Criminal Law
Payam Forouzandeh; Farid Mohseni
Abstract
After the completion of the preliminary investigation, if the investigator deems that the accused is in charge of that crime, he orders a summons to the trial against him. If the prosecutor agrees with that, he issues an indictment against the accused in order to send the case to court. Article 279 of ...
Read More
After the completion of the preliminary investigation, if the investigator deems that the accused is in charge of that crime, he orders a summons to the trial against him. If the prosecutor agrees with that, he issues an indictment against the accused in order to send the case to court. Article 279 of the Code of Criminal Procedure sets out the items that should be inserted in the indictment. Clause "c" of this article states the accused criminal record as one of the items of indictment. However, the judge of the court will need the accused criminal record when he finds him guilty and wants to determine the appropriate punishment for him. While the accused may be acquitted in court and there is no need to determine a punishment for him at all. In this article, with a descriptive method, while reviewing the possible foundations of the mentioned legislative sentence, it will be explained that because there is no need to inform the judge about the accused criminal record before proving his guilt, inserting that in the indictment and consequently informing the judge from that is contrary to the principle of prohibition of espionage and may violate his privacy. In addition, the judge's knowledge of the accused criminal record before he or she is found guilty also damages the fair trial process and creates a negative prejudice in the mind of the judge, which can violate the presumption of innocence and the judge’s mental impartiality. At the end, we will provide some suggestions for fixing these problems.
Criminal Law
Mohammad Ali Alipour; SeyedDoraid Mousavi Mojab; Seyed Basem Mavalizadeh
Abstract
Penal trial is a process which starts from crime detection and ends in a criminal conviction. In this regard, the stages of prosecution and investigation has special importance in criminal hearing. The close relationship and, in some cases, the conjunction of some detective and prosecuting procedures ...
Read More
Penal trial is a process which starts from crime detection and ends in a criminal conviction. In this regard, the stages of prosecution and investigation has special importance in criminal hearing. The close relationship and, in some cases, the conjunction of some detective and prosecuting procedures with each other and their belonging to a prior stage of trial would in effect made their absolute separation and thus their complete independence so severe. Meanwhile discovering of the accused’s real conduct is the cornerstone of justice in respect to the other stages of judicial proceeding and hence the independence of the interrogator could be resulted in a fair trial. Comparatively studying of the independence of Interrogatory institution from that of Prosecution in both Iran and Lebanon, we may find that the principle of their independence has been recognized, though in Iran the Interrogatory authority which is placed amid the structure of Public prosecutor’s office and under the administration of the Attorney General has defected such independence that in several cases obliges the Interrogator to administratively serve under the attorney general’s authority. However, both-mentioned institutions are separated and independent in Lebanon and although the Interrogator has to acquire the Attorney General’s opinion in the process of investigation, but the ultimate decision would be independently issued by him and in case of conflict in their views the dispute would be referred to a distinct authority which may be called “Accusation Bureau” and as such the principle of independence is better guaranteed in Lebanese legal system.
Criminal Law
Jafar Reshadati; Ali Rezaei
Abstract
In recent years, the debate of publishing and reporting the punishments of economic offenders in the media has been challenged. This matter enhanced its importance about judges and prosecutors for the necessity of dealing with corruption at the level of sovereignty and, at the same time, the importance ...
Read More
In recent years, the debate of publishing and reporting the punishments of economic offenders in the media has been challenged. This matter enhanced its importance about judges and prosecutors for the necessity of dealing with corruption at the level of sovereignty and, at the same time, the importance of maintaining the place of judgment. From their point of view, the release of images and names of the convicts was also sensitive. From criminologists’ perspective, each punishment contains advantages and disadvantages. Meanwhile neglecting the purposes of scandal's pathology and Tash'hir, in Iranian penal system that is imposed on corrupt judges, leads to overcoming incommodities instead of gaining benefits. This article seeks to review the country's laws regarding to Tash'hir and recent approaches of the judicial authorities and to conclude that according to the current rules and doctrines, the public disclosure of corrupt judges may be more offensive than promoting.
