Microsoft Word - 26660-ed.doc


Indonesian Journal of Law and Society (2021) 2:2 165-196 
ISSN 2722-4074 | https://doi.org/10.19184/ijls.v2i2.26660 
Published by the University of Jember, Indonesia 
Available online 30 September 2021 
 
 

_____________________________ 
 
* Corresponding authors’ e-mail: n.nima1376@gmail.com 

Legal Analysis of the Nature of Cyber Currency in 
Iran: A Comparison to EU Law 
 
Nima Norouzi* 
Islamic Azad University, Iran  
 

ABSTRACT: Electronic money as the monetary value stored in an electronic instrument is the 
last step in the gradual evolution of money, described as the immaterialization and invisibility of 
money. It is an emerging phenomenon that can perform the functions and duties of money. 
This study aimed to investigate the legal concept of cyber currency in Iran-Islamic and EU law 
in a comparative view. This study mainly considered e-money as a payment method and 
discussed it from different perspectives. In analyzing the legal nature of this phenomenon, it 
used two different approaches by combining an empirical-analytical method and a comparative 
study. The first approach was to analyze the nature of electronic money as a type of money. The 
second was to analyze the nature of electronic money in the light of non-monetary theories and 
describe it as one of the legal institutions used in business. This study concluded that electronic 
money would have different legal effects in its legal analysis, depending on who the publisher 
and acceptor are and how its publication and circulation process is defined and explained. The 
description of electronic money in the form of non-monetary theories ignored its role as an 
efficient payment tool in today's advanced business environment. 

KEYWORDS: Electronic Money, Cyber Currency, Islamic Law. 
 

Copyright © 2021 by Author(s) 
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International 
License. All writings published in this journal are personal views of the authors and do not 

represent the views of this journal and the author's affiliated institutions. 

 
 

 

Submitted: 21/07/2021  Reviewed: 26/08/2021  Revised: 29/09/2021  Accepted: 30/09/2021 

  

HOW TO CITE: 
Norouzi, Nima, “Legal Analysis of the Nature of Cyber Currency in Iran: A Comparison to EU 
Law” (2021) 2:2 Indonesian Journal of Law and Society 165-196, online: <https://doi.org/ 
10.19184/ijls.v2i2.26660>. 



166 | Legal Analysis of the Nature of Cyber Currency in Iran: A Comparison to EU Law 

 

 

I. INTRODUCTION 

The use of electronic money is described as a process of immaterialization 
and invalidity of money.1 This emerging phenomenon, which is technically 
undergoing its development process and economically gradually opening its 
place among monetary instruments as a means of payment in retail 
exchanges, is gradually gaining attention.2 Then, the national and regional 
currencies are regulated, with the European Union leading the way in 
issuing guidelines on e-money.3 

There have been rare existing literature that investigated the nature of e-
money. Mengjia argued that e-money is not a real currency and it possesses 
some nature and functions of currency.4 To some extent, the circulation is 
restricted within cyberspace, a measure of relative values and a payment 
tool.5 Another study by Zharova and Lloyd lacked a conceptual framework 
of the cyber-currency that concerned the use of crypto-currency with 
specific reference to the situation in Russia.6 A variety of such systems exist, 
like bitcoin, but it is perhaps the best-known example and will be used as 
synonymous with the concept throughout this article.7 Also, Breu studied 
blockchain technology and its future legal challenges.8 Although this study 
was a turning point in this field, it was case limited, and no conceptual legal 

 
1  Faraz Adam, “Fatawa Analysis of Bitcoin” in Halal Cryptocurrency Management 

(Palgrave Macmillan, 2019). at 133-147. 
2  Habib Farrukh, “Fintech, Digital Currency and the Future of Islamic Finance” in A 

Critical Analysis of Bitcoin from Islamic Legal Perspective (Palgrave Macmillan, 2021). 
At 9-29. 

3  In the recent period, many countries such as the United States, Australia, Russia, 
China, Ukraine, Indonesia, and Singapore regulated cyber currency. 

4  Mengjia, Y. U. "Analysis of Impact and Nature of Cyber Virtual Currency Based 
QB." Business Economy 2014 (2014): 16. 

5  Ibid. 
6  Anna Zharova & Ian Lloyd, “An examination of the experience of cryptocurrency 

use in Russia. In search of better practice” (2018) 34:6 Computer Law & Security 
Review 1300–1313. 

7  Ibid. 
8  Stephan Breu, “Are Blockchains and Cybercurrencies Demanding a New Legislative 

Framework” (2018) 1 Journal Law and Digital Economy. 



167 | Indonesian Journal of Law and Society 

 

 

analysis in terms of evolutionary, empirical, or analytic methods was 
implemented.9 

This study was based on the hypothesis that electronic money for economic 
functions can perform functions such as legal money or written money, but 
legally following these rules and regulations on the electronic transfer of 
funds and the conditions of activity of electronic money publishers. The 
European Parliament and the Council of Europe have inspired European 
national systems, first with the adoption of Directive 2000/46/EC and, 
more recently, with Directive 2009/110/EC. In Iran, so far, no regulations 
have been enacted on electronic money in a specific sense, and regulations 
such as the regulations on the use of electronic money services, approved by 
the Cabinet on 5/5/2005,10 regulate its general meaning and electronic 
transmission. The publisher and acceptor and how the publication and 
circulation process is defined and explained will have different legal effects. 

Two descriptive methods have been used, and the approach of European 
systems, especially France and the American system,11 as a typical model on 
the one hand, and Islamic law as reflected in the views of jurisprudential 
thinkers, the other hand, is different. Electronic money is used in the 
banking literature in both general and specific senses. In a general sense, e-
money encompasses all forms of electronic payment.12 In its specific sense, 
polyelectronics is the monetary value stored in an electronic instrument 

 
9  Ibid. 
10  In its specific sense, electronic money differs from the methods of electronic payment 

or transfer of funds (access products) that enable customers to use electronic means 
of communication to access traditional payment services. This means using a 
personal computer and the internet or mobile phones and telephone lines to pay for 
an electronic bank account and pay by credit or debit card, typically requiring online 
communication and verification. 

11  A Manimuthu et al., "A Literature Review on Bitcoin: Transformation of Crypto 
Currency Into a Global Phenomenon" (2019) IEEE Engineering Management 
Review at 28–35. 

12  Luqman Nurhisam, “Bitcoin: Islamic law perspective” (2017) 5:2 Qudus 
International Journal of Islamic Studies. 



168 | Legal Analysis of the Nature of Cyber Currency in Iran: A Comparison to EU Law 

 

 

issued in exchange for the receipt of funds and accepted as a means of 
payment13 by natural persons or legal entities other than the issuer.  

This study aimed to analyze the concept of the cyber currency in the Iran-
Islamic judicial system and compare it with the EU law.14 In particular, it 
reviewed the evolution of the monetary law and then compared principles 
and theories of this field.15 Then, the most unified and aligned theories will 
be chosen to conceptualize the cyber currency in Iran-Islamic law.16 Finally, 
this evolutionary-analytic study will be compared with the latest legislation 
of the EU region, mainly French law, due to its compatibility with Islamic 
law.  

This study is structured into three sections. The first section discusses the 
nature of cyber currency that mainly considers the evolution of money and 
structurize its legal entity through time. The second section studies the 
cyber currency using the results of evolutionary studies of the monetary 
theories. This section conceptualizes the cyber currency in the Iran-Islamic 
jurisprudence. The third section discusses the payment in cyber currency 
and its banking deposition.  

 

II. METHODS 

Given that this study was to analyze the cyber currency in the Iran-Islamic 
judicial system and compare it with the EU law, the research method in 
this research was empirical-analytical. The empirical analysis is an 
evidence-based approach to the study and interpretation of information. It 
never gives an absolute answer, but only a most likely answer based on 
probability. The concept in this study was identified using theoretical 

 
13  Electronic money products are sometimes card-based (storing value in a 

microprocessor chip housed in a plastic card) and sometimes software-based 
(specialized software installed on PCs). 

