Note to Article 152 of the Civil Code, employees are required to do some activities that are required to deal with danger, and this duty and obligation on their part is usually associated with danger and loss (such as the police, whose duty is to maintain security, a person who, according to His legal and Shariah duty has gone to guarding the border, fighting and confronting the enemy, the fireman, who is generally in dangerous conditions while performing his duty, is not allowed to leave his duty citing danger and emergency. They are considered deserving of punishment due to their omission. This writing is descriptive-analytical and based on library sources, and believes that there are many jurisprudential evidences that consider this rule unsuccessful in the jurisprudential test and consider it to be critical and unacceptable. The self-evident ruling on the necessity of self-preservation, the impermissibility of self-induction in danger, the rational and rational ruling on the necessity of saving life, the inappropriateness of differentiation in the effect of emergency, the application and generality of emergency evidence, the importance of saving life in the event of conflict, the rule of emergency evidence over primary evidence, the emergence of evidence The primary obligation to fulfill the contract in case of non-discipline, the withdrawal of primary evidence for non-discipline, the condition of not being distrained in the fulfillment and discharge of the obligation are part of these evidences.
Type of Study:
Research |
Subject:
Criminal Law Received: 2021/05/02 | Revised: 2023/01/22 | Accepted: 2021/12/18 | Published: 2022/10/10 | ePublished: 2022/10/10
Send email to the article author