Assistant professor at Al_Mostafa International University
Abstract
The maxim of fulfilling the promises which is the main center of different regulations of the international covenant systems loses its dignity with occurring the violation by the party fails to fulfill their part of promises and the countermeasure maxim become legitimate. The recent maxim is constantly one of the most important legal exception for the maxim of fulfilling the obligations (promises) in all legal systems like the legal system of the noble Quran. According to the Quranic teachings, the violation of the previous obligations has two instances: the real violation and the future breach based on the certain evidences (the ruling violation) both comprise the base for the lawfulness of the countermeasure maxim. The Quranic proof for the lawfulness of the countermeasure maxim is the violation of the obligation of 58th verse of sūrat al_Anfal. There are continually two interpretive attitudes for this verse because of the semantic wonder. In the first method, it is not necessary semantic relation to the other verses relating to the violation of agreement for inferring (getting) the ordinance in this verse. the miraculous specification of this verse is explaining the legal rules (hukm al_shari`a) through a few words and a spread meaning. This interpretive method relates to the method of fiqhi inferring from the verse. (retaliate in kind maxim). In the interpretive method mentioned by this paper, exploring the lawfulness of the countermeasure violation in the contractual relationship of the Islamic government based on the semantics. Because in the recent attitude, in agreement with the comprehensive opinion of the holy Quran, the clause of the legitimacy of the maxim, that is, the prior violation is supposed meanwhile, this verse has semantic relationship with the verses relating to the early violation (real). With this analytic view, defining a new instance of justice pivot in the contractual relation between countries (the Quranic innovation) has been distinguished. Because, according to the analytic method, the specification of being Countermeasure action as a maxim against the proceed breach is determined.
)