Possession, Ownership, and Asset Segregation in Gold-Backed Digital Assets under Islamic Law and Iranian Civil Law: With Reference to the 2025 Iranian Executive Regulation on Online Gold and Silver Trading

Context & Objective: The proliferation of digital gold trading platforms and the introduction of credit gold units have challenged traditional ownership models in Islamic law. This is particularly evident where a gap exists between electronic registration and physical delivery making the guarantee of ownership ambiguous. This research seeks to determine the jurisprudential foundations and civil law rules that can ensure the Sharia compliance and legal validity of these transactions while mitigating risks such as Gharar (legal uncertainty). The discussion outlines three potential legal frameworks for credit gold including objective ownership, undivided co-ownership of real reserves, and Personal Obligation. The primary research questions investigate the legal nature of these assets, the realization of constructive possession in digital environments, the impact of the 2025 Executive Regulation on Online Gold and Silver Trading, Adopted by the Council of Ministers of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and the status of asset segregation during platform insolvency.
Method & Approach: This study utilizes a doctrinal methodology to analyze the intersection of Islamic Fiqh and Iranian civil law. The approach involves a comparative analysis of classical concepts such as the Sarf sale and Qabd (Possession) against the technical requirements of digital assets. The research evaluates the evolution of contractual freedom under Article 10 of the Civil Law in light of new mandatory regulations. Furthermore, it interprets contemporary jurisprudential opinions on digital credit and Qabd Hukmi (Constructive Possession) to bridge the gap between classical legal theory and modern financial technology.
Findings: The findings indicate that the legal validity of credit gold transactions is best secured when assets are categorized as undivided co-ownership of physical gold rather than a Personal Obligation. Under the Personal Obligation model, the purchaser is merely a general creditor of the platform and lacks a real proprietary interest in specific reserves which creates high legal risk during insolvency. In contrast the undivided co-ownership model ensures that assets are segregable and reclaimable if a platform becomes insolvent. Constructive possession is effectively realized through electronic registration coupled with the customer's immediate ability to dispose of or claim the physical gold. Additionally, the Supervisor System established by the 2025 regulation serves as a critical safeguard that eliminates short-selling by mandating a one-to-one correspondence between digital units and physical inventory.
Conclusion: In conclusion the legitimacy of credit gold transactions rests upon objective ownership via undivided shares, verifiable constructive possession, and the complete segregation of customer assets. The 2025 Executive Regulation represents a pivotal shift from private contractual autonomy toward a regulated framework that prioritizes public trust and systemic risk management. By aligning digital registration with the jurisprudential requirements of possession and the prohibition of uncertainty or Gharar this regulatory evolution provides a robust legal basis for gold-backed assets. Ultimately credit gold can function as a reliable tool in the digital financial system provided that platforms adhere to the requirements of physical backing and institutional oversight.