Public Law
ali mohammad fallahzadeh; mahya kamrani
Abstract
Fair trial is the one of the most important discourses discussed in legal literature that Seeks to achievement to the good legal and judicial system that maintain rights and freedoms of individuals in the best possible way and was able to fulfill justice in all areas. Administrative justice are not exception ...
Read More
Fair trial is the one of the most important discourses discussed in legal literature that Seeks to achievement to the good legal and judicial system that maintain rights and freedoms of individuals in the best possible way and was able to fulfill justice in all areas. Administrative justice are not exception And must be under the norms and principles of a fair trial. This article, has studies this issue with emphasis on the procedure of Supreme Audit Court Act 2013 ratified by The General Assembly of this court with analytical and descriptive approach using legal resources, particularly related acts. The findings in addition to questioned the competence of the general assembly of the court in impose regulations, implies the existence of some deficiencies in the above regulation. several principles of a fair trial in these regulations has been neglected that can lead to the violation of rights of the accused in the Judiciary Boards and points out the legislative parliament in this regard.
Criminal Law
Hasan Poorbaferani
Abstract
In criminal proceedings, the victim is also entitled to certain rights that are at times not only not at variance with the rights of the accused, but are rather common to both parties. One such right, which is the cornerstone of a fair trial, is the right to a hearing by a competent court established ...
Read More
In criminal proceedings, the victim is also entitled to certain rights that are at times not only not at variance with the rights of the accused, but are rather common to both parties. One such right, which is the cornerstone of a fair trial, is the right to a hearing by a competent court established by law and to have a qualified attorney familiar with due process present. The other right is the independence and impartiality of the court and the timeliness of the hearing. The safeguarding of these rights both in relation to the accused and the plaintiff is imperative, for failure to do so shall undermine public trust in the legal system with dire consequences. The main question of this paper is whether the fair trial criteria, particularly the ones mentioned above, are satisfied in the case of medical malpractice victims in Iran’s current criminal law. To find a conclusive answer to this research question, the present paper shall apply the three criteria of hearing by a competent court, independence and impartiality of the court, and hearing within a reasonable time to medical malpractice cases in Iran.
Criminal Law
Nasrin Mehra; Gholamreza Gholipour
Abstract
In the dignity-oriented model of proceedings, the accused or suspected person enjoys some fundamental rights which cannot be taken away from him/her merely by him/her being arrested, accused or apprehended. One of these rights is the right to wear personal, normal, optional clothing; this shall be in ...
Read More
In the dignity-oriented model of proceedings, the accused or suspected person enjoys some fundamental rights which cannot be taken away from him/her merely by him/her being arrested, accused or apprehended. One of these rights is the right to wear personal, normal, optional clothing; this shall be in a manner which no entity or agency is authorized to deprive him/her of this right and coerce him/her to put on “criminal garb. This is so due to the fact that until is proven otherwise, the accused is assumed innocent and his/her outfit shall represent this state of guiltlessness. It means, the accused shall be treated under the aegis of the presumption of innocence not the presumption of criminality; ergo, the outfit of the accused plays a significant role in his/ her quality of defense, the judicial decision and the public judgment. Notwithstanding, in the proceedings of the current Iranian criminal justice system, the accused is forced to wear criminal clothes— something that leads into them and their relatives being subject to negative labelling and misjudgment. Apropos of the question “what is the legal base of the current practice”, the present study identified that not only the current practice is not in harmony with the national codes and the international standards, but also it is in conflict with the strategic principles of the criminal procedures, particularly human dignity, the presumption of innocence, procedural legality, equality of arms, impartiality and the protection of citizenship rights. In this regard, it is a particular desideratum that the present practice gets more aligned with the universal standards and the strategic principles.
mahmood ashrafy; abas zeraat
Abstract
The contradictoriness is one of the fundamental principles in any proceedings. However, the concept of this principle in the criminal proceedings which has a fundamental difference with civil procedure especially because of existence of the preliminary investigation and the possibility of taking decisions ...
