اضطرار و آثار آن در مسووليت بين المللي دولت ازمنظر حقوق بين الملل و فقه اسلامي

* Constraint and Its Effects on Governmentʹs International Responsibility in the View of International Law and Islamic Fiqh

A comparative study of the rule of constraint in both international law and in Islam shows that, in addition to the existence of similar features in these systems, there are areas of difference between them, among which is that in international law responsibility is considered merely a result of violation of contracts, and since constraint puts an end to the offensive nature of an act, it is not necessary to make up for the loss resulting from constraint. But this is not the case with Islam; the person who does harm to someone is responsible for making up for the loss that occurs. Beside, in Islamic law constraint has no effect on the nature of oneʹs act. On the other hand, according to international law constraint and necessity are different things whereas in Islamic law some consider them identical and some consider necessity as having a wider range than constraint, extending to the instance of the danger to which the vital interests of Islam and Islamic society are opposed. Also, in international law, the existence of danger leading to death is considered as an essential condition, whereas in Islam financial harm and the harm directed to oneʹs reputation are also given attention. In both international law and Islamic law the case of constrain must not be a result of an act of someone desperate, but in Islam when an act results from forgetfulness and not from intended fault, we can refer it to constraint. In international law, there is no such exception.