14  Stjepan Begusic, et al., "Scaling properties of extreme price fluctuations in Bitcoin 
markets" (2018) 510 Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications at 400-
406. 

15  Alam Nafis, Lokesh Gupta & Zameni Abdolhossein, “Cryptocurrency and Islamic 
Finance” in Fintech and Islamic Finance (Palgrave Macmillan, 2019)  at 99-118. 

16  Adam, Mufti Faraz & Mufti A K Barkatulla, “Currency in Islamic Law: A Sharī’ ah 
analysis of bitcoin” in Fintech In Islamic Financ (Routledge, 2019)  at 120-130. 



169 | Indonesian Journal of Law and Society 

 

 

literature and legal sources of the Iranian legal system, Imamieh 
Jurisprudence, and EU (mainly French) Law.  

After categorizing and analyzing the content, the existing concepts were 
materialized, and their standing in the current financial, economic, and 
trade legal structure of mentioned legal systems was discussed. The present 
research was empirical because it studied the concepts, using it to define 
the standing place of the cyber currency in the mentioned legal systems and 
how the law should treat the litigation on the cyber currency present 
strategies for practically improving this system. Also, comparative methods 
have been used to compare e-money legislation between European systems, 
especially France and the American system,  as a typical model, and Iran-
Islamic law as reflected in the views of jurisprudential thinkers. The 
comparison between Islamic-Iranian and EU law is selected because of two 
reasons. First, the rapidly growing crypto-currency demand in Iran is 
causing a great need for strong legislation in this field to help to solve the 
possible upcoming legal cases. Second, the EU has one of the earliest 
legislations in crypto-currency, and its experience is tested and can be 
helpful for countries lacking this legal infrastructure like Iran. 

 

III. THE NATURE OF CYBER CURRENCY 

Legal money or money, of which banknotes and coins are the instances, 
form a bank's currency.17 From the theoretical point of view, in electronic 
money, legal description and analysis of its nature are considered money. 
To prove the proposition that electronic money is money, we must first 
review and re-analyze the meaning and nature of each type of money and 
apply it to the state of electronic money.18 Before, examine the functions, 
economics, and duties. The legal nature of money and its characteristics is 

 
17  Ruoke Yang, “When is Bitcoin a security under US securities law” (2013) 18 J Tech 

L & Pol’y at 99. 
18  Angela SM Irwin & Caitlin Dawson, “Following the cyber money trail: global 

challenges when investigating ransomware attacks and how regulation can help” 
(2019) 22:2 Journal of Money Laundering Control. 

 



170 | Legal Analysis of the Nature of Cyber Currency in Iran: A Comparison to EU Law 

 

 

required as a scientific introduction. Therefore, it will follow the topics of 
this speech in three parts. 

 

A. Characteristics and Functions of Money  

From an economic point of view, money has at least three main functions.19 
Money is an instrument or medium of exchange, a unit of calculation or 
measurement of value, a means of preserving and storing value. Although 
money today is thematically diversified and developed, there is no doubt 
that money's most important function and characteristic are the means of 
its exchange. According to some economists, only objects have this 
function. Widely accepted as intermediaries of exchange, they can be 
described as money. 

As Jean Carbonier, the French jurist, pointed out: However, money is an 
intermediary of exchange and a means of payment; not every means of 
payment is money because money, in addition to fulfilling its monetary 
obligation, is a religion of Muscat. It also has. Therefore, any means of 
payment must include all the characteristics of money.20 Money is not only 
a means of payment; in its function as a common currency. It is a means 
and a tool for measuring the value and valuation of objects that have a 
rational benefit and economic value and are considered in the legal term of 
money. 

In other words, currencies determine the amount of tax and price of 
objects. Each unit of the common currency, which is the unit of calculation 
and measurement, is an ideal that is necessarily defined by a name such as 
Rial, Euro, and Dollar and acts as a reference with society's monetary 
system. A set of monetary units makes up a sum of money. However, this 
ideal unit requires an intermediary or device to be included for storage and 
exchange. The instrument in which monetary units are included, 
sometimes in coins and sometimes in banknotes, is called a monetary 

 
19  Mufti F Adam, “Bitcoin: shariah compliant” (2017) Amanah Finance Consultancy 

2017 at 1-54. 
20  Mark Holub & Jackie Johnson, “Bitcoin research across disciplines” (2018) 34 The 

Information Society at 114-126. 



171 | Indonesian Journal of Law and Society 

 

 

document or monetary instrument in legal analysis.21 However, the 
common currency in any monetary system is the pure element of money, 
and the unit of utility used to determine the value of services and 
commodity needed by the people of the society is used, whether it wants to 
be given a material form through aggregation and inclusion in an 
intermediary. 

 

B. Cyber and Traditional Currencies 

To describe and analyze the nature of electronic money as money, we must 
first analyze the nature of money itself to apply the reality of electronic 
money to it. While some economists predict that money will disappear in 
the future by introducing new technologies, some legal experts believe that 
money is still an unknown quantity from a legal point of view. Although 
pervasive in economic relations, money is generally devoid of legal theory. 
The few legal definitions of money are largely based on its functions and 
functions as a payment unit.22 According to some French law authors, they 
define exchange, lawyers' view of money is principled mainly from law and 
obligations arising from its application. Less attention is paid to the 
obligations arising from its creation and publication. However, experts 
agree about the nature of money made from valuables such as gold and 
silver. Because in these cases, material and physical property with intrinsic 
tax and value, due to the definition of three functions for it, played the role 
of money and intermediary of exchange. So, logically, we should focus on 
the current examples of legal tender and money, namely coins and 
banknotes. 

In the evolution of money, paper money or banknotes at the beginning of 
its existence expressed a claim and demand on the part of its publisher. 
When the convertible currency system was established, and the currencies 
were defined based on the number of precious metals, gold, and silver, the 

 
21  M Kabir Hassan, Mohammad S Karim & Aishath Muneezac, “A Conventional and 

Sharīʿah Analysis of Bitcoin” (2020) 35:1–2 Arab Law Quarterly at 155-189. 
22  Evan L Greebel, et al., "Recent key Bitcoin and virtual currency regulatory and law 

enforcement developments” (2015) 16:1 Journal of Investment Compliance. 



172 | Legal Analysis of the Nature of Cyber Currency in Iran: A Comparison to EU Law 

 

 

banknote issuer bank backed and issued banknotes. It was based on the 
gold and silver it had stored and had to exchange it for gold or its 
equivalent at the holder's request.23 For example, according to Article 17 of 
the Law of 22 April 1806, banknotes were normally payable to the holder 
in French law. The person receiving the bonds appointed the issuing bank 
as the debtor rather than the debtor. He counted the bills he had delivered 
to him. The banknote was considered a debt document of the issuer or a 
document of the holder. It could be transferred by receipt and contract. In 
this system, the banknote represented a transferable personal financial or 
religious right. 

Hence, the legal nature of this type of banknote was similar to a promissory 
note. It represented a religious right or a transferable claim in favor of the 
holder, except that the restrictions and formal conditions of the promissory 
note were removed and its economic function and legal effect. It was 
completely different in exchanges.24 These banknotes had the effect of cash 
payment, while the promissory note is a non-cash payment instrument. 
The situation was similar in other European-American monetary systems 
with similar financial banking systems. Thus, money with backing or 
convertible money was, by nature, debt and a payable obligation of the 
issuer and a religious right or claim of the holder. The monetary document 
representing it, namely banknotes and coins, indicated that religion and 
demand. In other words, this type of banknote or coin was not property per 
se but indicated property, and what was taxed and considered property was 
the same holder of the banknote from the issuing bank. Because private 
banks also issued banknotes during the period in some countries, such as 
the United States, the exchange value of such banknotes depended on the 
publisher's credit and the public's confidence in the publisher's financial 
ability.25   

 
23  Wulf A Kaal, “Decentralization-Past, Present, and Future” (2019) 19–23 U of St 

Thomas (Minnesota) Legal Studies Research Paper. 
24  Abbas Mirakhor, Iqbal Zamir & Seyed K Sadr, Handbook of Ethics of Islamic 

Economics and Finance (Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG, 2020). 
25  In the United States, since 1933, coins and banknotes issued by the Federal Reserve 

are the only legal forms of polling in that country that derive their value from law 
and public trust. 



