PAZHOUHESH NAME HOGHOUGH E KEYFARI
Year:2024 | Volume:15 | Issue:1|Papers Count:12

Knowing the nature and characteristics of the fundamental principles of criminal proceedings, considering the variety of principles and their content and the various interpretations that have been proposed in the context of different theoretical approaches, requires knowing the different foundations of these principles. The important question in this regard is, what are the most important fundamental principles governing criminal proceedings and is it possible to find a single basis to justify these principles? The extremism of different views in justifying the foundations of the fundamental principles and their attention to only a part of the existing facts makes it impossible to be satisfied with one basis in the justification of the principles. Sometimes these foundations take on a moral and philosophical aspect and seek their justification in ethical-philosophical approaches, and sometimes they find a legal and social aspect and seek to legitimize themselves through the foundations of human rights or expedient views or It is security oriented. In this article, with an analytical-descriptive approach, with t

Although Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights recognizes the right to freedom of expression for the citizens of the contracting states, it considers he use of this right subject to observance of formalities,one of which is respect for the spiritual dignity of others.The present reseach paper,,which was written in a descriptive-analytical method and using library and internet sources,deals with the main question that what the most important criteria are for distinguishing between the permission of freedom of speech and the prohibition of committing crimes against the spiritual dignity of individuals.The findings of the research show that the European Court of Human Rights has identified four criteria:the position of the audience,the nature and purpose of the statements,the ability to verify the statements,and the behavior and speech of the audience.

Nowadays, homelessness is considered as a social damage and a serious challenge in different countries, including Iran. In addition to to non-structural factors (personal-family) effective in its occurrence, structural factors (economy, employment and housing) have been identified as the main cause of homelessness.Homeless people are exposed to threats of victimization before and during their homeless life. This article, with a descriptive-analytical method, while investigating the causes of homelessness, tries to investigate the factors involved in the victimization of homeless people from the perspective of structural theories of criminology and theories of victimology.The findings of the article indicate that some personal characteristics and vulnerable aspects such as age and gender are effective in intensifying the possibility of victimization of homeless people in two stages before and during homelessness. Also, the possibility possibility of initial victimization and their delinquency-victimization due to the conditions and lifestyle, personal characteristics and there are daily needs.

The implication of partial defence of loss of control in the criminal system of England is that the accused loses his or her self-control, because of fear or heat of passion resulting from provocative act of victim, and killing a person. Although the loss of control has an important role in this defence and must be proven objectively and subjectively but the unjust act of victim is one of the two essential requirements of this defence. With respect to the important effect of victim in this defence, we did a comparative study on the partial defence of loss of control and self-defence in Iranian legal system. By explaining and distinguishing several situations witch deems these defences overlapped, we express some cases can only be subject to the partial daefence of loss of control. Therefore, it cannot be claimed that due to acceptance of the self-defense, it is not necessary to recognize the partial defence of loss of control in penal code. Actually we, by using the descriptive-analytical method based on library sources, describing and analyzing laws, realized these two defences are distinguished in their area, nature, affection and requirements. Eventually this article attempts to introduce a draft of the defence of loss of control compatible with bases of Iranian legal system.

According to critical approaches, social inequality as one of the main causes of crime is a product of injustice and social discrimination. Convergence between inequality, classism and crime in critical criminology shows that committing crime in the lower class is the result of criminal structures rather than being caused by a dangerous situation. Based on this, this research aims to investigate the commission of crime in the light of social inequality in the Snowpiercer film by using Fisk's semiotic method in three forms of technical, social and ideological codes. Based on the findings of the research, the technical codes in formats such as lighting, costume design, stage design, soundtrack, editing and the way of filming represent the class gap between the lower and upper classes of the train in different carriages. Based on the social codes, it is clear that the movie Snowpiercer , on the one hand, represents the social stratification in the capitalist system in different carriages of the same train, and on the other hand, it shows that social inequality and public pressure not only cause crime, but may also lead to Rebellion against the ruling system.

The use of data and computer systems as the subject and means of committing a crime is one of the manifestations of the negative link between these technologies and criminal law. The purpose of this research is to identify the challenges of the Iranian police in the search and seizure of data and the system in the prevention and detection of crime. The current research is applied in terms of its purpose, and descriptive-analytical in terms of its type and in the category of qualitative research. By using library resources and interviews with university experts, data has been collected and analyzed by qualitative content analysis method. The findings indicate that the police faces challenges in the search and seizure of data and the system with two types of challenges including: The The challenges are in the field of protecting the privacy of individuals and in the field of legislative limitations and loopholes. Therefore, the elimination of legislative gaps in the field of privacy and police powers and their access to databases for the prevention and detection of crime are effective in solving the challenges of the police in inspecting and confiscating data and systems in Iran.

