Justifying grounds (justifications) refer to those objective circumstances wich justify an unlawful act. Grounds for excluding criminal responsibility (EXCUSES), on the othr hand, refe to personal characterisic of the defendant caused his not responcible. Distinction between justifying grounds and to grounds for excluding criminal responsibility accepted in municipal law of majority countries, particularly in civil law countries. Also in Iranian criminal law separation between justifing grounds and EXCUSES is existence. But in international criminal law inexistence such separation. Concidering importance separaition between such grounds lookout particular juridical consequences that apiece own accordingly also in international criminal law separation between such grounds must be existence. Important question that arguable here is determination criterion for this separation. It seems for representation accorate criterion this separation is better to use from criterion that accepted in municipal law.

One of the great anomalies and harms in the field of social behavior is making EXCUSES against divine commands, which are presented in the form of ignorant and sometimes belligerent requests and questions in front of divine ambassadors. This issue has a wide reflection in the verses, especially the stories of the Qur'an. This article, with the title of examining the grounds and factors of social EXCUSES against divine commands, focusing on the verses related to the people of Prophet Moses (pbuh) and the nation of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), in a descriptive-analytical way and with a content analysis approach Qualitatively, the factors and contexts of this undesirable social behavior have been investigated. The results of this research show that in the Qur'anic approach, excuse-making is rooted in several factors, some of which are related to the internal structure of humans (insight-attitude) and some are influenced by external factors. The factors related to the existential structure in the field of vision are: ignorance, materialism and suspicion of God, and in the field of tendency: seeking superiority, diversity, convenience, opportunism and avoiding responsibility. Among the underlying factors outside of the structure of human existence, which has the role of directing and driving insights and tendencies, we can point out include physical and metaphysical factors (intangible) and socio-cultural factors such as harmful social structure and the role of companionship. Also, by thinking about verse 130 of Al-Baqarah and paying attention to the art of assurance used in it, we find out that the main root of disobedience to God's commands is to make EXCUSES, to have a desire for something other than God, and to have the heart as a hostage to something other than Him.

Contract EXCUSES, as exceptions to the principle of necessity of contract, are concepts, which according to them, the parties can legally get rid of their failure of the contract’s obligations. Some EXCUSES are without the will of the parties, and some others will be caused by one or both parties.Involuntary EXCUSES may generally make the contract impossible to enforce (impossibility), or they may make it hard to enforce (hardship). The writers are going to have a comparative study on both situations, «impossibility» and «hardship», and their effects on the contract according to the legal systems and also regional and international instruments. They further wish to suggest a few articles (for Iran civil code), as proper decisions (termination, suspension and the right to terminate) for the contracts in these two situations.Having a comparative study on voluntary EXCUSES «exempting and limiting clauses» and «the right to refuse performance of obligations», they found some evidences in Iran provisions, while a general regulation will be appropriate.