173 | Indonesian Journal of Law and Society 

 

 

Based on this analysis, the French Supreme Court, in its judgment of 7 
April 1856, held that the tax on banknotes of the Bank of France was based 
on pure trust. Leaving aside the support of gold and silver and the tendency 
of monetary systems to convert non-convertible currencies, the legal nature 
of money changed completely. In French banking law, this system was 
implemented following the law of 1 October 1936, and according to it, the 
Bank of France was released from the obligation to repay issued banknotes 
or coins. A change has occurred in other countries, such as the United 
States.26 As a result, unlike in the past, the current banknote is neither a 
payable obligation nor a religious right of the holder. Banknotes do not 
indicate property but are themselves property, money whose value and tax 
are credit and derive from the law. In other words, the value of money is 
determined by the law and is taxed by law. Therefore, in many national 
laws, the acceptance of common currency by the general public and legal 
persons is mandatory.27 For example, under Article 5 of the French Law of 
4 August 1993, the Bank of France is the only authorized issuer of 
banknotes accepted as legal tender. Any person who owes money for 
transactions can fulfill his debt by paying an amount equal to the amount 
owed to his creditor, and the creditor is required to accept those bills 
(currency) as a means of payment. 

Legal currency is the consequence of the irreversible currency system. As 
soon as the legislators decide that the banknotes are irrevocable, the holders 
of the banknotes will be backed up. This legal guarantee must be provided, 
and the depositors can provide the money. Goods and services should be 
rejected and refused. On the other hand, the trading party will also accept 
the monetary symbol based on its face value (the number mentioned on the 
sheet).To be sure, if she/he is sure this monetary symbol is accepted at the 
same value. Thus, in a non-exchangeable legal monetary system, monetary 
symbols, both banknotes and coins, have their exchange power from the 
law and government support and public trust and acceptance as a valuable 

 
26  John O McGinnis & Kyle Roche, “Bitcoin: Order without law in the digital age” 

(2019) 94 Ind LJ at 1497. 
27  Pietro Ortolani, “Self-enforcing online dispute resolution: lessons from bitcoin” 

(2016) 36:3 Oxford Journal of Legal Studies at 595-629. 



174 | Legal Analysis of the Nature of Cyber Currency in Iran: A Comparison to EU Law 

 

 

object.28 People accept common currency in exchanging goods and services 
simply because they trust that the acceptance of that money will continue 
in exchange and serve as a store of lasting value. Central banks are also 
responsible for maintaining their integrity and originality (original 
exchange value) by controlling the money in circulation. 

 

C. The Nature of Money in Islamic Legal Thought 

Among the thinkers of Islamic law, Martyr Sadraz is one of the pioneers in 
analyzing the nature of money.29 After emphasizing the intrinsic value of 
gold and silver coins, he has made a serious distinction between banknotes 
that can be converted into gold and silver and current banknotes, which 
according to the law of publishers, are exempt from converting them into 
gold. Regarding the second type, like the current banknotes, which have no 
gold backing, and the issuer has no obligation to convert them into gold 
and precious metals. It is believed that these are mandatory cash bonds, and 
their taxation is purely credit and has no intrinsic value and price. Law and 
government are enacted. However, members of a society accept these 
securities as the price of the transaction, and the transaction takes place. 
Experts in Islamic law agree on the validity of the current currency 
(whether coins or banknotes) but differ in the quality of their value and tax. 
The current views can be divided into two groups and in general. 

 

D. Purchasing Power Theory 

The creator of this theory is Shahid Sadr, who considers the current money 
as a proverb whose proximity is not in the paper of banknotes and the 
number of units written on it,30 but as the proverb of money embodies the 

 
28  Ginevra Peruginelli & Sebastiano Faro, “Research Quality Evaluation: The Case of 

Legal Studies” in The Evaluation of Research in Social Sciences and Humanities (2018)  
at 103-129. 

29  Dodik Siswantoro, Rangga Handika & Aria F Mita, “The requirements of 
cryptocurrency for money, an Islamic view” (2020) 6:1 Heliyon. 

30  Abulfathi I S Al-hussaini, et al., "Factors Influencing Adoption of Cryptocurrency-
based Transaction from an Islamic Perspective" (2020) 20:4 Global Journal of 
Computer Science and Technology. 



175 | Indonesian Journal of Law and Society 

 

 

real price, and the real value of money is its purchase power. Some other 
scholars have expressed the same theory with different interpretations. For 
example, a banknote is something that a reputable authority has given tax 
credit and value, i.e., the legislator, in purchasing power.31 In other words, 
the whole universe is money in exchange value and purchasing power. 
Therefore, in monetary debt repayment, something of the same name is 
not considered a repayable alternative. The match is only equal to the same 
concept in terms of price, value, and tax. 

According to some civil rights scholars, banknotes, which are so popularly 
referred to as money, are not money but represent a certain amount of 
money and credit value. The truth of money is its exchange and credit 
value, and in monetary obligations, the same amount is owed to the person. 
If a person ten years ago was obliged to pay one million rials to another, 
today she/he must pay that amount to the creditor that the tax was 
equivalent to one million rials ten years ago. It is equal in terms of 
exchange value. 

 

E. Nominal Value Theory 

According to this view, credit money is no different in terms of money and 
the value of exchanges with real money. It exempts in terms of non-money, 
like consumption value. While the purchasing power is monetary, 
sometimes their value and purchasing power decrease in coins and silver. 
We must also believe in reparation, while none of the jurists has issued that 
fatwa.32 Therefore, the nature of money depends not on its purchasing 
power but the principle of exchange value and not its value, and the 
principle of exchange value is also a relative feature of money. In addition, 
if the purchasing power is the same as its actual exchange price, then 
financial money is not the same and should be considered a price 
commodity. In contrast, the jurists do not consider it a price commodity. 

In summarizing and comparing the above two theories, it should be said: 
Although each of them has some aspects of the reality of Rabian money, 

 
31  Siswantoro, Handika & Mita, supra note 29. 
32  Adam, supra note 1 at 133-147. 



176 | Legal Analysis of the Nature of Cyber Currency in Iran: A Comparison to EU Law 

 

 

each of them has some objections.33 The most important flaws of the theory 
of purchasing power are the confusion between the concepts of property 
and taxation and the confusion between the nature of money and the 
nature of religion and monetary commitment. 

In addition, the acceptance of the theory of purchasing power has legal 
implications and implications that the proponents of the theory themselves 
will not be bound. The theory of purchasing power has no jurisprudential 
or legal evidence for its claim, and the legal texts imply otherwise. In 
relations between the creditor and the debtor, especially concerning 
monetary obligations, as stated in Article 1895 of the French Civil Code 
and Article 650 of the Iranian Civil Code, the repayment of the agreed 
amount in monetary units is the subject of the debt, and the payment of 
this amount owes the debtor Makes berry.34 Many contemporary jurists also 
believe that the monetary obligation to pay the same amount (the same 
amount of banknotes) leads to the acquittal of liability. The decrease or 
increase in the purchasing power of money does not affect this ruling.  

In relations between issuers (central banks) and banknote holders, reducing 
purchasing power does not create civil liability for the issuer. The 
responsibility of governments is only political responsibility and 
accountability to parliament for overseeing affairs, and states guarantee the 
legal value of legal money and money. They are not purchasing power and, 
on the contrary, international regulations specify the non-responsibility of 
states for the devaluation and purchasing power of the national currency.35 
Regardless of theoretical issues, contemporary jurists have used the 
traditional concept of money as a criterion by standardizing customs in 

 
33  Nashirah Abu Bakar, Sofian Rosbi & Kiyozaki Uzaki, “Cryptocurrency Framework 

Diagnostics from Islamic Finance Perspective: A New Insight of Bitcoin System 
Transaction” (2017) 4:1 International Journal of Management Science and Business 
Administration at 19-28. 