Read More
The contradictoriness is one of the fundamental principles in any proceedings. However, the concept of this principle in the criminal proceedings which has a fundamental difference with civil procedure especially because of existence of the preliminary investigation and the possibility of taking decisions without listening to statements and reasons of criminal claim parties, also the limits of implementation of this principle are not clear. So it is necessary to considering how to apply this principle, particularly in relation to the Criminal Procedure Act 1392, which seeks to further the adversarial criminal process such as a civil proceeding. contradictoriness in criminal procedure means that no decision against one of the public claim in any stages of the proceedings (prosecution, investigation and trial) should be made just after hearing testimony and considering evidences of public claim parties (accused and prosecutor). This principle is not explicitly mentioned by Criminal Procedure Act 1392 but the contradictoriness implicitly is accepted and the most important examples of implementation of this principle in this Act such as adversarial processing in the preliminary investigation stage in forgivable crimes and in the trial stage in the court, accessing to lawyer, prohibition of obtaining any defense bill, new document and evidence pursuant of announcement of termination of proceedings has been mentioned. However with regards to the unequal status of public claim’s parties and international documents emphasis on improving accused's status through using human rights instructions including applying of the principle of contradictoriness in the criminal procedure so here we will mention examples in the Criminal Procedure Act 2013 in violation of contradictoriness against accused.
rashid ghadiri bahram abadi
Abstract
One of the most fundamental philosophical issues, which is examined in political philosophy and philosophy of law, is confrontation of right and expediency. One side of this confrontation are people and their rights who expect the recognition of minimum fundamental rights, like the right to a fair trial, ...
Read More
One of the most fundamental philosophical issues, which is examined in political philosophy and philosophy of law, is confrontation of right and expediency. One side of this confrontation are people and their rights who expect the recognition of minimum fundamental rights, like the right to a fair trial, which belongs them under the humans dignity and personality. On the other side, society by the aid of its representatives, while trying to produce minimum resources for people and securing their welfare, has also a glance to its maintainance and continuance, by complying with some interests. This confrontation between humans rights and community interests, arrives its summit in terrorist offences and this, forms the most important philosophical base of differential criminal proceeding in terrorist offences. On one hand, suspects of terrorist activities want a fair trial as an undeniable right for human kind and on the other hand, political and judicial authorities seek to retain security of society, and see suspending and ignoring terrorist suspects’ rights, as one of resorts for achieving this aim. They regard suspension and ignorance of this group’s rights, as securing security. After explanation of this confrontation and its quality in terrorist offences, in this essay, is tried to produce logical resorts for its resolution.
bagher shamlo; majid moradi
Abstract
There are some approaches in Criminal law changes. The first is offense-oriented, and then offender-oriented and finally victim-oriented. Offender-oriented has concentrated on protection of accused's rights in the sight of fair trial and after securing these rights relatively has trended to victim-oriented ...
Read More
There are some approaches in Criminal law changes. The first is offense-oriented, and then offender-oriented and finally victim-oriented. Offender-oriented has concentrated on protection of accused's rights in the sight of fair trial and after securing these rights relatively has trended to victim-oriented approach. Iran criminal law system has also affected by these approaches, but it considers victim's right before securing innocent suspended, accused and convicted's rights properly. According to the weakness of Iran Jurisprudence in enforcing content of article 171 of Iran Constitutional Law and article 58 of Islamic Penal Code of Iran, 1370, this study considers and criticizes the practical process of compensation of innocence suspended and accused and its effects in present and future criminal procedure system (Criminal Procedure Act, 1392 and The Islamic Penal Code of Iran, 1392). Changes in substantive and procedural law in 1392 cause to some inconsistencies in the process of compensation of judicial victims which seems that article 30 of The Supervision on Judges' Manner has abolished.
