CRIMINAL LAW RESEARCH
Year:2017 | Volume:5 | Issue:18 |Papers Count:6

Criminal policy, as part of public policy, enjoys significant feature due to the fact that governments have different characteristics and their identity is formulated by diverse concepts and their establishment follows different goals. The Islamic Republic of Iran as a political system based on ‘Republicanism’ and ‘Islamite’ enjoys its specific criminal policy according to the two given components. These two components can have specific consequences which distinguish the regime of Iran from the others. While it is true that adoption of republicanism and Islamite as two basic components for political regime can force the government to follow the principles of democracy including the rule of law, civil society, and respect for equality and freedom which change the face of criminal policy, the question remains that how adoption of Islamite stressing on the respect for necessities of religion can impact on the criminal policy. In this article, we attempt to elucidate the two components of republicanism and Islamite alongside the modeling the criminal policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran based on aforementioned components from the theoretical standpoint.

In responding to criminal phenomena, the criminal policy takes principles and methods by which its general prospects would be revealed. Nowadays, we face with increasing rate of crimes which violate security and welfare of the citizens leading to change criminal policy’s strategy from offender-based towards crime based in order to provide the security in a way that fundamental principles of criminalization, criminal liability, and sentencing are changed and bears a differential interpretations. Supposing the offenders as an enemy, it creates a hostile-oriented criminal law and due to the globalization of crimes and gross violation of national and international security, it seeks uttermost security. Stressing on extreme slogans of providing security for citizens, it seems that criminal policy has encountered a kind of crisis in the context of humanitarian law and failed to achieve its goals. Whether the security-oriented criminal policy can reach the goals in spite of the existence of serious challenges or not is a matter of concern in this article.

Situational crime prevention techniques are considered as fundamental elements of the cyber security and protection of likely targets from possible criminal attacks. The technological nature of some measures are such that can violate a vast number of fundamental rights, including the free flow of information, and can prevent users from receiving, seeking, and imparting intended contents. International human rights obligations of governments prevent them from the maximum application of preventive measures. However, the security for the sake of public order is accepted to the extent that human dignity can still be guaranteed in areas where possible crimes of this nature may be committed; the whole context should not be determined by security considerations any more than is absolutely necessary. Hence, the application of situational prevention measures is logical and supported to the extent where everyone is some how extent responsible for crime prevention, and users are not deprived of a legitimate right of access to the World Wide Web when the goal is a reduction of potential opportunities for crime. In this article, we evaluate the violation of the right to the free flow of information through the most common measures used to limit or deny access, taking into account on the one hand the fact that extensive application of these measures could also limit the spread of creative ideas of network users while, on the other hand it can safeguard against political and social despotisms.

The cases which can be counted as searching and seizing the evidence without needing the legal warrant, are situations proposed as “Third-Party Consent” doctrine. In the American system, officials can search any place or object without having a warrant or even a probable cause, provided that a person authorized to consent voluntarily agrees to the inspection. This doctrine has always been involved with two issues including determining: “Third-party consent territory” and “the identity of the authorized persons to consent”. Gradually, foundations of doctrine were challenged and it was claimed that it did not have the capability of surviving in the current situation and according to its old understanding. In fact, the arrival of modern technology in the age of communication and in the cyber territory due to the change of subjects and the conceptual transformation of the doctrine in the field of technologies, it has faced many challenges. Doubts towards efficiency of the doctrine became apparent when it was observed that almost all services in the current age are being provided by Third-Party; hence, the traditional reading of the Doctrine leaves no trace of privacy. In this review, we will explain the Third-Party Doctrine in the cyber environment.

Judicial decision-making is the most significant element of any litigation. Such decision ranged from very early injunction final vote is influenced by various factors. These factors, in addition to the contents and facts of the case in criminal cases, deal with the defendant and victim’s personality and the function of criminal justice institutions. Still, what has not been embarked on enough is the judge's mental schemata as the models of judicial decision-making which is discussed under the title of the patterns of judicial decision-making. The model, based on reality, is a design which shows the main links that exist among the main factors of a phenomenon. In lawsuits, the scheme which forms the basis of decision-making might include the law, the attitude of the judge, the judge's strategy and the judge`s personal attributes any of which is discussed as the model of decision-making. Although the law comes to view as the first the first obvious model forming the decision-making, it shall not escape our notice that it fails to clear the reason which rests behind a judge’s decision. Accordingly, subsequent researches investigated the Attitude, strategy and personality traits and proved that these factors impacted the judicial decisions.

In this paper, the analysis of one of the main prerequisite conditions of situational prevention, i.e. the warning condition is investigated. The condition is analyzed under two main titles; the first one is the necessity of warning in Fiqh, human rights, and criminology. Afterward, such necessity alongside its conditions in order to achieve the proper way of warning is examined from the viewpoint of ordinary people, experts, and offenders. It will be concluded that, for it is fairly common for ordinary citizens who use dangerous or even fatal protective equipment to keep their properties safe from any criminal activities, it is essential for the state to make attempts to suggest appropriate laws to the legislature and legally determines conditions, types and other technicalities of different situational crime prevention measures and their legal limits. In this way, people will be aware of the legal domain of taking preventive measures without being trapped in criminal liability for hurting people who face such measures during their criminal activities.