Document Type : Research/Original/Regular Article
Authors
1
p.h.d student of criminal law and criminology,Department of law,Mashhad Branch,Islamic Azad University,Mashhad,Iran.
2
.Full professor , Department of criminal law & Criminology, Shahid Beheshti university , Tehran , Iran.
3
Associate Professor, Department of Law, Mashhad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Mashhad, Iran.
4
Assistant professor,Department of law,Mashhad branch,Islamic Azad University,Mashhad,Iran.
10.22106/jlj.2025.2024441.5853
Abstract
When it comes to justifying punishment, the idea that a criminal deserves it is the only argument that seems to have an instinctive basis. Human intuition and emotions, operating beyond conscious reasoning, always demand a reaction to criminal behavior. This tendency to react is so strong that even after the decline of retributivism in the 1980 decade, Isolated rehabilitation discourses . However, some argue that strict responses are mainly driven by the agendas of policymakers, who frame them as the will of the people. This study uses a descriptive-analytical approach and philosophical reasoning to explore whether harsh responses to crime are simply the product of lawmakers' intentions or if they genuinely reflect public demand. The findings suggest that the desire for punishment is deeply rooted in both individual and social instincts, shaped by a form of moral upbringing. Therefore, the tendency toward retributivism and rejecting leniency is a genuine public demand that can be defended in academic discussions.
Keywords
Subjects
