Criminal Law
Ruhollah Akrami; mojtaba yasini nasab
Abstract
One of the interlocutory orders is the criminal bail writ with various types specified in Article 217 of the Criminal Procedure Code. According to paragraphs “a” to “g” of this article, the investigating judge shall make an agreement with the accused, obliging him/her to attend ...
Read More
One of the interlocutory orders is the criminal bail writ with various types specified in Article 217 of the Criminal Procedure Code. According to paragraphs “a” to “g” of this article, the investigating judge shall make an agreement with the accused, obliging him/her to attend in or not to leave the designated place or to appear there periodically. Restricting an accused person who has not yet been proven guilty is against the Principle of Innocence, the Lack of Guardianship Principle (the principle that no person has any naturally vested power over any other person) and the Rule of Domination. Any violation of the mentioned principles requires a permit with special jurisprudential-legal titles, and their occurrence through orders for own recognizance (OR) release necessitates identifying their nature. To interpret the nature of these orders, theorists have put forward various doctrines such as indefinite contract, judicial action and non-contractual obligations. The existence of ambiguities in these doctrines led to the emergence of new possibilities such as declaration of damages, and compromise. The result of this desk-based descriptive-analytical study indicates that the orders for OR release are, by nature, the guardianship ordinance considering the hierarchy in the appointment of officials, and the penalty clause for them is ta'ziri (at the discretion of the judge), imposed by the Islamic ruler on the accused person who violates the ordinance.
Criminal Law
Ruhollah Akrami
Abstract
In regard to proving criminal cases, although each legal system has its own view over the validity of Confession, yet it has a special position in all legal system. Confession has an intrinsic value in different countries' regulations subject to the system of legal reasons, thus in some legal systems, ...
Read More
In regard to proving criminal cases, although each legal system has its own view over the validity of Confession, yet it has a special position in all legal system. Confession has an intrinsic value in different countries' regulations subject to the system of legal reasons, thus in some legal systems, the judge is obliged to issue a judgment based solely on the confession for the absolute validity given to it by the legislator. Whereas in countries affected by the system of moral reasons, the confession itself is not valid and its value is as a means of assuring the judge of the event to which the confession has been made. In the present article, an attempt has been made to examine the validity of the confession in proving the case with a descriptive-analytical method. In this regard, it is examined whether a criminal judge can issue a sentence as soon as the accused confesses, and this validity remains until the judge is aware of its inaccuracy? Or that the sentence can be issued only on the basis of a confession when the judge is satisfied with it? And basically, this persuasion can be based on confession alone or does it need other supporting evidence? In order to answer these questions, while briefly studying the legal system of some Islamic countries, the issue has been specifically examined from the perspective of the Codified regulations, legal doctrine and judicial procedure of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The superficial conflict between the approach of the Islamic Penal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure on this issue has added to the complexity of the issue, which makes it necessary to rely on interpretive methods to accept the relevant validity of the criminal confession.
