Controversy between supporters and opponents over dowry; How is the wife's right guaranteed?

In the review of the new dowry resolution, two lawyers for and against set a ceiling of 14 coins, replacing imprisonment with electronic monitoring and how to separate insolvent debtors from wealthy ones.

Ambassador Arjan of the Community Group, the first part of Mehr's judicial reporter's interview with two lawyers who support and oppose the new dowry resolution regarding dowry, "From "Dowry Prison" to "Electronic Bond"; Two views on the implementation of the dowry law" was dedicated to examining the views in favor and against the new dowry law; Among them, setting a ceiling of 14 shekels for the discussed performance guarantee, replacing imprisonment with electronic monitoring, how to distinguish insolvent debtors from able-bodied people, and concerns about weakening the guarantee of dowry collection. In this section, Atefeh Hazeq emphasized the necessity of reducing the imprisonment of debtors unable to pay and providing the possibility of employment and debt payment, and Hamidreza Haji Esfandiari, while opposing the resolution, emphasized the need to maintain the guarantee of effective implementation for dowry collection and the separation of indigent people from able-bodied debtors who refuse to pay. In the following, you will read the second part of this conversation, which examines the details of the resolution, the implementation uncertainties of electronic monitoring, the identification of property and assets, and the challenges of enforcing financial sentences.

In this part of the interview with Atefeh Hazeq, a basic lawyer of a judiciary and in favor of the new dowry decree, and Hamidreza Haji Esfandiari, who is against this decree, the reporter of Mehr has examined the different aspects of this issue.

One of the issues raised about the new dowry law is the use of electronic monitoring instead of imprisonment. Can this change be a guarantee of proper execution for dowry collection?

Hamidreza Haji-Esfandiari, opponent of the new dowry resolution: The point that needs to be clarified is that the objection of the Guardian Council is not basically based on the principle of reducing imprisonment or using alternative methods; The objection is that imprisonment is absolutely excluded from this process, even in the case of a person who has the financial ability but willfully refuses to pay the debt.

If the person is truly insolvent, it is a completely different matter. Someone who cannot pay should not be imprisoned simply because of financial incapacity. However, a difference should be made between this person and someone who has the ability to pay but refuses to pay.

The question is, how does the new mechanism want to separate these two groups from each other? Can asset identification and information systems accurately determine whether a person is really insolvent or is hiding his assets and refusing to pay his debts?

Atefeh Hazeq, in favor of the new dowry law: A person who is in prison only because of dowry debt is not necessarily a criminal. He may not have committed any criminal behavior and simply cannot afford to pay a debt.

In my opinion, putting such a person in prison is not a good solution. If the person is to be monitored, devices such as electronic restraints can be used to allow them to both work and remain monitored.

We have used electronic binding in various cases. When it is possible for a person to be supervised without being in jail, why not use the same capacity for a financial debtor who is supposed to work to pay off his debt?

In the new dowry resolution, determining the quorum of 14 coins and the issue of electronic monitoring have been taken into consideration. What ambiguities do these changes create?

Hamidreza Haji Esfandiari, opponent of the new dowry decree: In the new decree, two important issues have been taken into consideration; First, the determination of 14 coins as the limit to which a specific performance guarantee is raised, and second, the issue of electronic monitoring.

In the case of an amount higher than 14 coins, the issue of proof of financial ability is raised and the burden of proof is placed on the couple. That is, if the dowry is more than this amount, the desired mechanism for its implementation will be different.

Both parts of this issue have been the subject of controversy. Therefore, it cannot simply be said that the new decree came to eliminate the prison; All legal implications of this change should be reviewed.

Atefeh Hazeq, in favor of the new dowry decree: the main issue is that we must differentiate between different people. A truly indigent person should not be imprisoned for years simply because of a financial obligation. On the other hand, if a person is financially capable and hides his assets, there must be a legal means to identify his assets.

For this reason, information systems and property identification become important. If we can properly review a person's financial information, we no longer need to decide whether a person is insolvent or affluent based on claims alone.