The will is the first step in a mystical journey (here a journey of birds toward Simorgh, which is comparable with Phoenix). In the first step, birds are aware of the importance of finding Simorgh and having a king, but this primary awareness is in conflict with their current situations; thus, they face mental challenges and doubts. They are in a decision-making dilemma between what they have and what they want to have (Simorgh) which finally led to EXCUSES, doubt, and inaction. The two main questions of this study are: 1) why do the birds reject to take a trip despite knowing the necessity of finding Simorgh? 2) Why is life without Simorgh meaningless? Theoretical foundations explained here mean the role of wisdom in acts and the relation of thought and emotion in the fulfillment of desires. Attar intended to illustrate that asking (quest) is a necessary condition, not a sufficient condition. Where there is a will, there is not a way necessarily and ambition has a key role in this regard. Some obstacles of the journey expressed include thought deficiency fear, avoiding risks, interests, pleasures, and habits. What is missing link in this stage is ambition. Lack of ambition is the main reason for the EXCUSES of birds which is shown in birds’ speech with the recurring “enough” word as the motif. Introduction "What to ask for?" is the most important question in Sufism and mysticism. In his educational works, Attar has paid more attention to the desires and wishes of mankind and has tried to explain these desires from the perspective of mysticism and Sufism and determine what he considers to be fundamental and original. However, he had to deal more with this issue in his work “Elahinameh” (the letter of God) and spoke about the desires and needs of the people in the form of the story of the six children of the caliph. In his work the “Mantegh Al-Tair” (the logic of the birds), in addition to the question of what to ask for (which is solved very quickly by realizing the existence of Simorgh and finding it necessary), Attar has spoken about how to ask. The importance of the subject lies in the fact that from a mystical point of view, human value is measured according to one's desires and aspirations. Rumi says: As long as you seek a gem of the mine, you are the mine As long as you seek a piece of bread, you are the bread You are wise if you know this secret That you are everything that you seek it Moreover, in mystical discourse, values are completely linked to the truth (God) and are determined in relation to proximity or distance from the truth. Therefore, the seeker of the path (Salek-e tariqat) must do everything in his power to approach and reach the true God or lover (who is Simorgh according to Mantegh Al-Tair), and this is the only way to reach human perfection. Also, from a religious and mystical points of view, the spiritual life has absolute superiority over the physical life, and real life is an inner issue. So, if we want to know a human being, we must see what or who his life secretly tends to be. Materials and Methods The present study aims to investigate the excuse of birds in Attar’s Mantegh Al-Tair. The two main questions of this study are why the birds reject to take a trip despite knowing the necessity of finding Simorgh and why life is without Simorgh meaningless. The mentioned theoretical foundations in the study include the role of wisdom in acts and the relation of thought and emotion in the fulfillment of desires. Discussion of Results After learning of the existence of a kingdom called Simorgh, the birds in Mantegh Al-Tair agree on the necessity of traveling and finding him. But when they want to start the journey to find Simorgh, it is as if they have doubts and make EXCUSES for not going. In the text, the reason for the refusal of the birds (which are the symbol of the seekers of the path or people with special wishes and ideals) to travel to Simorgh (the symbol of the right and the ultimate wish) is not very clear. In the beginning, the birds of the narrative are impatient to start the journey, but their EXCUSES begin immediately, which has led to a long conversation between them and Hudhud (hoopoe). The birds' conversations with Hudhud are presented in two episodes: In the first chapter, it is the beginning of the Bulbul's speech (nightingale), and in the last, it is the Sa’wa’s speech (finch). After presenting themselves (reporting on the current situation), both seem to want to turn away from the initial determination to reach Simorgh, and at once speak of the sufficiency of what they have. In fact, they prefer contentment and satisfaction with the current situation (although they considered it bad and undesirable) to traveling and reaching Simorgh (which they consider good and desirable). Every bird has an excuse to step back. In the second part, in spite of Hudhud's explanations and responses, birds describe their situation to a number of anonymous birds and ask for Hudhud's guidance. With this storyline and conversations between the birds and Hudhud, Attar aims to explain the mental challenges of the position of decision (magham-e talab) and the distance between decision and practice. In the field of human behavior, the important question has always been why a person does not always act in accordance with what he knows, or why, even though he knows that one action is good and useful and another one is bad and harmful, he acts according to the first and the latter is not avoided? It has been a challenging issue for philosophers of the past and psychologists today for one to intentionally do bad or harmful work after knowing what is good or useful and what is bad or harmful. These are just some concepts named Akrasia. It is the state of mind in which someone acts against their better judgment through weakness of will. People like Socrates and Plato find akrasia impossible because they believe that man cannot act against his wisdom, while according to the reality of human life this is not the case. It is quoted from Socrates that we do what we know to be right, and what deprives us of doing right is ignorance. That is, if someone has clear knowledge, it will be strange if an agent overcomes his knowledge and pulls it back and forth like bands. Plato has said that desires and emotions could not overcome reasoning and thus change rational decisions. In Attar's view, logic, alone, cannot cause action or prevent the interference of emotions and desires, and it is the effort (Hemmat) that connects knowledge and desire with action and possession. Hemmat which means heartfelt attention with all spiritual powers to the goal and destination (Vesal-e Simorgh), causes the continuation of walking the path (Soluk) to reach the truth. In the word selection of the birds, the word ‘enough’ has been repeated many times as a motif, which indicates the low effort of the birds. The birds’ high effort also depends on overcoming humble desires and paying attention to the foresight and overcoming obstacles. Conclusions In Hudhud's dialogue with birds, Attar explains the inner challenges of seekers (and people) when making a decision and doing an action. He shows that, in both the outer life (objective) and the inner life (spiritual), just wanting and wishing is not enough to achieve the goal and fulfill desires. Self-sufficiency along with some unhealthy habits, laziness, hedonism, and seeking for convenience lead to inaction and these are major obstacles in the way of achieving one's desires. According to Attar, the main obstacles to achieving the goal are removed with effort. A long conversation between birds and Hudhud is to strengthen the will and determination of the birds and eliminate the gap between decision and action. Attar's special emphasis on the issue of the distance between decision and practice in this narrative indicates his realism, which is the result of the poet's constant relationship with people. Attar was aware of human nature and its control over mankind. In the narrative of Mantegh Al-Tair, while expressing the theoretical and practical foundations of mystical cirrhosis, he has sent the moral message to the general public that it is not enough just to know and decide to achieve the goal, but strong will and effort are necessary as well.