The definition and ambit of criminal policy has been evolved since its birth and it is today regarded as knowledge and art of recognition and implementing several measures and backward or foreward responses invented to tackling criminal phenomenon, defending society and citizens and safeguarding individual rights and liberties by state and/or community. By different sorting out of its dual elements -criminal phenomenon and body of society-, variable relations and state-based or community-based models evolve. State-based models could belong to authoritarian or totalitarian states as well as to liberal states. On the other hand, the longlasting and fundamental problematic of criminal jurisprudence as to source of the right to punish has been enfronted with within two major categories of doctrines -psitivist doctrines and natural law doctrines. This research, using descriptive-analytical method, has been to a find the interrelation of these doctrines and the so-called models and has found out that state-based models, authoritarian and totalitarina models are mostly compatible with natural law doctrines, while liberal state models are more conformed with positivist doctrines.

Severe breaches of humanitarian law are one of the jurisdictional of  international criminal tribunals ratione materiae. On the other hand, although the four 1949 Geneva Conventions and their additional protocols do not explicitly refer to human rights because refer to the situation of armed conflicts, but in the statutes of the international criminal tribunals, whether the International Criminal Court or ICTY or ICTR, The multiple effects of human rights and international humanitarian law are dealt with each other. In cases such as Prosecutor v. Kronjlak (2002) in the International Criminal Court for the former Yugoslavia, the relationship between international humanitarian law and human rights has been pointed out. The main question that has been done in this research in a descriptive-analytical methodology , according to the practice of international criminal courts, what is the mutual influence of international humanitarian law and international human rights? The result of the current research is that the rules of human rights, such as the right to a fair trial for perpetrators of international crimes, witnesses and victims, and not considering the immunity of accused government have penetrated into officials in international criminal proceedings. On the other hand, human rights and international humanitarian law collide with each other in one point “ humanity “ .

The Islamic revolution has transformed Ta'zeer in Islamic law, notably through the 2013 Islamic Penal Law's Article 18. This shift broadened Ta'zeer's scope, encompassing Shariah prohibitions and government regulations. Despite drawing from Shia jurisprudence, particularly "Al-Ta'zeer Lakl Haram," the extension of Ta'zeer to non-disobedient acts lacks a clear rationale. Article 18 introduces a debatable categorization of punishments, dividing them into written and unwritten forms, and imposes statutes of limitations on Ta'zeer, contrary to Imami jurisprudence. This study navigates the complexities of these legal reforms, examining their historical and doctrinal evolution within government jurisprudence, offering insights into the interplay between Islamic law and contemporary amendments.

In an era of rapid information growth in cyberspace, the challenges of criminalizing and controlling the dissemination of misleading information have become prominent issues in ethics and criminal law. Opinions on criminalizing misleading information are divided into two groups: those supporting criminal intervention and those opposing it. This study examines the feasibility and justificatory frameworks for criminalizing misleading information in cyberspace. The main research question is how to justify the criminalization of misleading information dissemination from the perspective of criminal law philosophy. The article employs an inductive-deductive method, analyzing the criteria for justifying criminalization and applying them to the behavior of disseminating of misleading information to determine its feasibility and limits. Focusing on four key criteria of criminal law philosophy—Filtering, Balance of Reasons, Social Acceptance, and Harm Prevention—this research demonstrates how these criteria can provide a justified framework for criminally addressing the dangers of misleading information in cyberspace.

The philosophy of virtue ethics can serve as the foundation for a virtue-based criminal law. Proponents of this perspective assert that the descriptive concept of crime is derived from three key principles of virtue ethics (vice, akrasia, and enkratia). These moral constructs influence both the "foundation" and "extent" of criminal responsibility. The primary question, then, is how the scope of "criminal responsibility" is articulated based on these virtue ethics principles, and whether criminal responsibility is "character-based" or "conduct-based." Some virtue ethicists argue that "character" is a prerequisite for criminal responsibility, whereas other philosophers of criminal law emphasize the element of "conduct" in determining criminal liability. Adopting an analytical-critical method, this article aims to assess the influence of these three virtue ethics concepts on the notion of crime, before presenting counterarguments to this position. The article argues that those three aforementioned dimensions of moral wrongdoing i.e. vice, akrasia, and enkratia do not function as a "necessary condition" within the "descriptive" concept of crime. Consequently, the realm of criminalization and the foundation of criminal responsibility cannot be solely formulated based on ethical concepts.

Opponents frequently argued that the lack of alignment between the criminal responsibility of legal entities and key punishment principles, such as the individualization and personalization of penalties, was a primary point of contention for them. This disagreement stemmed from their belief that legal entities were not always distinct entities separate from individuals. In this study, conducted through an analytical-descriptive approach, the alignment of punishment principles with the status of legal entities in the criminal justice systems of Iran, England, and the United States was examined. These principles were classified into three main categories relating to the nature of the crime, the punishment, and the offenders, with relevant issues discussed within each legal framework. The analysis revealed that, contrary to the opponents' arguments, these principles generally aligned with the status of legal entities in most instances across all three legal systems, thereby undermining the opponents' stance on this matter.