Contrary to the belief that the challenges of dowry can be resolved merely by amending the Law on Financial Convictions, one of the most important and thought-provoking points in reforming family law is the necessity to consider religious matters and the codified rules outlined in the Book of Marriage. Despite the pressing need to adapt these rules to the realities of young people’s lives today, the failure to consider them in legislative drafting leads to the rejection of parliamentary bills by the Guardian Council. Evidence of this is seen in statements by the Secretary of the Legal-Judicial Commission of Parliament, who has suggested the annulment of the wife’s right of retention. However, the right of retention originates from religious sources and is, in fact, one of the wife’s religious rights. Therefore, annulling it through legislation requires valid jurisprudential fatwas.

Another important point is the definition of dowry (mahr) in Islamic law, where it is considered the wife’s rightful claim. Accordingly, the determination of dowry depends on the mutual consent of both spouses. Based on the principle of freedom of contract, no governmental authority has the right to obstruct the establishment of this right or to limit its scope.

Contrary to the common perception of the directive limiting dowry to “110 gold coins,” what that directive actually addressed was the enforcement mechanism within the Law on Financial Convictions. It stipulated that enforcement through imprisonment could be applied only up to 110 coins. In other words, if a wife’s dowry was set at 1,000 coins, and the husband paid 110 coins in cash and in a lump sum, the wife could no longer request the husband’s arrest to claim the remaining amount. This gave the husband an opportunity to pay the remainder in installments. Thus, in the proposed amendment reducing the enforceable limit from 110 coins to 14, the same enforcement rule would apply—this time to only 14 coins. Consequently, the idea that Parliament can solve the dowry issue by tweaking a few articles of the Law on Financial Convictions, without any structural change, is a naïve one. Experience has shown that such measures act more like a temporary sedative than a true cure. The reason for this perspective lies in the fact that the main goal of such proposals is to reduce the number of dowry-related prisoners. As long as this remains the prevailing legislative approach in Iran, the dowry challenge will persist.

Another issue is the claim that thousands of current dowry prisoners will benefit from the reform. This raises an important question: assuming the law is amended and approved by the Guardian Council, will it apply retroactively? Article 4 of the Civil Code explicitly states that laws are not retroactive unless a specific provision in the law says otherwise. Even if the amended law were to include such a provision, it would still raise a serious question regarding the principle of vested rights. If, based on a court ruling, the wife has legally acquired rights, can a legislative amendment justly invalidate those rights, in contradiction to legal principles? Because of such flaws, it is essential for legislators and members of the Legal-Judicial Commission to thoroughly examine all aspects of any proposed law. This can only be achieved if experts and specialists with years of experience in family law are consulted during the drafting process.

Under this premise, the commission should engage with experts through the Parliament Research Center to address family law reform and related legal issues. Drawing upon specialized data provided by experts, a sound legislative path for reforming dowry-related laws can be shaped.

In this regard, each and every detail of the legislative drafting process must be carefully considered. In the field of legal theory and legislative fundamentals, attention to the philosophy of legislation holds particular importance. Thus, it is necessary to first consider the needs of the target community and then the broader society, to analyze the expectations that the law is meant to address. But what authority is qualified to make such assessments?

Given that the subjects of family law are human beings and the microcosm of society—the family—it is essential that experts in the humanities, including psychologists, sociologists, economists, legal scholars, and other relevant specialists, thoroughly examine the different dimensions of the family. They must study the objectives defined under the concept of “family,” and then, based on the data and findings derived from their specialized research, initiate the legislative drafting process. The law should then be formulated and ratified according to the essential characteristics of a good law: clarity, decisiveness, comprehensiveness, and precision. Only under such conditions can the implementation of the law and its positive outcomes be realistically expected. Otherwise, we will continue to see repetitive, ineffective laws that lack enforcement power—not only failing to solve society’s problems but adding further complications to existing ones.