lead to a nal decision in the
prosecutor’s oce, In the crimes subject to the jurisdiction of the criminal
court of the province up to four months and in other crimes up to two
months, in relation to the mitigation of the quia timet bill of the accused;
Unless there are legal reasons or a valid reason for the survival of the
issued quia timet bill which in this case by mentioning them the writ will
be retained and in this case the accused has the right to appeal against
this decision within 10 days from the date of notication to the local or
revolutionary court, as the case may be.
As is clear from the text of paragraphs (H) and (T), the Iranian legislature
to guarantee the right to object of the defendant to temporary detention in
addition to the “right” to object to the “issuance” and “continuation” of the
detention write that recognized for defendant. “It was also an ‘obligation’
for the issuing authority to review its contract at regular intervals”.
Criminal Procedure Code of 2013 in article 10241 in protest of the
detention order, has accepted almost the same provisions of the previous
laws, and in Article 242, has also recognized the right of the accused to
object to the renewal and maintenance of the temporary detention order
after two months in serious crimes and one month in other crimes, within
10 days from the date of notication in the competent court.
Article 244 of the said law and note 1 of it also recognizes the right to
request a reduction of security even after issuance of indictment only once
and the court is obliged to hear the sentence even if it wants to plead, and
according to Article 245, the court is obliged to consider the defendant’s
objection in an extraordinary time.
786
Saeed Ayoobi Yazdi, Seyed Mehdi Mansouri y Mohammad Reza Rahmat
The Relationship Between the Right to Security and the Right to Freedom in Islam and the Study
of Formal Rules for Relinquishing these Rights in Iran
Pursuant to the above-mentioned articles of Judicial Procedure of the
Public and Revolutionary Courts Code in 1999 and the Law on Amending the
Law on the Establishment of General and Revolutionary Courts approved
in 2001, and Code of Criminal Procedure approved in 2013, It is clear that
Iranian law on the recognition and enforcement of the right to object to
the provisional deprivation of liberty is explicitly stated in accordance with
international human rights instruments, in particular Article 4 of the article
9 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the laws of the
country in this eld do not have ambiguity and problems.
Conclusion
In the present study, an attempt was made to discuss the issue of the
relationship between the right to security and the right to liberty in Islam
and the formal regulations for the deprivation of these rights in Iran. In
this regard, after examining the concept of these two rights and discussing
the challenges related to their nature, we conduct research and criticize the
relationship between these rights in Islam.
In the present article, we have dealt with three types of relations
between freedom and security, and it was said that there are three types of
structures, minimum, intermediate and maximum in Islam, which indicate
the correspondence between security and freedom in Islam and is of great
importance. And if there is not possibility of maximum in a situation, Islam
has made it possible for Muslims to build other structures, and it is not
necessary to abandon one ideal in favor of another.
According to this, we examined the formal provisions of Iranian
criminal law from the perspective of the situation of deprivation of these
rights. The results showed that according to the right to liberty and security
of individual, all persons should always have the right to liberty, and the
deprivation of liberty of persons should be exceptional. This is recognized
in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran in accordance with
international human rights instruments. Deprivation of liberty and personal
security of individuals should be done only on the basis of law and the order
of a judicial authority and as an inevitable necessity.
This is recognized in the basic and ordinary laws of Iran, and although
it has its defects, the approved criminal procedure law has removed most
of the objections raised in the previous law. The deprivation of liberty
exercised by the judicial authorities must be reasoned and justied, and the
legal document and the reasons for its issuance must be stated. According
to the right to liberty and security of individual, it is necessary to deprive the
individual of liberty exercised in accordance with the law must be limited
to a certain period of time and a fair trial of the arrested persons should be
787
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 39 Nº 71 (2021): 767-788
held as soon as possible.
In Iranian law, Civil Procedure Code and the Revolution in Criminal
Aairs and the Law Amending the Law on the Establishment of Public
Courts and the Revolution recognized this right. However, there were
ambiguities that the adopted Code of Criminal Procedure, in addition to
eliminating, also reduced the period of temporary deprivation of liberty.
