Jurisprudential analysis reveals the peace contract's misuse in the Iranian legal system, indicating the need for reforms.
The Peace (amicable settlement) contract is one of the most significant institutions in the Iranian legal system and Islamic jurisprudence. Due to its flexibility and broad functionality, it occupies a unique position in resolving disputes and regulating legal relationships. However, this very flexibility creates opportunities for misuse and improper applications, including the employment of legal tricks and the circumvention of statutory rules. This study aims to examine the jurisprudential and legal mechanism of the Peace contract as a tool for legal deception, analyzing its various dimensions and exploring strategies to prevent its misuse. In the jurisprudential section, it is emphasized that the legitimacy of the parties’ intentions and the contract’s compliance with public order and good morals are fundamental conditions for the validity of a Peace contract, rooted in Islamic sources. From a legal perspective, Iranian law—particularly Articles 757 to 760 of the Civil Code—stresses the legitimacy of contractual purposes and prohibits the use of Peace contracts to circumvent laws or fulfill illegitimate obligations. For instance, employing a Peace agreement to evade taxes or debts, unlawfully transfer property, or establish fictitious agreements are considered forms of legal deception and are deemed invalid within the judicial system. Ultimately, by examining legal constraints and supervisory mechanisms, including judicial oversight regarding the legitimacy of intentions and transparency of Peace agreements, it is determined that preventing the abuse of this contract requires a combination of legislative reform, strengthening judicial practices, and enhancing legal awareness among the parties. This study recommends that the judiciary can play a more effective role in limiting the misuse of this legal instrument by issuing practical guidelines and increasing oversight of the drafting and registration of Peace agreements.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ebrahimi et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: