تأثير پيوند اعضا بر سقوط حق قصاص

Effect of Organ Transplantation on the Loss of Retaliation' Right

قصاص عضو، حقي است كه به نظر اجماعي فقهاي مذاهب اسلامي با وجود شرايطي قابل استيفاء است، ولي آن‌چه محل اختلاف گرديده است تأثير پيوند عضو بر سقوط قصاص است، خواه عضو پيوندي، عضو مورد جنايت باشد؛ خواه عضو قصاص شده. منشاء و علت اصلي اين اختلاف، تفسير و برداشت متفاوت از روايتي است كه در اين رابطه وجود دارد. برخي آن را درباره مجني عليه و برخي ديگر آن را مخصوص جاني مي‌دانند در اين مقاله اقوال فقها و مباني استدلال هر يك در اين خصوص مورد بررسي قرار گرفته و سپس نظريه جواز پيوند عضو، توسط مجني عليه چه قبل و چه پس از اعمال حق قصاص و عدم سقوط حق وي و عدم امكان ازاله عضو پيوندي مجني عليه توسط جاني، و نظريه جواز پيوند عضو توسط جاني و عدم امكان اجراي مجدد قصاص وي تقويت و مورد دفاع قرار گرفته است. مبناي نظريه عدم سقوط حق قصاص مجني عليه اين است كه حق قصاص وي با وقوع جنايت تحقق يافته و اقدام مجني عليه در پيوند عضو تأثيري در سقوط اين حق ايجاد نمي‌كند و مبناي نظريه جواز پيوند توسط جاني و سقوط حق قصاص مجني عليه نسبت به عضو پيوندي نيز اين است كه حق قصاص نسبت به عضو جاني جاري گرديده و پيوند زدن آن تأثيري در احياي مجدد اين حق ندارد.

consensus of the Islamic scholars of the Islamic constitutions, can be made subject to conditions, but what is the difference between the members is the effect of organ transplantation on the retaliation of the retribution, whether the transplant is a member of the crime, whether it is a member of the retribution. The origin and the main cause of this difference is a different interpretation from the narrative that exists in this regard. Some consider it as something special about Madnay, and some of it are specially Johnny. In this article, the jurisprudents and the arguments of each argument are discussed. an‎d then the theory of organ transplant authorization was strengthened by a criminal case against, before and after the exercise of the right of retribution, his right to crash, and the impossibility of depriving him of a linkage to a criminal offense by a criminal, and the theory of the authorization of a transplant by a human being and the impossibility of re-enforcing his retaliation. According to the theory of non-cessation of the right of retribution, the law is based on the fact that his right to retribution has been fulfilled with the occurrence of a crime and The action against a member of the transplant does not have an effect on the collapse of this right, and the basis of the theory of permission of a transplant by a person and the right of retributive right to a member of a transplant is that the right of retribution to a member of a person is ongoing and its transplantation has an effect on rehabilitation This is not right.