Search

In recent years, the paid withdrawal of rural homesteads has become a widely discussed topic within the academic community. However, from the perspective of protecting farmers' rights and interests, literature exploring the impact of this policy's implementation remains scarce. As the reform of the separation of the three rights of the homestead deepens, disputes related to paid withdrawal of homesteads have escalated rapidly. This study aims to highlight the importance of protecting farmers' rights and interests, seeking to enhance their property rights and revitalize unused rural resources. Employing a case study methodology, this study systematically examines the issue of farmers' rights and interests protection during homestead withdrawal. This analysis is based on the survey, collection, and evaluation of 324 judicial cases. The findings reveal the following: (1) Disputes involving paid withdrawal of homesteads encompass the entire withdrawal process, with the majority of conflicts arising during the withdrawal stage. (2) Prior to withdrawal, farmers express heightened concern regarding their political rights, particularly the right to be informed and to participate in withdrawal decisions. (3) During the withdrawal process, farmers prioritize resettlement and compensation rights. Additionally, novel issues such as the allocation of withdrawal compensation surface after farmers receive resettlement and compensation benefits. (4) After withdrawal, farmers anticipate more suitable "alternative" social rights and remedies. Based on these findings, this study presents policy recommendations for realizing farmers' rights and interests in the context of paid withdrawal of rural homesteads. These suggestions include consistently respecting farmers' autonomy and preserving their political rights throughout the withdrawal procedure. During the withdrawal stage, emphasis should be placed on the comprehensive value of resettlement compensation, encompassing both the residential and social security aspects of rural homesteads. Post-withdrawal, farmers' social rights and the development rights of their homesteads ought to be fully guaranteed, ensuring a harmonious balance between farmers' immediate and long-term interests. Furthermore, optimizing the dispute resolution mechanism stands as a pivotal aspect of safeguarding farmers' rights and interests through legal recourse. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years, the paid withdrawal of rural homesteads has become a widely discussed topic within the academic community. However, from the perspective of protecting farmers’ rights and interests, literature exploring the impact of this policy’s implementation remains scarce. As the reform of the separation of the three rights of the homestead deepens, disputes related to paid withdrawal of homesteads have escalated rapidly. This study aims to highlight the importance of protecting farmers’ rights and interests, seeking to enhance their property rights and revitalize unused rural resources. Employing a case study methodology, this study systematically examines the issue of farmers’ rights and interests protection during homestead withdrawal. This analysis is based on the survey, collection, and evaluation of 324 judicial cases. The findings reveal the following: (1) Disputes involving paid withdrawal of homesteads encompass the entire withdrawal process, with the majority of conflicts arising during the withdrawal stage. (2) Prior to withdrawal, farmers express heightened concern regarding their political rights, particularly the right to be informed and to participate in withdrawal decisions. (3) During the withdrawal process, farmers prioritize resettlement and compensation rights. Additionally, novel issues such as the allocation of withdrawal compensation surface after farmers receive resettlement and compensation benefits. (4) After withdrawal, farmers anticipate more suitable “alternative” social rights and remedies. Based on these findings, this study presents policy recommendations for realizing farmers’ rights and interests in the context of paid withdrawal of rural homesteads. These suggestions include consistently respecting farmers’ autonomy and preserving their political rights throughout the withdrawal procedure. During the withdrawal stage, emphasis should be placed on the comprehensive value of resettlement compensation, encompassing both the residential and social security aspects of rural homesteads. Post-withdrawal, farmers’ social rights and the development rights of their homesteads ought to be fully guaranteed, ensuring a harmonious balance between farmers’ immediate and long-term interests. Furthermore, optimizing the dispute resolution mechanism stands as a pivotal aspect of safeguarding farmers’ rights and interests through legal recourse.

The criminal investigation process always requires the description of criminal laws and the judge in order to comply with the law of the case, both in form and substance, is obliged to determine the limits of the relevant laws and this process is valid even in the clearest rules. Now, in relation to the powers of the criminal judge regarding the description of a criminal phenomenon at the international level, two classical and modern views are clearly in opposition. And this theory is rooted in the progressive principle of separation of powers, which prevents the judiciary from interfering in the legislature, and its purpose is to prevent arbitrariness of judges, but in the recent century, the opposite is growing. That the criminal judge has an active, dynamic and guiding role in describing the criminal phenomenon, the judicial procedure in Iranian criminal law is the flagship of the recent movement, so that in dealing with emerging forms of criminal phenomena by providing new descriptions of old laws They have paved the way for the revision of laws. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Dirasat: Shar'ia & Law Sciences is the property of University of Jordan and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)