34  Breu, supra note 8. 
35  As a change in the value of a currency is not a breach of international law, a state is 

not liable for its consequences on holders of its currency or on creditors or debtors to 
obligations denominated in that currency.   



177 | Indonesian Journal of Law and Society 

 

 

explaining and recognizing issues.36 Although the price of other things is 
measured in money, the money itself is a parable, and the guarantee is a 
parable. The price of a banknote does not fall short of what is set for it. A 
thousand dollar bill is never nine hundred dollars and is always the same as 
a thousand dollars without decreasing purchasing power.37  

However, the difference between the currencies in any legal monetary 
system with banknotes or coins denoting a number or fraction of that 
currency is clear, and banknotes are casually referred to as money. It is not 
money and rather, it represents a quantity of money and credit value, and 
the truth of money is its exchange and credit value. Some certain facts of 
money have been ignored. According to this theory, the ownership of 
money as an object of economic value and taxation is eliminated, while 
money is purely taxed.38 Acceptance of such a theory in Imami 
jurisprudence, which distinguishes between the concepts of wealth and tax, 
is not acceptable. The distinction between the concept of wealth and 
taxation and the duality of the two is a matter of custom. 

Banknotes and coins are indeed a monetary symbol or, in our view, a 
monetary document representing a certain amount of money. However, the 
custom and wisdom of the wise considered these objects as property and 
gave them tax and economic value because of their exchange power. Hence, 
in the legal literature today, legal tender money (banknotes and coins) is 
considered a property of its nature. Given the custom nature of the concept 
of property, such a description of common currencies in different systems 
of money and movable property is quite acceptable considering that it has 
all the characteristics of movable property. In jurisprudential literature, it is 
almost complete or almost complete.39 They consider cash as property and 

 
36   Paul Anning, Stuart Hoegner & Jerry Brito, The Law of Bitcoin (Bloomington: 

iUniverse, 2015). 
37  Adam, supra note 19. 
38  Mustapha Abubakar, M Kabir Hassan & Muhammad A Haruna, “Cryptocurrency 

tide and Islamic finance development: any issue?” 
39  Mohd Ma’Sum Billah, Islamic Financial Products: Principles, Instruments and 

Structures (Palgrave Macmillan, 2019) at 413–434. 



178 | Legal Analysis of the Nature of Cyber Currency in Iran: A Comparison to EU Law 

 

 

apply all property rulings to guarantee loss and usurpation and consider 
them as property and not as a sign of property. 

 

IV. CONCEPTUALIZING CYBER CURRENCY AS MONEY 

If e-money is a new form of money in the true sense of the word, it must 
have the basic characteristics of money, and the nature of money in the 
legal analysis must apply to it. Electronic money can perform a common 
currency's economic functions and duties and have desirable monetary 
characteristics such as anonymity, portability, durability, divisibility, 
uniformity, and uniformity. From a legal point of view, the fundamental 
and debatable issues regarding e-money in comparison and comparison 
with the legal tender are mainly two things: the ability and value of the 
exchanges to be used as a general means of payment and its units to be 
included in a monetary document. Act as common currency as a means of 
storing value. 

 

A. Electronic Money as a Means of Payment and Its Exchange Value 

Electronic money in its current state is the result of an exchange. In a 
technical and contractual process, the publisher produces an electronic 
mark as electronic money and in exchange for the receipt of the equivalent 
amount of the applicant. An electronic money issuer Unlike a legal money 
issuer, one does not create money but exchanges electronic signs describing 
electronic money with legal money at the applicant's disposal. Based on this 
fact, e-money publishers commit to repurchase the exchanged e-money and 
instead pay the equivalent to the e-money holders. Thus, electronic money 
is the product of agreement and is exchanged for legal money at the 
beginning and end of its life cycle.40 Ensuring that the holder can convert 
the electronic monetary value back into banknotes increases public 
confidence in e-money as an effective and reliable alternative to coins and 

 
40  Stephan Breu & C Paterson, “Blockchains and cyber currencies challenging antitrust 

and competition law” (2019) Law, Ethics Society: Historical Contemporary 
Perspectives at 205-215. 



179 | Indonesian Journal of Law and Society 

 

 

banknotes. However, there is no legal redemption capacity in the currency, 
and there is no such obligation for the issuer (central bank). 

Businesses accepting electronic money receive the required electronic value 
of the transaction price from the consumer in exchange for the goods or 
services provided to the consumer41, and thus sellers based on the 
acquisition of electronic monetary units. The electronic or computer 
memory of the buyer is transmitted and registered in their system. 
However, concerning the buyer, it is assumed that the transaction price has 
been paid. Then, the electronic monetary value is considered as a means of 
payment. The buyer's obligation to pay the price is nullified. Because of 
this feature, one electron coin should be considered an alternative to legal 
tender (banknotes).42 Electronic money is available like a banknote and 
makes payment possible. Payment by electronic money does not require a 
connection to a bank account and funds transfer from one account to 
another. Like banknotes, it makes it possible to pay the price, except that 
the banknote's power is a valid tax due to tax credit. The means of payment 
is electronic money based on the agreement between the buyer and the 
seller and based on the publisher's commitment to repay it. 

According to what we have already said in explaining the nature of legal 
tender, today's banknotes are movable by their very nature. They have 
exchanged for the transaction themselves, and by handing them over to the 
seller of the goods or services, the cash is exchanged, and final payment is 
made. Nevertheless, do the e-currencies exchanged between e-wallet 
holders and sellers have such a legal nature and function? If electronic 
currencies are considered one of the exchanges and the subject of exchange, 
they must be property in themselves and not be considered money.43 
Assuming they are property, they are either movable property or intangible 
property. In the first case, we are against the assumption. Electronic 
monetary units cannot be classified as tangible property because they have 

 
41  Mark E Burge, “Apple pay, bitcoin, and consumers: the ABCs of future public 

payments law” (2015) 67 Hastings LJ at 1493. 
42  Eric D Chason, “How bitcoin functions as property law” (2019) 49 Seton Hall L 

Rev at 129. 
43  Joshua AT Fairfield, “Smart contracts, Bitcoin bots, and consumer protection” 

(2014) 71 Wash & Lee L Rev Online at 35. 



180 | Legal Analysis of the Nature of Cyber Currency in Iran: A Comparison to EU Law 

 

 

no physical or physical form. Furthermore, there is no doubt that they are 
immaterial and intangible. 

At present, when the issuers of electronic money are financial institutions 
and commercial banks. Electronic money has not gained the same 
economic and legal status as legal tender (banknotes and coins). 
Simultaneously, the publisher's obligation to repay it and convert it into 
legal tender or hard currency Electronic money and its legal requirements. 
Acceptance of e-money by businesses is also based on the feature that the 
transferee (current holder) can also demand a refund from the 
publisher.44From the point of view of the Roman jurist, electronic money 
implies a claim or a religious or personal right. It raises the question of 
whether electronic money is intangible property that one owes a claim to it 
and is it continuously? Or is it just a claim against the publisher? 

The fact is that e-money has no independent value other than the value-
seeking reflected in the common amount of money. Because the publisher 
does not want or convert these electronic units into legal or bank currency, 
no trader or seller will accept them and have no exchange value. Thus, e-
money issued by commercial banks and financial institutions with legal 
tender issued by central banks has this inherent difference: it is not 
considered movable in itself and taxed by the creditor. It is legal or written. 
Electronic money can be a means of payment, but its mechanism of action 
is quite different from legal money (banknotes and coins). Payment by 
electronic money is based on the transfer request to the seller (i.e., the 
transferee of one electron money) with the feature that the issuer usually 
does not recognize the new creditor until the creditor converts the 
electronic units from legal tender or currency.  

However, the above analysis does not prevent money from being 
considered electronic money. The bottom line is that e-money is not a 
non-repayable or non-repayable currency like the current currency of the 
issuer. However, it can be a type of money that can be converted into a 

 
44  Angela SM Irwin & Adam B Turner, “Illicit Bitcoin transactions: challenges in 

getting to the who, what, when and where” (2018) Journal of Money Laundering 
Control. 



181 | Indonesian Journal of Law and Society 

 

 

generation of paper money that can be converted or pledged. The sub-
currency of money is not convertibility or non-conversion. However, its 
exchangeability and acceptance are the prices of a transaction.  

It should be added that today there are electronic payment schemes 
available to customers in anchors or e-wallets with the ability to recharge or 
without it by some economic enterprises that are only in non-real 
exchanges.45 Its services can be used. (Like telephone cards and cards of 
metro companies) These schemes do not provide e-money in their sense. 
Rather, they are merely an advance payment mechanism. 

 

B. Electronic Money as a Monetary Document 

At present, money in common units is contained in three instruments or 
monetary documents: coins and banknotes, and bank accounts (writing 
money). These three monetary instruments are of exchange value and can 
act as a means of storing value. Individuals usually maintain a portion of 
their assets, which is interpreted as a person's cash assets. 

According to the analysis, e-money does not know Rapol. However, it is 
considered a monetary obligation, and e-money lacks the characteristic of 
being an instrument or a monetary document and can be considered a 
monetary commitment document. The distinction between the two is also 
clear. A monetary deed has a tangible property and the exchange value and 
power of fulfilling the religion. However, a monetary commitment deed is 
not tangible property and is considered a property reflected in that 
property.46 It is transferable. In other words, the delivery or transfer of a 
monetary commitment document can act as a means of repaying and 
paying in another transaction if accompanied by a transfer request. 
However, electronic money is not considered a kind of money in the sense 
of convertible money, and it is similar to previous banknotes. An electronic 
document containing monetary value can be interpreted as a document and 

 
45  Alexander Kroeger & Asani Sarkar, “The law of one bitcoin price?” (2017) Federal 

Reserve Bank of Philadelphia. 
46  Kusuma Teddy, “Cryptocurrency for Commodity Futures Trade in Indonesia: 

Perspective of Islamic Law” (2020) 37:1 Journal of Islamic Banking & Finance. 



182 | Legal Analysis of the Nature of Cyber Currency in Iran: A Comparison to EU Law 

 

 

monetary instrument because the demand is embodied and objectified in 
the self-document. 

 

V. CYBER DEPOSIT 

Banknotes and coins are not the only documents and tools for maintaining 
monetary units. Economists have realized over time that the assets of 
individuals' bank accounts are also money because they have the same legal 
functions. The balance of a bank account indicates the amount of money, 
i.e., a certain amount of monetary units (USD 1,000, for example), 
independent of the monetary documents that contain it (for example, 
twenty dollar bills). It is independent of claims that act as a means of 
payment and transfer in business (such as checks).47  Thus, bank money is 
an amount of money that is registered in a bank account. It is transferred 
from one account to another through a non-cash payment device, such as a 
check. In other words, the term bank or written money has various 
documents such as checks, bank cards, and credit transfers (L/C) that allow 
the circulation of writing money. In the legal analysis of the relationship 
between the depositor and the bank, the bank owns bank (current) and 
savings bank deposits. The bank is obliged to repay the deposit amount to 
the account holder(The nominal value of the deposited units). For this 
reason, the bank can use the funds it has received and take ownership of 
them. 

The use of non-cash means of payment, such as a check, is the transfer of 
an account holder's order to pay all or part of the account balance or its 
transfer to the beneficiary's account. Therefore, even if the bank confirms 
the check, the funds are not transferred. However, only the money transfer 
mechanism of the issuer is withdrawn from the bank. In French 
jurisprudence and following Article 62 of the Czech Rules of Procedure, 
the issuance of a check is effected if an impossible bank pays the check and 

 
47  Jon Truby, “Decarbonizing Bitcoin: Law and policy choices for reducing the energy 

consumption of Blockchain technologies and digital currencies” (2018) 44 Energy 
research & social science at 399-410. 



183 | Indonesian Journal of Law and Society 

 

 

if the bank imposes the funds on another bank account.48 The bank does 
not transfer a claim or religious right but transfers an amount of money 
(i.e., units of common currency) recorded in the beneficiary's account. Bank 
money or writing is a form of money because it is a reserve of value (units 
of common currency) that can be transferred from one account to another 
and act as a means of payment in transactions. 

 

A. Applying the Nature of Written Money to Electronic Money 

Electronic money schemes have several significant differences from the 
conventional bank deposit system. First, the funds that the publisher first 
receives in exchange for the issuance of electronic money are not recorded 
to a specific bearer. Its repayment is not necessarily to a specific person. 
Although some legal writers do not consider this difference significant and 
believe that financial institutions should account for customer deposits, 
they do not have a duty to record it in their offices.49 An electronic money 
storage card is like a savings account in which the customer's account 
balance is recorded and is owned by the customer. 

Second, if the holder uses electronic money, payment requires immediate 
change and reduction of their e-wallet inventory and the increase of the 
accepting device (seller).50 However, in the payment of the bank account 
balance (i.e., payment with written money), the payment is made by check 
or bank card of the buyer, the payment is made in the form of funds 
transfer, and the buyer's account owes the desired amount and the seller's 
account.  

Bank accounts assume the role of a monetary document. However, unlike 
other monetary instruments, such as banknotes and coins, they do not 
cause the circulation and circulation of common units. Bono shooter points 

 
48  Ben Van Vliet, “An alternative model of Metcalfe’s Law for valuing Bitcoin” (2018) 

165 Economics Letters at 70-72. 
49  Spencer Wheatley, et al., "Are Bitcoin bubbles predictable? Combining a generalized 

Metcalfe's law and the log-periodic power law singularity model" (2019) 6:6 Royal 
Society open science. 

50  Lawrence J Trautman, “Bitcoin, virtual currencies, and the struggle of law and 
regulation to keep the peace” (2018) 102 Marq L Rev at 447. 



184 | Legal Analysis of the Nature of Cyber Currency in Iran: A Comparison to EU Law 

 

 

out, unlike banknotes and coins, which are both monetary documents and 
coins. They are also a means of payment; writing money is just money and 
not a means of payment.51 Payment by written or banknotes is possible with 
the help of payment instruments such as checks and bank cards. These 
devices make the payment by accessing the account holder's bank (based on 
the transfer of funds to the creditor's account) through a double exchange 
(debiting the payer's account and settling the payer's account). 

E-money is quite the opposite. Electronic money is not considered a 
monetary document. However, it is a means of payment, and as mentioned, 
this payment does not require the transfer of funds from one person's 
account to another. While from the buyer's point of view, final payment 
has been made by handing over electronic money to the seller, or more 
precisely, by transferring electronic units from the buyer's card to the 
seller's system. However, according to the publisher, no money transfer has 
taken place between the buyer and seller. In a single (aggregate) account, 
the electronic money issuer records all the monetary amounts received in 
exchange for the issued electronic units. Transferring electronic money 
from the buyer to the seller does not change the issuer's debit balance. In 
an e-money payment system, a transfer of money occurs when the seller 
(the e-money accepting firm) asks the issuer to convert the electronic units 
he accepted at the time of payment into legal or written money. 

 Although the aggregate account of the electronic money issuer acts as a 
store of value, the electronic units are not considered property in 
themselves. They merely represent the claimants' claim against the account. 
Therefore, they are not a new form of monetary instrument and are merely 
a new means of payment. Therefore, due to the significant differences 
between one electron coin and written money (bank deposits) and the 
mechanism of action of the two, it is somewhat theoretically difficult to 
apply the nature of written money to electronic money. 

 
51  Matthew P Ponsford, “A comparative analysis of bitcoin and other decentralized 

virtual currencies: legal regulation in the People’s Republic of China, Canada, and 
the United States” (2015) 9 HKJ Legal Stud at 29. 



