PAZHOUHESH NAME HOGHOUGH E KEYFARI
Year:2013 | Volume:4 | Issue:1|Papers Count:7

Prevalence of AIDS disease without any treatment for it has turned its inflection into a crime commitment in the recent years. Although there is a long period between a person's infection & his/her death, we can pursue the act of the person who infects others as a murder. On the other hand with regard to three parts of actus reus against corporal integrity of people, causality between the first and the third parts (i.e criminal consequences and culprit’s behavior) is essential. Therefore, we have to study causality in the actuaries. Existence of causality is the only condition for considering the behavior of AIDS vectors and its resulting consequences as a criminal responsibility. So we try to investigate indispensable rules, especially Islamic criminal law that has approved in offences against persons that proceed from transmission of aids virus as the object of this article after introducing this illness and expressing the importance of causality in criminal law and offences against persons.

Crime as a social and human phenomenon is affected by all dimensions of human life. The economic policies of the government that also have an impact on the lives of different groups of people will have direct and indirect effects on the general model of offense. These policies on the one hand have reduced some of the criminogenic crimes and on the other hand prepare the way for new crimes and a new range of offenders and crime victims. Targeted subsidies Act, as well as the most important social policy after the Islamic Revolution, although according to the governments, are seeking social justice and social welfare of the people, however, there are such laws that because of micro and macro-economic developments have followed, have faced criminologists to unknown horizons. Eliminating energy and staples subsidies and liberalizing and commodity prices and cash subsidies, while creating economic challenges such as inflation, unemployment, are facing a large group of people to challenge of living, and consequently, has add fuel to some crimes and in particular economy crime like robbery and hoarding. So according to deep causality between crime and economic conditions, it is essential to use deliberate measures to reduce the consequences of Act causing offense and preventing the delinquencies causing them, resorting to social prevention measures. This article examines the role of economic conditions as a negative effect of cash subsidies, in order to explain causing offense measures of Targeted subsidies Act.

Sadism personality disorder is a psychic disorder. The afflicted one reaches to some mental, physical and sexual satisfaction by making others suffer mentally, physically and sexually. Therefore, many behaviors that are based on sadism are considered as criminal acts. What are investigated in this article encompass: Nature, reason and circumstances of sadism personality disorder, concept of crime of sadism, the answer to the question why all the crimes cannot be considered sadistic and quality of criminal responsibility of the perpetrators afflicted to sadism that finally lead to investigation of sadistic crimes against person, its social aspects and additionally crimes against property, ownership, public safety and security that are based on sadism personality disorder. This abstract ends by considering the importance of sadism crime prevention and necessity of attention to the difference of this crime with ordinary ones by presenting practical suggestions.

The rule of non bis in idem is one of the most important rules of international criminal law. After Islamic revolution in Iran, legislator did not accept establishing this rule in extraterritorial jurisdiction subjects, but in new Islamic penal code, this rule was accepted as one of conditions of exercising nationality principle and passive personality principle and just in scope of non designated Islamic discretionary punishment (tazir). Seemingly, according to editors of this code, accepting the rule of non bis in idem in fixed punishments, retaliation and designated Islamic discretionary punishments are opposed to Islamic standards. However, due to Islamic lessons, some properties such as flexibility of Islamic orders, presenting the juridical rule of relation between reasonable sentence and Islamic sentence and also judicial rules with no loss in Islam show that this notion is instable.

International crimes typically occur in a wide range. Breadth of scope involved many persons in committing these crimes in a way that adds a large number indirectly and directly. Participant’s involvement in physical commitment, causational, assistant, commendation, (order) excitation and group membership can be shared in the criminality. International courts have made many efforts in order to substantiation of criminal justice and punish all people involved in these crimes. These include efforts by appealing to notions such as "membership in a criminal organization", "conspiracy" and theory of “joint criminal enterprise". In this paper, of the latter concepts, briefly and only to explanation the principles and background the theory of "joint criminal enterprise” is discussed and the main emphasis will be on explaining the recent theory. Doctrine that international courts in interpreting three different species have concluded and according to different situations, and it's one of the culprits have been a pretext to achieving the goal no punishment stay of offenders. But this theory and its species didn’t make firm on solid position because there are strong criticisms that it has been noticed. These criticisms sometimes have revealed severe criticism of the aforesaid theory to the fundamental concepts of criminal law.

Regarding the distinction between tort and criminal liability, there is no doubt about the mens rea being one of the main requirements to establish criminal responsibility - the point that we can find its obvious reflex in the principle of ‘actus non facit reum mens rea’. The less vague example is the murder - particularly in Iranian criminal law. The crimes based on intention, usually, are defined as ones which need perpetrator’s act of will accompanied by intent and knowledge (consciousness). However, it is a matter of ambiguity that the intent and knowledge are evaluated how and upon which approach-subjective or the objective one? Can we apply the objective criterion in this evaluation at the fact level or is it applicable merely at the evidence level? I am, through this article, going to find the applicability of the objective criterion in respect to mental state of murder and I will show that there is a false and erroneous confusion between these two different levels in our legal doctrine: fact and evidence. I do believe that the act which will practically certain result in death, is only evidence from which we can infer the perpetrator’s intent. The new Islamic Penal Code (2013) will be examined in this paper as a comparative approach will be taken to the American jurisprudence in this respect.

Crimes against the state cannot be justified in the same way as other legal crimes. Each and every crime and punishment are created by the law which political authority passes and justification of such punishment is dependent on the issuing authority. A punishment is justified only because it is issued by an authoritative legislature. However, justification of laws which are protecting political authority itself needs arguments beyond this common response. Such arguments are an integral part of theory of political authority. Prevalent punishment theories are in contrast, ethical theories based on proving subordinate citizens duty to obey the political authority orders because of their ethical supremacy. While, instead of ethical judgment on subjects, the commander should be judged. Why can he issue order and compel punishment? As a result, we defend a theory based on political equality that can justify authority without ethical judgment on subjects. The theory was titled “Participation Theory” in this paper and based on political rights that guarantee interference of all citizens in making and changing political system all times. Only a criminal system which defines itself in accordance with these political rights could be justified.