Can electronic monitoring be considered a complete replacement for imprisonment?

Hamidreza Haji Esfandiari, opponent of the new dowry law: It should be noted that electronic monitoring in the penal system is a part of the mechanisms related to the reduction of imprisonment and prison alternatives. Therefore, it cannot be simply said that a person who is under electronic surveillance has nothing to do with the prison system and correctional measures.

This person is still subject to a monitoring system and there are restrictions for him within the framework of the regulations related to electronic monitoring.

Atefeh Hazeq, in favor of the new dowry decree: My argument is not about what exactly to define electronic binding. The issue is that the person can work and earn money outside the prison and at the same time it is possible to monitor him.

If a person is in prison, the possibility of his normal employment is lost. But with electronic monitoring, both his residence and workplace are known and more control is possible.

Has a specific statistical and expert basis been provided to determine the number of 14 coins?

Hamidreza Haji Esfandiari, opponent of the new dowry decree: My question is still what is the basis for determining this number. In the negotiations and reviews of the relevant commission, have data and statistics been presented to show that 14 coins is a suitable number to determine this limit?

Previously, the number of 110 coins was mentioned. Now this number has reached 14. Therefore, it should be clear what study was done and what data is behind this decision.

If there is going to be a legal restriction on a financial obligation that is registered in an official document, the basis of this restriction should be clear to the society and experts.

Atefeh Hazeq, in favor of the new dowry resolution: The main point is that the real conditions of people should be examined and there should be a difference between someone who is unable to pay and someone who refuses to pay despite being financially able. Accurate identification of people's assets and financial status can be effective in identifying these two situations.

If a dowry of more than 14 coins is specified in the official marriage document, what effect does the new decree have on the registered commitment?

Hamidreza Haji Esfandiari, against the new dowry decree: Another issue that should be paid attention to is the position of the official marriage document. Suppose in the official document, 500 coins are specified as dowry. If there is a guarantee of effective implementation only up to 14 coins, the question arises, what is the duty of that official document and the obligation recorded in it?

Atefeh Hazeq, in favor of the new dowry resolution: When two people have determined a certain amount of dowry in an official document with each other's consent, it should be determined what effect limiting the performance guarantee will have on this document.

This does not mean that the official document is invalid. The principle of religion still exists and the problem is the method of its implementation.

Even in the current situation, if a person is not able to pay the dowry at once, the court can examine the issue of confiscation and distribution. The dowry may be much more than what a person can pay initially, but the principal of the debt is not lost.

Is the current mechanism for dealing with debts and installments sufficient to determine the true ability of debtors?

Atefeh Hazeq, in favor of the new dowry resolution: in practice, the courts in dowry cases examine the issue of arrears, installments and adjustment of installments. The price of the coin changes and the economic conditions of the person may also change; Therefore, there should be a mechanism to determine the installments according to the actual situation of the person.

The problem is that sometimes the bankruptcy process is not done properly and with full investigation. A person's financial information should be checked to determine how much assets and income he really has.

Hamidreza Haji Esfandiari, opponent of the new dowry decree: There is an important issue here. In some cases, the court simply does not pay attention to the claim of arrears and may conclude that he has the ability to pay, considering the person's living conditions.

For example, in a dowry case of 10,000 shekels, the couple had remarried and had a child, and the court concluded from the set of circumstances that he basically did not intend to pay, and for that reason, his debt was not accepted.

Therefore, the issue is not only to say that all the prisoners of dowry are incapable. The court must examine the real circumstances of the person.

What reforms should be made in the bankruptcy process to more accurately determine the financial status of individuals?

Atefeh Hazeq, in favor of the new dowry law: I also believe that the handling of arrears should be accurate. But this review should not be done only in a short meeting and based on a few comments.

We must use asset identification systems. It should be determined what property the person has, what accounts he has, what income he has and whether he has made financial transfers or not.

If the claim for bankruptcy is to be accepted or rejected, the judge must have accurate information. It is not possible to make a decision about a person's financial situation in just one meeting without full access to financial information.