185 | Indonesian Journal of Law and Society 

 

 

In the case law, there is also a difference of opinion whether electronic 
money is of the nature of a deposit as subject to their regulations or a 
different nature. Therefore, it is considered a general obligation money-
issuing institution other than a deposit. In ECB Regulation 2001/13, the 
amount owed by the issuer in respect of issued electronic money is 
classified as deposit liabilities. However, in US federal regulations, the 
value stored in e-wallet smart cards is considered a general obligation, not a 
deposit.52 The importance of this description lies in the fact that in addition 
to making the issuance of e-money by non-banking institutions possible 
and excluding the proceeds from the rules and requirements of bank 
deposits. It also determines the legal nature of some legal writers who have 
likened online e-money only to a debit card or a debit card in a plan that 
allows access to the account holder.53Some writings have used online e-
money schemes as a form of cash and not a kind of deposit. 

However, if the funds that electronic money holders pay to publishers are a 
kind of deposit, and electronic tokens are tools that, firstly, are the reason 
and evidence of the funds deposited in favor of the holder and, secondly, 
have the means and tools to do so. Instead, the repayment of the funds 
deposited with the issuer to the holder has transferred the electronic 
monetary sign. Functional electronic signs are like checks, in which the 
holder can return some or all of the funds deposited with the publisher or 
transfer them to another. (Article 310 of the Iranian Commercial Code) 
Some authors believe that the electronic money bag is like a savings 
account.54 When a customer wants to buy goods from a merchant, he 
presents the savings ledger to the merchant (as a representative and 
trustee), and he deducts an amount from the ledger and adds the same 
amount to his ledger credit. 

 The above analysis is acceptable to the extent that the electronic money 
issuer of banks and financial and credit institutions and the relevant 

 
52  Max Kubat, “Virtual currency bitcoin in the scope of money definition and store of 

value” (2015) 30 Procedia Economics and Finance at 409-416. 
53  Filka C Windiastuti & Fauzul H N Athief, “Inacoin cryptocurrency analysis: an 

Islamic law perspective” (2019) 2:2 Journal of Islamic Economic Laws at 152-177. 
54  Mohamad Roshan, Mostafa Mozafari & Hanieh Mirzayi, “Jurisprudential and law 

Investigation into Bitcoins” (2019) 22:87 Journal of Law Research at 49-78. 



186 | Legal Analysis of the Nature of Cyber Currency in Iran: A Comparison to EU Law 

 

 

account is subject to the regulatory regulations of the Central Bank. 
Because despite the mentioned differences, it performs the functions and 
duties of bank money. If payment instruments, i.e., electronic signs, are 
significantly different from checks. First, checks are non-cash means of 
payment, but it is assumed that electronic money is a primary means of 
payment. Second, the ownership of electronic money, like a banknote, is 
subject to the rule, and its possession is the reason for the owner. Usually, 
the issuer is not responsible for its loss or theft, and the real holder of the 
stolen electronic money card cannot be returned to the publisher.  In 
contrast, the loss of an ordinary check does not deprive the holder of his 
legal right. He can receive the amount by using the provisions related to 
the loss of the check (Article 14 of the Penal Code and Article 314 of the 
Code of Criminal Procedure). Despite the differences of opinion that exist 
in different legal systems about the need for clear ownership of the check 
and limited transfer of its ownership,55 electronic money does not need to 
have a material aspect, and with the transfer of electronic bits, the 
ownership of the money passes to the new holder. 

 

B. Non-monetary Theories in Analyzing the Nature of Electronic Money 

According to the views that give electronic money a non-monetary nature, 
e-money is a claim against money in its legal analysis. These claims and 
claims are transmitted from one intermediary to another, from one 
electronic instrument to another, until they are converted and repaid by the 
publisher into legal tender. 

It may be argued that e-money is the issuer's electronic document of 
transferability and obligation, and the holder can use it in his exchanges as 
a means of fulfilling an obligation, and according to the prevailing legal 
system, by using the same legal establishment. Assignment of the right 
(demand), remittance, sale, or peace of religion, transfer it to the 
transaction. However, the interpretation of e-money as a simple religion 

 
55  Navabpour Alireza, Yousefi Ahmad Ali & Talebi Mohammad, “Jurisprudential 

Analysis of Cryptocurrencies’ Functions-Case Study of Bitcoin” (2019) 18:72 213–
243 at 213–243. 



187 | Indonesian Journal of Law and Society 

 

 

and demand and its transfer in the traditional forms of the law of 
obligations is logical and true to its purpose. It makes its transfer subject to 
the procedures of assignment of students other than similar institutions in 
civil law. It also opens the door to objections and defenses related to the 
legal relationship between the claim contained in the electronic money and 
the underlying contract. In addition, such an approach deprives e-money of 
its legal benefits and economic functions as an instant and quasi-monetary 
means of payment. Therefore, any legal analysis and interpretation of this 
phenomenon should be made to achieve its practical goals. 

 

C. Analysis of Electronic Money as a Document in the Face of a Digital Carrier 

A "document in the form of a carrier" is a piece of paper or writing under 
which the issuer undertakes to pay a certain amount to any person who 
seizes and delivers it in a certain promise or upon request. The relationship 
of documents in the form of the carrier with commercial documents in the 
specific sense, general and specific, is modal. In our law, bonds and 
participation bonds are also examples of bearer documents. 

The document has several features in terms of legal status. Article 320 of 
the Commercial Code of Iran outlined that the possessor of the document 
is the owner of the document and the holder of the right to be listed in it 
unless proven otherwise. The current document, such as commercial 
documents, is itself a representative and the reason for employment is the 
signatory. The holder does not need any other reason to prove his claim. 
Except in cases where the competent judicial authority or the police 
prohibit the payment of that document, the payment to the bearer shall 
release the debtor. In case of loss of the document, the creditor and the real 
holder of the document can demand his claim from the debtor through the 
legal formalities (Articles 322 to 333 of the Iranian Commercial Code). 
Except in the case of a decree invalidating a document issued by a 
competent court, the debtor shall not be obliged to pay the document in 
the name of the bearer, except in return for obtaining a document or a 
court order to deposit the same amount in the box of justice (Article 331 of 
Iranian Commercial Code). Documents as portable have the description of 



188 | Legal Analysis of the Nature of Cyber Currency in Iran: A Comparison to EU Law 

 

 

transferability. Their transfer to third parties is without formalities. It 
enables the holder to transfer it to another with a receipt and contract in a 
simple process and following the provisions of the Commercial Code. In 
addition to what is specified in the relevant regulations regarding 
commercial documents on the bearer's side. In some systems, the judicial 
procedure has applied the principle of not paying attention to the 
objections against the holder in good faith regarding all the documents on 
the bearer's side.56 Due to this principle, the publishers cannot present the 
objections and defenses related to his relationship with the original holder 
of the document to the successive holders because they have promised to 
pay it to each holder. With the lack of endorsement of the document and 
its transfer by receipt and contract, the transferor of the document has 
limits. It has neither obligation nor responsibility in case of non-payment 
of the document nor debts and bankruptcy of the document's issuer. 
Otherwise, he has secured the back of the document as a guarantor. 

However, in most national systems and international regulations, the 
positive value of message data is accepted. Whenever there is a text 
required by law, the message data is written in the sentence. Some legal 
analysts believe that something is more than a simple request and should be 
classified as a document in the carrier's face because electronic units 
represent all the documents in the carrier's face that are inserted in an 
electronic medium and have the effect of completing the transaction. 
According to this view, e-money, in addition to having the characteristics 
mentioned in the documents, has the power to act and, by transferring it to 
the next person, causes the debt of the transferor of the electronic money to 
be paid to the transferee.  

