Criteria for Abuse of Rights and Their Applications in Easement Rights: A Comparative Study Between Islamic Law and the Jordanian Civil Code

Selim Karakaş

Makale detayları

Criteria for Abuse of Rights and Their Applications in Easement Rights: A Comparative Study Between Islamic Law and the Jordanian Civil Code

Yazarlar:

Selim Karakaş

Yayıncı:

Süleyman Demirel University

Ana Başlıklar:

İslam Hukuku

Dergi:

Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi Issue 54, pp.38-56

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

6/2025

Belge Dili:

Arapça

Document ID (Org No.):

2001352550

pISSN:

2602-2346

Anahtar kelimeler:

Özet:

 The term Abuse Of Rights is a contemporary concept that was not explicitly mentioned in classical Islamic jurisprudential texts, despite its significant importance in regulating various matters related to individual rights. It essentially refers to causing harm to others, as no individual is permitted to harm another while exercising a legitimate right. Rights are not absolute or unrestricted, and there must be a prohibition of abuse in exercising rights to safeguard the rights of all individuals. Similarly, Easement Rights are a vital subject concerning peoples rights, as they regulate the relationship between individuals entitlements regarding the properties of others and the rights of property owners themselves. Islamic legislation has laid down certain principles and guidelines to balance these rights, just as the Jordanian Civil Law has enacted provisions to organize this area. This study examines the criteria for abuse of rights and its applications in easement rights, comparing Islamic legislation and the Jordanian Civil Law. The research begins by defining abuse, its criteria, and easement rights. It then elaborates on the criteria for abuse of rights and explores several of its applications in easement rights within the frameworks of Islamic legislation and the Jordanian Civil Law, comparing these two systems. Abuse of rights is assessed based on two primary criteria: the subjective criterion, also referred to as the intentional criterion, and the objective criterion, also known as the material criterion. The subjective criterion pertains to the individuals intention and is divided into two categories. The first is pure intention to harm others, where the rights-holder uses their right solely to harm others. The affected party in cases of easement rights is often the neighbor of the rights-holder. Two conditions must be met for this criterion to apply: first, the rights-holder must intend to harm another; second, this intention must be exclusive, meaning no other purpose is associated with the act. If the rights-holder aims for any benefit, even minimal, alongside the harm, the action is not judged under the subjective criterion but rather under the objective criterion due to conflicting interests. The second aspect of the subjective criterion is the misuse of a right for unlawful purposes. This involves utilizing a lawful right for an unintended or impermissible purpose. The objective criterion concerns the consequences of actions and is divided into two categories. The first is imbalance between conflicting interests, which may occur between two individual benefits or between an individual benefit and a public interest. The second category under the objective criterion is excessive harm. Normal harm, which is minor, must be tolerated and forgiven. However, if an individual exercises their right in a manner that deviates from common norms, causing significant harm to others, their action constitutes abuse of rights. The study concludes that both Islamic Law and the Jordanian Civil Law agree on the prohibition of abuse of rights in all its forms, whether evaluated based on intentional or material criteria. Both systems emphasize preventing harm in the exercise of easement rights.

 The term Abuse Of Rights is a contemporary concept that was not explicitly mentioned in classical Islamic jurisprudential texts, despite its significant importance in regulating various matters related to individual rights. It essentially refers to causing harm to others, as no individual is permitted to harm another while exercising a legitimate right. Rights are not absolute or unrestricted, and there must be a prohibition of abuse in exercising rights to safeguard the rights of all individuals. Similarly, Easement Rights are a vital subject concerning peoples rights, as they regulate the relationship between individuals entitlements regarding the properties of others and the rights of property owners themselves. Islamic legislation has laid down certain principles and guidelines to balance these rights, just as the Jordanian Civil Law has enacted provisions to organize this area. This study examines the criteria for abuse of rights and its applications in easement rights, comparing Islamic legislation and the Jordanian Civil Law. The research begins by defining abuse, its criteria, and easement rights. It then elaborates on the criteria for abuse of rights and explores several of its applications in easement rights within the frameworks of Islamic legislation and the Jordanian Civil Law, comparing these two systems. Abuse of rights is assessed based on two primary criteria: the subjective criterion, also referred to as the intentional criterion, and the objective criterion, also known as the material criterion. The subjective criterion pertains to the individuals intention and is divided into two categories. The first is pure intention to harm others, where the rights-holder uses their right solely to harm others. The affected party in cases of easement rights is often the neighbor of the rights-holder. Two conditions must be met for this criterion to apply: first, the rights-holder must intend to harm another; second, this intention must be exclusive, meaning no other purpose is associated with the act. If the rights-holder aims for any benefit, even minimal, alongside the harm, the action is not judged under the subjective criterion but rather under the objective criterion due to conflicting interests. The second aspect of the subjective criterion is the misuse of a right for unlawful purposes. This involves utilizing a lawful right for an unintended or impermissible purpose. The objective criterion concerns the consequences of actions and is divided into two categories. The first is imbalance between conflicting interests, which may occur between two individual benefits or between an individual benefit and a public interest. The second category under the objective criterion is excessive harm. Normal harm, which is minor, must be tolerated and forgiven. However, if an individual exercises their right in a manner that deviates from common norms, causing significant harm to others, their action constitutes abuse of rights. The study concludes that both Islamic Law and the Jordanian Civil Law agree on the prohibition of abuse of rights in all its forms, whether evaluated based on intentional or material criteria. Both systems emphasize preventing harm in the exercise of easement rights.

 The term Abuse Of Rights is a contemporary concept that was not explicitly mentioned in classical Islamic jurisprudential texts, despite its significant importance in regulating various matters related to individual rights. It essentially refers to causing harm to others, as no individual is permitted to harm another while exercising a legitimate right. Rights are not absolute or unrestricted, and there must be a prohibition of abuse in exercising rights to safeguard the rights of all individuals. Similarly, Easement Rights are a vital subject concerning peoples rights, as they regulate the relationship between individuals entitlements regarding the properties of others and the rights of property owners themselves. Islamic legislation has laid down certain principles and guidelines to balance these rights, just as the Jordanian Civil Law has enacted provisions to organize this area. This study examines the criteria for abuse of rights and its applications in easement rights, comparing Islamic legislation and the Jordanian Civil Law. The research begins by defining abuse, its criteria, and easement rights. It then elaborates on the criteria for abuse of rights and explores several of its applications in easement rights within the frameworks of Islamic legislation and the Jordanian Civil Law, comparing these two systems. Abuse of rights is assessed based on two primary criteria: the subjective criterion, also referred to as the intentional criterion, and the objective criterion, also known as the material criterion. The subjective criterion pertains to the individuals intention and is divided into two categories. The first is pure intention to harm others, where the rights-holder uses their right solely to harm others. The affected party in cases of easement rights is often the neighbor of the rights-holder. Two conditions must be met for this criterion to apply: first, the rights-holder must intend to harm another; second, this intention must be exclusive, meaning no other purpose is associated with the act. If the rights-holder aims for any benefit, even minimal, alongside the harm, the action is not judged under the subjective criterion but rather under the objective criterion due to conflicting interests. The second aspect of the subjective criterion is the misuse of a right for unlawful purposes. This involves utilizing a lawful right for an unintended or impermissible purpose. The objective criterion concerns the consequences of actions and is divided into two categories. The first is imbalance between conflicting interests, which may occur between two individual benefits or between an individual benefit and a public interest. The second category under the objective criterion is excessive harm. Normal harm, which is minor, must be tolerated and forgiven. However, if an individual exercises their right in a manner that deviates from common norms, causing significant harm to others, their action constitutes abuse of rights. The study concludes that both Islamic Law and the Jordanian Civil Law agree on the prohibition of abuse of rights in all its forms, whether evaluated based on intentional or material criteria. Both systems emphasize preventing harm in the exercise of easement rights.

 Teassüf hakkın kötüye kullanılması, klasik fıkıh eserlerinde geçmeyen modern ıstılahlardan biridir. Bunun yanı sıra teassüf insanların haklarıyla alakalı bütün alanlarda araştırılması gerekli olan önemli bir konudur. Öyle ki kimsenin kendi meşru hakkını kullanırken dahi başka birine zarar vermeye hakkı yoktur ve ona tanınan haklar sınırsız değildir. Sonuç olarak bütün insanların haklarını gözetmek için onların haklarını kötüye kullanmalarının engellenmesi gereklidir. İrtifak hakları da insanların, başkalarının mülklerindeki haklarını ve o mülk sahiplerinin haklarını düzenlemesi yönüyle bu çerçevede incelenmeyi hak etmektedir. Nitekim İslam Hukuku insanların haklarını gözetmek için bu konuda bazı kural ve ilkeler belirlemiş olup Ürdün Medeni Kanunu da bazı maddelerini buna ayırmıştır. Bu çalışma teassüfün ölçütlerini ele alıp bunun irtifak haklarındaki uygulamalarını İslam Hukuku ve Ürdün Medeni Kanununun konuya yaklaşımları karşılaştırmalı olarak incelemiştir. Öncelikle her iki hukuk sisteminde de teassüfün ölçütleri tespit edilmiş, sonrasında da bu ölçütlere bağlı olarak irtifak haklarında teassüfün hangi örneklerinin ele alındığı araştırılmıştır. Çalışma, teassüf, miyâr ölçüt ve irtifak hakkı terimlerinin tanımıyla başlamış sonrasında teassüf ölçütlerini açıklayıp konu hakkında İslam Hukukunun ve Ürdün Medeni Kanununun ele aldığı bazı örnekleri bu iki sistemi karşılaştırarak incelemiştir. Hakkın kötüye kullanılması iki temel ölçüte bağlıdır, bunlar: manevi ve maddi ölçütlerdir. Manevi yani subjektif ölçüt kişinin niyetiyle doğrudan alakalıdır ve bu ölçüt iki durumda ortaya çıkar: Birincisinde kişi hakkını sadece başkasına zarar verme niyetiyle kullanır ve küçük de olsa bu fiilden bir menfaat beklentisi yoktur, ikincisi ise hakkın gayrimeşru bir amaç için kullanılmasıdır. Zarar verme niyetinin tespit edilebilmesi için iki önemli şart vardır: İlki hak sahibinin zarar verme niyeti ile bu fiili işlediğinin tespit edilmesi, ikincisi kişinin fiilini gerçekleştirirken başkasına zarar vermekten başka bir niyetinin bulunmamasıdır. Eğer az da olsa bir menfaat umarak ve başkasına da zarar vermek niyetiyle bu fiilini işliyorsa bu durum, manevi ölçüte değil maddi ölçütün menfaatlerin çatışması kapsamına dahil olacaktır. Teassüfün ikinci temel ölçütü olan maddi yani objektif ölçüt ise fiillerin sonuçlarıyla ilgilidir ve bu da ikiye ayrılır: Birincisi iki hak sahibi arasındaki menfaat çatışmasıdır ki burada iki bireysel menfaatin çatışması olabileceği gibi bireysel menfaat ile toplumsal menfaatin çatışması şeklinde de ortaya çıkmaktadır. İkincisi ise aşırı zarardır. Eğer bir kişi, hakkını meşru bir şekilde kullanmasına rağmen, başkasına karşı elde ettiği faydaya eşit veya ondan daha büyük bir zarar oluşturuyorsa, hakkını bu şekilde kullanması teassüf kapsamına girer ve bu fiilinden menedilir. Bu durum, zarar ister iki bireysel menfaatin çatışmasından kaynaklansın isterse de bireysel ve toplumsal menfaatin çatışmasından kaynaklansın aynıdır. Bu durum şu küllî kaidelere dayanır: Zarar-ı âmmı def içün zarar-ı hâs ihtiyar olunur. Def-i mefasid celb-i menafidan evladır. Çalışmanın sonucunda İslam Hukuku ile Ürdün Medeni Kanununun teassüfün ölçütlerinde tamamen birleştiği, sadece modern dönem İslam Hukukçularının bu ölçütleri maddi ve manevi olarak iki temel başlık altında ele aldıkları, Ürdün Medeni Kanununun ise bu tasnife gitmediği tespit edilmiştir. Buna ilave olarak da irtifak haklarında insanların teassüften menedilmesi noktasında ortak bir tutum izledikleri ortaya çıkmıştır.

Makale detayları

Criteria for Abuse of Rights and Their Applications in Easement Rights: A Comparative Study Between Islamic Law and the Jordanian Civil Code

Yazarlar:

Selim Karakaş

Yayıncı:

Süleyman Demirel University

Ana Başlıklar:

İslam Hukuku

Dergi:

Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi Issue 54, pp.38-56

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

6/2025

Belge Dili:

Arapça

Document ID (Org No.):

2001352550

pISSN:

2602-2346

Islamic Law

Jordanian Civil Code

Abuse of Rights

Easement Rights

Harmİslam Hukuku

Ürdün Medeni Kanunu

Teassüf

İrtifak Hakları

Zarar

Sayı

Makale detayları

Yazarlar: Selim Karakaş

Yayıncı: Süleyman Demirel University

Ana Başlıklar: İslam Hukuku

Dergi: Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi Issue 54, pp.38-56

Belge Tipi: Makale

Yayın Tarihi: 6/2025

Belge Dili: Arapça

Document ID (Org No.): 2001352550

pISSN: 2602-2346

Sayı

Yazarlar:

Selim Karakaş

Yayıncı:

Süleyman Demirel University

Ana Başlıklar:

İslam Hukuku

Dergi:

Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi Issue 54, pp.38-56

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

6/2025

Belge Dili:

Arapça

Document ID (Org No.):

2001352550

pISSN:

2602-2346