Strict liabilities are needless of some normal liability elements. In criminal law sometimes mens rea is not necessary. Crimes including such liability are called “Strict liability crimes”. The nature of these crimes is ambiguous and even their cases are mentioned in a systematic way. Moreover a criterion is required for them and their general principles must be organized. In this essay a list of some cases of these crimes both in foreign and domestic law is offered. The author argues that the criterion must be a combination of the crime’s “stigma”, “importance”, and “criminal” or “regulatory” nature. Because of the variety of strict liability crimes their general principles must be classified. Five groups of these crimes are distinguishable: crimes based on destruction; stronger cause; refutable fault presumption (res ipsa loquitur); irrefutable fault presumption and; conduct crimes.

One of the most important mental diseases is Schizophrenia, which in it, thoughts, emotions and feeling of patient have changed and deviated and caused to disorder performance for them. The most characteristics of this disease are further tendency to isolation, separation and loneliness. They abhor the external universe and tend to isolation. They can become delinquent exceptionally because of their imaginations and in this way, they can be entered to criminal events.These patients create wrongdoing for some reasons, including: 1.Their delusions and hallucinations which are created by their psychosis, brain damages and misuse of drugs. 2. Having some disorders which cause impulsive and unexpected behavior. 3. Personality disorders. 4. Having an excitability mood, low tolerance and neurotic circumstances, but in special situations, they have legitimated EXCUSES of criminal liability and in some circumstances they haven’t, which we have mentioned and illustrated perfectly in this essay.

Two theories of frustration and force majeure almost refer to the same subject, namely, the impossibility of performance of the commitment or contract. However, although they are very similar in theory and practice, they have differences that distinguish one from the other. For instances, frustration of contract has a wider scope, compared to force majeure. However, in comparing the theories regarding changed circumstances and hardship of performance of contract and theory of frustration, it should be considered that in the former, the performance of contract is not cancelled but faced by high hardship and cost, while in the latter, the performance of commitment or contract either becomes partly or completely cancelled as applicable or, if it remains possible to perform, it becomes essentially different from what is originally agreed and intended by the parties. Thus, according aforementioned theories, they are similar, they may not be considered as identical. Briefly speaking, theories of changed circumstances and hardship of performance of contract have a wider scope than that of frustration of contract.

During the performance of Oil and Gas contracts, which are usually one of the longest investment contracts, there may be incidents in which the relations between the parties and the fulfillment of obligations, change and become unstable. In order to deal with the new situation, which may prevent the fulfillment of the obligation or make its performance difficult, various theories have been expressed, which we have examined under the heading of contractual EXCUSES. Contractual EXCUSES, which are also considered as an exception to the principle of the necessity of contracts, have been identified under different titles and chapters in international and regional instruments, and the effects and remedies of that will also differ on the contract. In this article, while emphasizing the difference between contractual EXCUSES from the “stabilization clause” which is used in Oil and Gas contracts, by examining the practical procedure of arranging and inserting the EXCUSES clauses in several examples of these contracts, the authors at first try to introduce the types of terms and after pointing out the defects of each one, they have mentioned the necessary cases of amending and changing these contracts in order to comply with international and regional instruments.