Regarding the relationship between the electronic money holder and the 
publisher, its analysis as a document in the carrier's face can be rooted in 
the contract between the publisher and the first holder. Electronic money is 
an anonymous document in which the creditor's name is not mentioned in 
this analysis. The publisher, as the debtor, undertakes to pay the amount to 

 
56  Mohammad Mahdi Soleymanipour, Hamed Sultaninejad & Pourmotahar Mahdi, 

“Jurisprudential Investigation into Virtual Money” (2017) 6:2 Islamic Finance 
Research Bi-quarterly Journal. At 167-192. 



189 | Indonesian Journal of Law and Society 

 

 

the holder of the document upon request. Such an obligation as a general 
holder is described as an obligation in favor of a third party in the original 
contract. Contracts will largely determine the rules and regulations 
governing this new anonymous document concluded between the issuer 
and the holder, the issuer and the commercial accepting companies, the 
issuer and the intermediary banks, and the clearing and settlement 
institutions.57 This digital document is not subject to the specific provisions 
of the Commercial Code and is not governed by the provisions of bill, 
promissory note, and check. However, the question arises as to whether the 
mere submission of the e-money and its transfer to the functional seller acts 
as a cash price and is considered a final payment.58 If the answer is yes, how 
is this process legally analyzed and according to the description of 
electronic money as a document in the carrier's status, and under what 
conditions does it break the buyer's obligation to pay the price? 

Some French legal writers believe that payment by depositing a claim does 
not invalidate the debtor's debt. For this type of payment to achieve the full 
and final performance of the obligation, the creditor must agree that the 
first claimant must be considered fulfilled. This follows from the provisions 
of Article 1275 of the French Civil Code, which states: In the 
representation and assignment by which the obligor introduces another 
obligor as the obligor and obliges the latter obligee against the obligor, the 
obligation does not become the obligation. It explicitly states that Ebra, the 
obligor who made this transfer, intended. Thus, the fall of the buyer's 
obligation to the seller is subject to the declaration of the seller's will and 
intention in this regard.59 Doubt in this regard is how the seller must 
express his intention to inform the buyer. Some commentators on French 
civil law believe that this intention should be explicitly stated and implicit. 

Other commentators believe that there is no valid reason for such a 
condition and that the implicit intention must be considered sufficient, 

 
57  Ibid at 167-192. 
58  Reza Mirzakhani & Hosein Ali Sa’adi, “Bitcoin and the Financial-Legal Nature of 

Digital Money” (2018) 15:30 Journal of Iran’s Economic Essays at 71-92. 
59  Ibid. 



190 | Legal Analysis of the Nature of Cyber Currency in Iran: A Comparison to EU Law 

 

 

provided it is definite and certain.60 If the agreements concluded between 
the issuer and the e-money accepting firms include conditions for the full 
and final fulfillment of the buyer's obligation, it can be a sufficient reason 
for the e-money acceptor's intention to issue it. 

According to the rules of Iranian law, this payment process does not 
require the completion of the formalities mentioned above, and the holder 
of the electronic money can make the request reflected in it (which is 
considered the publisher's religion) in exchange for receiving goods or 
services in the form of a contract of sale or peace. Or exchange service 
provider. Given that the buyer's claim for the entire property is the 
responsibility of the issuer, the said exchange is subject to the buyer being 
the same or as a buyer, and if it is generally the responsibility of the seller, 
with the suspicion of invalidity of the sale of the goods to the whole. There 
will be an Imam in jurisprudence. However, some scholars consider the sale 
of goods invalid if it requires the exchange of religion for religion. 
Therefore, the analysis of the nature of electronic money in the form of a 
document in the form of a carrier with the characteristics mentioned above, 
features, and limitations, despite its relative desirability, makes the function 
of electronic money as a means of cash payment difficult in at least some 
cases. 

 

D. Analysis of Electronic Money as a Traveler's Check 

Electronic money is not a payment method associated with the holder's 
bank account and therefore is not a non-cash means of payment like a 
check. Its owners generally do not have an account with the publisher. 
From the point of view of some researchers, the payment system is 
different from banknotes and different from bank accounts and traveler's 
checks because the method of issuance and its function is the same as a 
traveler's check. An amount of money is given to the issuer and issuer, 
which is the bank and the credit institution, in exchange for which a 
document and a tool are issued and placed at the disposal of the holder, 

 
60  Asghar Mahmoudi, “A Comparative Analysis of Crypto-Currencies in the Light of 

Jurisprudence and Law” (2019) 49:3 Law Quarterly at 503-522. 



191 | Indonesian Journal of Law and Society 

 

 

which can be used to pay for goods and services obtained from commercial 
enterprises. 

Accordingly, e-money has the same function and nature as a traveler's 
check, which gives the holder the means to pay for the goods or services 
required and the issuer an obligation to repay the amount defined in it to 
anyone who submits the card.61 In addition, a traveler's check generally 
contains a receipt based on which it can be freely circulated and transferred 
without the need for formal formalities. Some authors distinguish between 
different electronic money schemes and consider its offline type as a 
traveler's check and its online type as a debit or debit card. In analyzing the 
legal nature of traveler's checks, this is a positive payment instrument, 
embodied and crystallized in the document. It is called check and quasi-
money. In the case of e-money analysis as a traveler's check, its issuance 
and circulation in many legal systems will face the relevant legal 
restrictions. 

 

E. Analysis of Electronic Money as the Nature of Special Rights 

Unlike a traveler check, e-money is an anonymous document contained in a 
microchip and not a paper medium. Thus, e-money is inherently 
transferable securities, and, like other anonymous securities, its tax is 
embodied and documented in the document or the sign. Nevertheless, 
some authors believe that electronic money is an electronic document that 
has its nature and also exists. The immaterialization of a pre-existing paper 
document (such as a traveler check) is not.62 However, this view does not 
provide a clear analysis of the specific legal nature of the application. 
Contrary to the above view, it is sometimes said that electronic money does 
not have a special legal nature. Its electronic component only provides a 
way to record information and send messages.63 From this point of view, 

 
61  Soleymanipour, Sultaninejad & Mahdi, supra note 56 at 167-192. 
62  Morteza Chitsazian & Zahra Khorsandi, “Digital Currencies from the Perspective of 

Jurisprudence and Law” (2021) 8:3 International Journal of Multicultural and 
Multireligious Understanding. At 88-96. 

63  Al-hussaini et al, supra note 30. 



192 | Legal Analysis of the Nature of Cyber Currency in Iran: A Comparison to EU Law 

 

 

electronic money is not a new nature that requires the invention of new 
legal rules and easily fits into existing legal frameworks. 

 

VI. CONCLUSION 

Electronic money emerges different from electronic methods of 
transferring funds. In analyzing the legal nature of this phenomenon, two 
different approaches can be adopted. The first approach is to analyze the 
nature of electronic money as a kind of money. Based on the views 
presented on the nature of money presented and reviewed in this study, 
describing the nature of electronic money as a type of money does not seem 
so difficult.  

Given the literature and theories in this field, two main approaches have 
been classified.  The first one is monetary theories which consider e-money 
as something with the natural value same as the traditional value money 
has, and it can be considered under current financial and monetary 
legislation. However, the second approach considers the non-monetary 
theories and states that the traditional monetary legislation cannot be 
applied to many legal cases related to e-money transactions. It suggests that 
a hybrid financial market competitive monetary legislation must be 
established for e-money cases. Therefore, the second approach is the most 
effective, and e-money needs to be considered a separate monetary system 
with unique legislation. 

 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

None. 

 

REFERENCES 

Abubakar, Mustapha, M Kabir Hassan & Muhammad A Haruna, 
“Cryptocurrency tide and Islamic finance development: any issue?” 

Adam, Faraz, “Fatawa Analysis of Bitcoin” in Halal Cryptocurrency 
Management (Palgrave Macmillan, 2019). 



193 | Indonesian Journal of Law and Society 

 

 

Adam, Mufti Faraz & Mufti A K Barkatulla, “Currency in Islamic Law: A 
Sharī’ ah analysis of bitcoin” in Fintech In Islamic Financ (Routledge, 
2019). 

