Maremat & Me'mari-e Iran
Art University of Isfahan
1- Art University of Isfahan
2- Art University of Isfahan ,n.shayganfar@aui.ac.ir
2- Art University of Isfahan ,
Abstract: (48 Views)
Articles 558 to 569 of the Islamic Penal Code, ratified in 2013, are dedicated to crimes against cultural heritage. These crimes are considered non-compoundable and fall under the category of offenses against public interests. It is crucial to note that law (e.g., legislative enactments) and doctrine (e.g., expert opinions) constitute two primary sources of legal principles. Establishing a relationship between these two sources is vital for addressing legal deficiencies and formulating more cohesive regulations.
In this context, institutionalizing restoration-related discussions—such as restoration doctrines—extends their relevance beyond elite circles and into the public domain, aligning with the principle of the rule of law, which is fundamental in public law. The concept of intervention is a critical aspect of restoration doctrine, defined by criteria such as adherence to the principle of minimal intervention, material compatibility, and differentiation between restored and historical components. Any intervention that deviates from these criteria is considered unprincipled.
This study seeks to explore the relationship between these two domains by addressing the following research question: How is the concept of unprincipled intervention reflected in the Islamic Penal Code concerning crimes against cultural heritage? The primary objective is to define unprincipled intervention and examine its correlation with the crimes specified in the Islamic Penal Code. Employing a qualitative and comparative approach, the findings reveal that although the term "intervention" is not explicitly mentioned in the Penal Code, its implicit meaning aligns with provisions related to offenses such as destruction (Article 558), structural instability (Article 560), encroachment on historical site boundaries (Article 563), restoration, repair, alteration, renewal, or expansion (Article 564), and change of use (Article 566). Furthermore, the objects of intervention and the modes of its communication exhibit significant parallels between restoration doctrine and the Penal Code.
In this context, institutionalizing restoration-related discussions—such as restoration doctrines—extends their relevance beyond elite circles and into the public domain, aligning with the principle of the rule of law, which is fundamental in public law. The concept of intervention is a critical aspect of restoration doctrine, defined by criteria such as adherence to the principle of minimal intervention, material compatibility, and differentiation between restored and historical components. Any intervention that deviates from these criteria is considered unprincipled.
This study seeks to explore the relationship between these two domains by addressing the following research question: How is the concept of unprincipled intervention reflected in the Islamic Penal Code concerning crimes against cultural heritage? The primary objective is to define unprincipled intervention and examine its correlation with the crimes specified in the Islamic Penal Code. Employing a qualitative and comparative approach, the findings reveal that although the term "intervention" is not explicitly mentioned in the Penal Code, its implicit meaning aligns with provisions related to offenses such as destruction (Article 558), structural instability (Article 560), encroachment on historical site boundaries (Article 563), restoration, repair, alteration, renewal, or expansion (Article 564), and change of use (Article 566). Furthermore, the objects of intervention and the modes of its communication exhibit significant parallels between restoration doctrine and the Penal Code.
Article number: 174
Type of Study: Research original/ Regular Article |
Subject:
Maremat
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |