Intl. Fiqh system roundtable reviews capacities of no harm principle

A roundtable titled “International Fiqh system” was held at the Feghahat School of Ahl al‑Bayt, with members of the ijtihad circle on international Fiqh in attendance.  
During the session, Hoj. Seyyed Alireza Hosseini Faqih, Hoj. Seyyed Esmail Deldar and Hoj. Seyyed Emad Saberi examined jurisprudential and legal dimensions of the ‘no harm principle (La Zarar)’ as well as the ‘principle of non‑harmful use’ in domestic and international contexts.
According to Hoj. Hosseini Faqih: “The narrative and jurisprudential foundations of the no harm principle (aka harm principle) are rooted in historical traditions including the well‑known case of Samra ibn Jundab”. 
 “This rule can serve as a basis for removing or invalidating rights that ultimately cause harm to others”, he stated. 
He also discussed jurisprudential debates related to preemption rights and water rights, outlining different interpretations of the rule, including the negation of harmful rulings, the rejection of harm in legislation and the prohibition of causing harm. 
He noted: “In the jurisprudential system, whenever a source of harm emerges, mechanisms exist to remove it".
Also speaking in the event, Hoj. Deldar described the no harm principle as a fundamental pillar for regulating social relations in Islamic jurisprudence. 
He stressed: “Without attention to this rule, an essential balance between individual rights and public interests would disappear.”  
Referring to examples such as preemption, rights of passage, water rights and other easement rights, he explained: “Islamic jurisprudence uses the principle to prevent legal rights from becoming instruments of pressure or harm among neighbors and partners”. 
He also emphasized the need to reinterpret the rule within a systematic framework of “Fiqh of systems” in response to the increasing complexity of modern social and economic relations.
In the final part of the session, Hoj. Saberi examined the ‘principle of non‑harmful use’ in international environmental law. 
Referring to major judicial cases including Trail Smelter, Corfu Channel and Lake Lanoux, he explained: “These precedents reinforced the responsibility of states to prevent environmental harm to other countries”.
Saberi concluded: “Territorial sovereignty of states is not absolute, and the use of domestic resources must not cause damage to other nations.”