Adam, Mufti F, “Bitcoin: shariah compliant” (2017) Amanah Finance 
Consultancy 2017. 

Al-hussaini, Abulfathi I S, et al., "Factors Influencing Adoption of 
Cryptocurrency-based Transaction from an Islamic Perspective” 
(2020) 20:4 Global Journal of Computer Science and Technology. 

Alireza, Navabpour, Yousefi Ahmad Ali & Talebi Mohammad, 
“Jurisprudential Analysis of Cryptocurrencies’ Functions-Case Study 
of Bitcoin” (2019) 18:72 213–243. 

Anning, Paul, Stuart Hoegner & Jerry Brito, The Law of Bitcoin 
(Bloomington: iUniverse, 2015). 

Bakar, Nashirah Abu, Sofian Rosbi & Kiyozaki Uzaki, “Cryptocurrency 
Framework Diagnostics from Islamic Finance Perspective: A New 
Insight of Bitcoin System Transaction” (2017) 4:1 International 
Journal of Management Science and Business Administration. 

Begusic, Stjepan, et al., "Scaling properties of extreme price fluctuations in 
Bitcoin markets" (2018) 510 Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its 
Applications. 

Billah, Mohd Ma’Sum, Islamic Financial Products: Principles, Instruments 
and Structures (Palgrave Macmillan, 2019). 

Breu, Stephan, “Are Blockchains and Cybercurrencies Demanding a New 
Legislative Framework” (2018) 1 Journal Law and Digital Economy. 

Breu, Stephan & C Paterson, “Blockchains and cyber currencies 
challenging antitrust and competition law” (2019) Law, Ethics 
Society: Historical Contemporary Perspectives. 

Burge, Mark E, “Apple pay, bitcoin, and consumers: the ABCs of future 
public payments law” (2015) 67 Hastings LJ. 

Chason, Eric D, “How bitcoin functions as property law” (2019) 49 Seton 
Hall L Rev. 



194 | Legal Analysis of the Nature of Cyber Currency in Iran: A Comparison to EU Law 

 

 

Chitsazian, Morteza & Zahra Khorsandi, “Digital Currencies from the 
Perspective of Jurisprudence and Law” (2021) 8:3 International 
Journal of Multicultural and Multireligious Understanding. 

Fairfield, Joshua AT, “Smart contracts, Bitcoin bots, and consumer 
protection” (2014) 71 Wash & Lee L Rev Online. 

Farrukh, Habib, “Fintech, Digital Currency and the Future of Islamic 
Finance” in A Critical Analysis of Bitcoin from Islamic Legal Perspective 
(Palgrave Macmillan, 2021). 

Greebel, Evan L et al, “Recent key Bitcoin and virtual currency regulatory 
and law enforcement developments” (2015) 16:1 Journal of 
Investment Compliance. 

Hassan, M Kabir, Mohammad S Karim & Aishath Muneezac, “A 
Conventional and Sharīʿah Analysis of Bitcoin” (2020) 35:1–2 Arab 
Law Quarterly. 

Holub, Mark & Jackie Johnson, “Bitcoin research across disciplines” (2018) 
34 The Information Society. 

Irwin, Angela SM & Caitlin Dawson, “Following the cyber money trail: 
global challenges when investigating ransomware attacks and how 
regulation can help” (2019) 22:2 Journal of Money Laundering 
Control. 

Irwin, Angela SM & Adam B Turner, “Illicit Bitcoin transactions: 
challenges in getting to the who, what, when and where” (2018) 
Journal of Money Laundering Control. 

Kaal, Wulf A, “Decentralization-Past, Present, and Future” (2019) 19–23 
U of St Thomas (Minnesota) Legal Studies Research Paper. 

Kroeger, Alexander & Asani Sarkar, “The Law of One Bitcoin Price?” 
(2017) Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia. 

Kubat, Max, “Virtual currency bitcoin in the scope of money definition and 
store of value” (2015) 30 Procedia Economics and Finance. 

Mahmoudi, Asghar, “A Comparative Analysis of Crypto-currencies in the 
Light of Jurisprudence and Law” (2019) 49:3 Law Quarterly. 



195 | Indonesian Journal of Law and Society 

 

 

Manimuthu, A, et al., “A Literature Review on Bitcoin: Transformation of 
Crypto Currency Into a Global Phenomenon” (2019) IEEE 
Engineering Management Review. 

McGinnis, John O & Kyle Roche, “Bitcoin: Order without law in the 
digital age” (2019) 94 Ind LJ. 

Mengjia, Y. U. "Analysis of Impact and Nature of Cyber Virtual Currency 
Based QB." (2014) Business Economy. 

Mirakhor, Abbas, Iqbal Zamir & Seyed K Sadr, Handbook of Ethics of 
Islamic Economics and Finance (Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG, 
2020). 

Mirzakhani, Reza & Hosein Ali Sa’adi, “Bitcoin and the Financial-Legal 
Nature of Digital Money” (2018) 15:30 Journal of Iran’s Economic 
Essays. 

Nafis, Alam, Lokesh Gupta & Zameni Abdolhossein, “Cryptocurrency and 
Islamic Finance” in Fintech and Islamic Finance (Palgrave Macmillan, 
2019). 

Nurhisam, Luqman, “Bitcoin: Islamic law perspective” (2017) 5:2 Qudus 
International Journal of Islamic Studies. 

Ortolani, Pietro, “Self-enforcing online dispute resolution: lessons from 
bitcoin” (2016) 36:3 Oxford Journal of Legal Studies. 

Peruginelli, Ginevra & Sebastiano Faro, “Research Quality Evaluation: 
The Case of Legal Studies” in The Evaluation of Research in Social 
Sciences and Humanities (2018). 

Ponsford, Matthew P, “A comparative analysis of bitcoin and other 
decentralized virtual currencies: legal regulation in the People’s 
Republic of China, Canada, and the United States” (2015) 9 HKJ 
Legal Stud. 

Roshan, Mohamad, Mostafa Mozafari & Hanieh Mirzayi, “Jurisprudential 
and law Investigation into Bitcoins” (2019) 22:87 Journal of Law 
Research. 

Siswantoro, Dodik, Rangga Handika & Aria F Mita, “The requirements of 
cryptocurrency for money, an Islamic view” (2020) 6:1 Heliyon. 



196 | Legal Analysis of the Nature of Cyber Currency in Iran: A Comparison to EU Law 

 

 

Soleymanipour, Mohammad Mahdi, Hamed Sultaninejad & Pourmotahar 
Mahdi, “Jurisprudential Investigation into Virtual Money” (2017) 6:2 
Islamic Finance Research Bi-quarterly Journal. 

Teddy, Kusuma, “Cryptocurrency for Commodity Futures Trade in 
Indonesia: Perspective of Islamic Law” (2020) 37:1 Journal of Islamic 
Banking & Finance. 

Trautman, Lawrence J, “Bitcoin, virtual currencies, and the struggle of law 
and regulation to keep the peace” (2018) 102 Marq L Rev. 

Truby, Jon, “Decarbonizing Bitcoin: Law and policy choices for reducing 
the energy consumption of Blockchain technologies and digital 
currencies” (2018) 44 Energy research & social science. 

Van Vliet, Ben, “An alternative model of Metcalfe’s Law for valuing 
Bitcoin” (2018) 165 Economics Letters. 

Wheatley, Spencer et al, “Are Bitcoin bubbles predictable? Combining a 
generalized Metcalfe’s law and the log-periodic power law singularity 
model” (2019) 6:6 Royal Society open science. 

Windiastuti, Filka C & Fauzul H N Athief, “Inacoin cryptocurrency 
analysis: an Islamic law perspective” (2019) 2:2 Journal of Islamic 
Economic Laws. 

Yang, Ruoke, “When is Bitcoin a security under US securities law” (2013) 
18 J Tech L & Pol’y. 

Zharova, Anna & Ian Lloyd, “An examination of the experience of 
cryptocurrency use in Russia. In search of better practice” (2018) 34:6 
Computer Law & Security Review 1300–1313.