Criminal Law
saeed ghaedi; fazlolah foroughi
Abstract
Unlike other legal units in Iran's judicial system, there is no single criminal policy regarding the general aspect of intentional homicide .The confusion resulting from the legislative criminal policy and its dual approaches have challenged the judicial procedure. The victim's right to determine the ...
Read More
Unlike other legal units in Iran's judicial system, there is no single criminal policy regarding the general aspect of intentional homicide .The confusion resulting from the legislative criminal policy and its dual approaches have challenged the judicial procedure. The victim's right to determine the punishment in intentional homicide and the predominance ofits private aspect has pushed its public aspect to the sidelines in such a way that in theprosecution and investigation decisions in the prosecutor's office and the criminal court one،often focuses on the private aspect of intentional homicide and demanding retribution has beennoted. And in cases where an action or punishment is determined in terms of the general aspect, in the way of criminal investigation, settlement, issuing judgment and the principles governing them, there are problems in terms of observing the principles of fair proceedings, the defense rights of the accused and the rights of the society.The current research has attempted to enumerate the challenges in the judicial procedure by using analytical-descriptive and collecting the desired information in the library method and relying on the cases of intentional homicide in the criminal justice system of Iran . And while emphasizing the necessity of concrete criminal policy in order to Key protect the rights of the society, it is to explain the duality of the deterministic system and its role in the formation of the existing judicial procedure through the expression of its effects and solutions to overcome the existing situation. Until the adoption of an integrated legal policy with an approach based on fair proceedings .
Criminal Law
eshagh rasuli amirhajlu; Shahram Ebrahimi; fazl allah forughi
Abstract
Criminologists have long used every opportunity to warn criminal policymakers about the adverse health, criminological, moral and social consequences of incarceration. However, considering the abovementioned costs and adverse effects in Iran’s judicial system, decarceration has been given priority, ...
Read More
Criminologists have long used every opportunity to warn criminal policymakers about the adverse health, criminological, moral and social consequences of incarceration. However, considering the abovementioned costs and adverse effects in Iran’s judicial system, decarceration has been given priority, especially for minor crimes and criminals without a criminal record; but its implementation in practice faces several judicial and operational challenges. In this paper, the judicial and operational challenges of decarceration are examined in light of court rulings, using an analytical-descriptive method. The obtained findings indicate that the most important identified challenges are the frequency of criminal cases, sustainable incarceration-oriented culture among judges, lack of proper infrastructure, unprepared accepting bodies and the society incarceration-centred public culture, respectively. Some of the proposed solutions to cope with the current situation are: Changing the culture of incarceration among judges by providing a proportionate execution guarantee; increasing the supreme judicial authority’s attention to the equipment needed to implement this policy in such a way that the statistics-oriented procedure of the judiciary does not distort the decarceration policy; monitoring the performance of judges in terms of adherence to macro-judicial policies in the field of community-based punishments; real and continuous monitoring of how to file Personality Record; improving the level of knowledge of judges by holding continuous training courses; upgrading the level of hardware and software facilities for applying non-custodial sentences and increasing the awareness of relevant institutions, regarding their rights and duties and reforming the culture of public punishment.