On the other hand, according to the principle of deprivation of liberty,
individuals have the right to object to their arrest or detention. Iranian law
explicitly recognizes this principle. Under the right to liberty and security
of law, individuals have the right to seek their liberty on the ground that
their deprivation of liberty is illegal. Iranian law also explicitly recognizes
this principle.
Bibliographic References
AKHOONDI, Mahmoud. 2005. Criminal Procedure Code. Mizan Publishing.
Tehran, Iran.
ASHOURI, Mohammad. 2008. Criminal Justice. Mizan Publishing. Tehran,
Iran.
BUZAN, Bari; WEAVER, Eli. 2007. “A New Framework for Security Analysis”
In: Institute for Strategic Studies Publications. Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 79-87.
COPLESTON, Frederick. 2013. From Bentham to Russell, Translated by:
Bahauddin Khorramshahi. Soroush Publishing Company. Tehran, Iran.
COPLESTON, Frederick. 2016. History of Philosophy, from Wolf to Kant,
translated by Ismail Saadat and Manouchehr Bozorgmehr. Soroush
Publishing Company. Tehran, Iran.
DINARVAND, Ali Abas; AZIN, Ahmad; GOLSHANI, Alireza. 2021. “To Study
the Formation and Increase of Social Capital in Islamic Republic of Iran”
In: Cuestiones Políticas. Vol. 39, No. 69, pp. 852-869.
FOROUZAN FAR, Leila. 2021. “Iran’s criminal policy towards money laundering
in the country’s banking system” In: Cuestiones Políticas. Vol. 39, No. 69,
pp. 344-360.
FORUM, Eric. 2006. Escape from Freedom, translated by Ezatollah Fooladvand.
Morvarid Publications. Tehran, Iran.
FRIEDMAN, Lawrence. 1999. “The concept of security, in a collection of
selected political articles” In: The Research Institute for Strategic Studies
Publications of the Research Institute for Strategic Studies. Vol. 32, No.
6, pp. 246-255.
788
Saeed Ayoobi Yazdi, Seyed Mehdi Mansouri y Mohammad Reza Rahmat
The Relationship Between the Right to Security and the Right to Freedom in Islam and the Study
of Formal Rules for Relinquishing these Rights in Iran
GOVICH, Georges. 1974. Social Force and Human Freedom A step forward in
the eld of sociological study of the struggles and advances of freedom.
translated by Hassan Habibi. Tehran, Iran.
HATZENBERGER, Antoine. 2007. Azadi, translated by Abbas Bagheri. Alam
Publishing. Tehran, Iran.
KAMALI, Mohammad Hashem. 2002. Freedom of Expression in Islam
(collection of articles), written, selected and translated by Mohammad
Saeed Hanaei Kashani. Ode. Tehran, Iran.
KHALEQIEH, Ali. 2014. Criminal Procedure Code. Institute of Legal Studies
and Research, Shahr-e-Danesh. Tehran, Iran.
KHAZAEI, Manutschehr. 1998. Collection of articles on the criminal process.
Ganje Danesh Publications. Tehran, Iran.
MIRAHMADI, Mansour. 2012. “Political Freedom in the Holy Quran” In:
Fourth Strategic Meeting on Freedom. Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 113-120.
NEZHAD, Hedayatollah; HAZERI, Javad. 2020. “Constituent elements of
prohibited vertical agreements in the competition law of Iran and the
European Union” In: Cuestiones Políticas. Vol. 38, No. 67, pp. 378-395.
SHAKERI, Reza. 2006. “Power as Security; Review of Modern Political Theory”
In: Quarterly Journal of Strategic Studies. Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 748-760.
SOROUSH, Abdul Karim. 1992. “Reason and Freedom” In: Kian Magazine. Vol.
17, No. 2, pp. 59-86.
SOROUSH, Abdul Karim. 2009. Tradition and Secularism Collection of
Discourses. Sarat Publications. Tehran, Iran.
www.luz.edu.ve
www.serbi.luz.edu.ve
www.produccioncienticaluz.org
Esta revista fue editada en formato digital y publicada
en diciembre de 2021, por el Fondo Editorial Serbiluz,
Universidad del Zulia. Maracaibo-Venezuela
Vol.39 Nº 71
