واكاوي وضعيت حقوقي معامله با جهت نامشروع در فقه اماميه با مطالعه تطبيقي در حقوق موضوعه ايران و مصر

The Analysis of Legal Status of Transactions (Dealings) with Unlawful Motive (Intent) in Imāmī Fiqh (Jurisprudence) with Comparative Study in the Positive Law of Iran and Egypt

وضعيت حقوقي معامله با جهت نامشروع، همواره از مسايل مورد مناقشه انديشمندان فقه و حقوق بوده است. در فقه اماميه، حقوق موضوعه ايران و مصر بين موردي كه جهت نامشروع وارد قلمرو توافق طرفين شده و موردي كه جهت نامشروع صرفاً جنبه شخصي و دروني براي يكي از متعاملين دارد و موردي كه فقط طرف ديگر به آن علم دارد، تفكيك شده است. نوشته حاضر، مورد سوم را يعني جايي كه انگيزه نامشروع وارد قلمرو توافق طرفين نشده ولي طرف ديگر به آن علم دارد، بررسي مي‌كند. درباره حكم معامله اخير، ميان انديشمندان فقه اماميه و نيز حقوق‌دانان ايراني و مصري اختلاف نظر وجود دارد. مشهور فقيهان و حقوق‌دانان، صرف وجود علم را براي بطلان معامله كافي ندانسته و حكم به صحت آن داده‌اند اما غير مشهور، به بطلان چنين معامله‌اي اعتقاد يافته‌اند. قانون‌گذار مدني نيز در ماده 217 به پيروي از نظر مشهور فقيهان اماميه، قايل به صحت معامله مذكور شده است. اين پژوهش با روش توصيفي و تحليلي، ديدگاه‌هاي انديشمندان فقه و حقوق را درباره مسيله اخير مورد بررسي تحليلي قرار داده و با نقد ديدگاه مشهور فقيهان و حقوق‌دانان، نظر غير مشهور را كه حكم به بطلان قرارداد مذكور داده‌اند، از منظر فقه استدلالي و حقوق ايران قوي‌تر و با مصالح اجتماعي و نظم عمومي و فلسفه وضع ماده 217 قانون مدني سازگارتر مي‌داند و اصلاح ماده مذكور را پيشنهاد مي‌كند.

The legal status of transaction with unlawful motive (intent) is one of the issues which the fiqh scholars and legal (law) scholars have constantly put forward arguments. In Im?m? Sh?’a jurisprudence, the positive law of Iran and Egypt, it is separated the case which the unlawful motive enters into the spectrum of the agreement of contracting parties from the case which the unlawful motive is merely inner and personal aspect for one the contracting parties and from the case which the other side of the contracting parties has knowledge of it. The present note is dedicated to the third case i.e. where an unlawful intent does not enter to the agreement of the contracting parties but the other side has knowledge. There is disagreement between the fiqh scholars and legal (law) scholars of Iran and Egypt about the legal authority of the latter transaction. The well-known Islamic jurists (Fuqaha) and law Jurists believe that the existence of knowledge does not solely cause the voidance of such transaction. But infamous scholars think the voidance of such transaction. The Civil legislature in article 217 following the well-known Im?m? Sh?’a jurists (Fuqaha) accepts the validity of the mentioned transaction. This research with descriptive-analytic method has analyzed the presented opinions which are clarified by the fiqh scholars and legal (law) scholars. This paper with criticizing the opinions of the well-known fiqh scholars and legal (law) scholars has accepted the opinion of the infamous jurists who believe the voidance of the mentioned contract and also believed that it is more stable from the view of the deductive fiqh and law of Iran and it is compatible with social benefits and public order and the philosophy of article 217 of the civil law of Iran and it has suggested the amendment of the mentioned article. Keywords: Unlawful motive (intent), Transaction, Im?m? Sh?’a jurisprudence, The positive law of Iran, The law of Egypt.