Criminal Law
Ali Azizi; Mohammad Farajiha
Abstract
Problem-Solving Courts with a specialized and independent structure were established in some countries with common law legal system to use the authority of courts to address the underlying problems of offenders and victims, the structural problems of the justice system, and the social problems of communities ...
Read More
Problem-Solving Courts with a specialized and independent structure were established in some countries with common law legal system to use the authority of courts to address the underlying problems of offenders and victims, the structural problems of the justice system, and the social problems of communities and finally to reduce the recidivism rate. However, because they reach only a small proportion of litigants compared to the traditional courts, the idea of applying core principles of problem-solving courts to traditional courts was put forward. This article, with a qualitative method, first examines the necessity of problem-solving approach in judicial system and then analyses the opportunities and barriers to applying problem-solving principles and practices in traditional criminal courts of Iran. The findings of the research show that some principles like changing traditional attitudes and role orientations of judges, prosecutors, attorneys, and other justice system actors is the basis for adopting problem-solving approach in traditional criminal courts of Iran and it can hardly be transferred, but enhancing the direct interaction between judges and litigants is the most easiest. Moreover, resource constraints (lack of time, money, and staff) and educational and electronic systems limitations pose serious barriers in implementation of other principles and effectiveness of problem-solving approach. Tangible results show that the application of these principles and indicators can help increase the quality and effectiveness of the criminal justice procedure and reduce its non-therapeutic consequences.
Criminal Law
Ali Azizi; Mohammad Farajiha
Abstract
AbstractAfter various approaches dealing with the crimes, some countries in common law legal system have adopted a therapeutic-judicial approach and established courts called "problem-Solving courts". The first model of these courts was Miami-Dade County Drug Treatment Court in 1989 which with a therapeutic-judicial ...
Read More
AbstractAfter various approaches dealing with the crimes, some countries in common law legal system have adopted a therapeutic-judicial approach and established courts called "problem-Solving courts". The first model of these courts was Miami-Dade County Drug Treatment Court in 1989 which with a therapeutic-judicial approach was trying to address the offenders' underlying problems with addiction or substance abuse issues. The idea of adopting this model in the criminal justice and health care systems led to planning and implementing a pilot project in Iran named "Iranian Drug Treatment Court" jointly by the Judiciary and the State Welfare Organization in 2017. This article with emphasis on Tehran Drug Treatment Court seeks to evaluate and analyze the process of "planning" and "implementing" of this model in Iran by using a "descriptive-analytical" method and reviewing all documents written for this project as well as other related regulations. The results of the research show that the common law model of drug treatment courts has not been correctly adopted, and problem solving principles and their legal capacities in Iran have been somehow neglected. Meanwhile, the project has not been completely implemented in accordance with the criteria and indicators specified in its relevant documents.
