CRIMINAL LAW RESEARCH
Year:2018 | Volume:7 | Issue:24 |Papers Count:10

The prediction of recidivism is a part of criminological studies which has many functions in the juristic decision about the convicted. One of the most important decisions deals with parole and is based on the hypothesis that the convicted will have a due attitude during his conviction and will not commit any criminal offence after early release from prison. Several studies have been conducted about such clause which might be divided into three generations: First generation methods that were mostly intuitional and clinical; second generation methods, which included clinical methods, improved by actuarial studies and static actuarial methods, and third generation methods which considered risk/need and static/dynamic factors. Hence, standard tables like SFS and LSI-R are provided which are applied to grant parole. In Iran, according to the second clause of Article 58 of the Islamic Penal Code (enacted in 2013) and its precedence in older criminal codes, prediction of non-commission of crime is one of the conditions of granting parole which is a legal context to apply prediction studies in parole. Yet, juridical context is not provided. The exact definition of factors needs longitudinal research with regard to successful studies in other countries and localising them.

Today and with the advancement of medical science, the issue of protecting the health of the fetus has become more and more of a concern for actors in the field of health and legislation. On this occasion, fetal abuse is not limited to physical violence that causes abortion or damage to their members. Rather, it includes many of the risk behaviours by which a pregnant woman during pregnancy can cause death, fetal illnesses, and fetal disorders. In this regard, the United States, along with the relative ban on abortion, has provided suitable criminal protection against other abuse to the fetus, also known as the Protection of Unborn Children. In addition to the federal area, this issue has been further taken into acount in some states like South Carolina. In this regard, the national criminal justice system has failed to pay attention to the fetal negligence or failure although it has provided a supportive approach to violence against the fetus. Therefore, this study aims to provide a supportive strategy by analysing and comparing the fetal abuse status in the criminal system of the United States and Iran.

The criminal liability will not be realized, but under two circumstances: enjoying resolution power and free will. Lacking one of these two circumstances is considered as a barrier to the criminal liability. Therefore, the resolution power and free will are two basic conditions of the criminal liability. In Iranian criminal system, the criminal rliability would be realized when a criminal is sane, mature and enjoy full discretionary power. In Egyptian criminal system, it is presumed that punishment is personal. The Egyptian criminal system approved the criminal liability of other's action in 1945 and applied it. There is no clear definition, and its scope is not restricted. The criminal responsibility resulting from other's action is fully limited to the text of the law in Iranian criminal system. The judicial process is practically unable to indentify and create it. In addition to ensuring the public interests, the criminal responsibility resulting from other's action is both preventive and deterrent. It also plays a constructive role in the economy and protecting workers' right and capitalists. Accordingly, if it considered outside the law, it may cause harmful effects.

he majorities of authors have been interested in the moral element of unintentional offences and have not been sufficiently interested in the issue of the material element and the legal element of these offences. That being so, this has sparked an amalgam. These authors failed to make any difference between unintentional absolute liability offences and unintentional offence conditioned upon a result. The French legislature refers for the first time to the question of the moral element of unintentional offenses in the 1994 Penal Code. The Iranian Penal Code also refers in this regard to Article 125 of the new Penal Code (enacted in 2013). Nevertheless, these Codes have disadvantages on this subject. First, we are interested in the issue of the difference between formal offences and outcome offences, and then we address the issue of the moral element of these offences. First, we are interested in the issue of unintentional absolute liability offences and unintentional offence conditioned upon a result, and then we address the issue of the moral element of these offences.

This article discusses whether it is possible and recommendable that corporate criminal responsibility be introduced for violations of human rights and humanitarian law and that the domestic courts, as well as the International Criminal Court, should, therefore, have jurisdiction over such legal entities or not. This article discusses whether it is possible and recommendable that corporate criminal responsibility should be introduced for violations of human rights and humanitarian law and that the domestic courts, as well as the International Criminal Court, should, therefore, have jurisdiction over such legal entities. The first section of the article studies the recent works done by the UN Human Rights Council and also Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in the framework of a project for improving accountability and access to provide remedy for victims of business-related human rights abuses. The second part, while reviewing the Nuremberg military trials and discussions during the 1998 Rome Conference, explores key questions of de lege ferenda as well as current policy and legal matters.

The aim of this paper is to consider the Tu quoque defence in the context of international criminal law by the analytical-descriptive approach. Simply put, Tu quoque is the Latin term (equal to: You too) and often is stated in this context: (You should not punish me because you did it too). This defence, for the first time was implicitly accepted during the Nuremberg tribunal (following World War II) in the Admiral Karl Doenitz case. The original base of this argument is the clean hands doctrine: (if one of the parties of armed conflict has committed certain crimes, his hands to prosecute or punish other parties of conflict for the same crimes are not clean). Recently, criminal tribunals such as International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia have been faced with Tu quoque as a defence. Despite the existence of an ambiguous history for this defence, jurists have not paid enough attention to this defence. This paper, by examining the jurisprudence of IMT and other international criminal courts, concludes that Tu quoque defence in Genocide and Crimes against humanity cannot be accepted, but in some War Crimes and the Crime of Aggression, this defence is acceptable under certain circumstances.

As people are actual victims of crimes against the public interest, criminal protection of public interest, undoubtedly, is an instance of People protection. However, the issue of victimization in crimes against public interest is one of the theoretical and practical controversial issues for on the one hand the consequences of such crimes are appeared after passing a long time and they, generally, are without immediate victims, and on the other hand its not possible to determine the vulnerable people and harms which are caused by any of them can affect each citizen by this portion in the community. These obstacles not only make difficult prosecution for obtaining causal relationship and offensive faults but also make compensation difficult for victims both conceptually and procedurally. In addition to the difficulties relating to the assertion Casual relationship complaining from vulnerable citizens and potential, victims who are g non-objective and intangible of some damages have become an obstacle. In this article, we attempt to study protective facilities, obstacles and traits in some legal systems, ineffective support of public interest and use these cases in condifiction of regulations in Iran`s law.

Customary Penal Code (1916) is the first substantial code in Iranian criminal law. This Code was ratified 37 years after County Code (1879). Its importance is due to the fact that it makes the substructures of its post criminal codes. This Code is very important due to a new division of crimes, penalties and explanations of County Code which was unprecedented. These regulations show Iranian criminal law developments and Iranian legal social culture in 100 years ago. Many of current criminal law organizations go back to even pre-constitutional period. In Naseri period, French Penal Code (1810), and some of Ottoman regulations were translated, but they were not ratified by Naserredin Shah. These laws and regulations were accepted by Nosratodoleh. This article examines the ratification of Customary Criminal Code and then analyzes typology of crimes and penalties.

Power and freedom are two subjects which are always in contrast to each other. Governments strive to enhance their authorities to control people with an emphasis on following the rules; yet, people try to improve their freedom by different methods. When laws are considered unfair and employing legal ways do not lead to modifying them, folks disobey them deliberately, consciously and nonviolently through civil disobedience to show the necessity of modifying them. Although this act is kind of violation of law, its way to breaking the law differs from other usual offenders. Albeit, this is impossible to ignore their punishment. Civil disobedience originally is distinguishable from revolution, rebellion, and armed disobedience based on acceptance of punishment from disobedient. However, with regard to the moral motivation of disobedience and his/her ideal aim based on the establishment of justified law, their punishments can include suspension or mitigation, and in some circumstances can amnesty or remission.

Confession is a traditional and common evidence in criminal cases. It is assumed that a reasonable person does not plead guilty. However, in some cases, defendants confess crime which they actually have not committed. In the present paper, by applying the case study method, ten cases indicating the role of police in obtaining false confession are analyzed. The data were collected by case analysis, observation and interviews. . When the police come to believe that a person is a criminal and has failed to acquire any evidence, a confession from a suspect is the simplest solution to prove the allegation and rest the case. Police officers may obtain a false confession by a three-step process: Suspected misclassification, coercion, and contamination. Recording interrogations along with training correct ways of interrogation and informing police officers regarding false confessions may pave the way for preventing or reducing the rate of false confessions in the police investigation.