Field and Aims: Cybercrime is one of the CRIMES that is considered in this regard due to the accelerated development of information and communication technology and short criminal history in this field. In recent years, the Islamic Republic of Iran has considered this area from the perspective of the penal system, but today, however, we clearly and abundantly face legal and criminological inadequacies in these LAWs. The revision of LAWs, based on specialized studies and in line with technology and up-to-date knowledge in the field of combating economic CRIMES, is a cure for the unpleasant event of inefficiency of LAWs in this field and, consequently, the spread of related CRIMES. Methodology: In this research, which has been done through documentary studies and through the study of relevant LAWs and domestic and international scientific and specialized sources, an overview of current LAWs, including analysis of the need to review the COMPUTER Economic CRIMES LAW in the form of descriptive research. We are analyzing. Findings: What should be considered as the most important element of this review and development is to pay attention to the results of specialized criminal evaluation in the field of crime prevention and deterrence of related punishments, which show more than anything else the lack of legal instances of these CRIMES and lack of Necessary comprehensiveness is present in the present LAWs, in addition to the fact that the existing LAWs do not have a sufficient deterrent aspect according to the results of field evaluations, therefore these cases deserve attention. In other words, increasing the security of this space and economic progress in the field of e-commerce depends on the adoption of accurate scientific and technical strategies, and the development of interdisciplinary knowledge as well as recognizing the criminal responsibility of individuals to deal with these CRIMES. Conclusion: Finally, the legislator should provide as much as possible the context of a deterrent, inclusive and beneficial criminal policy to the society to deal with such CRIMES and by formulating and approving up-todate, efficient and appropriate LAWs, the field of COMPUTER economic CRIMES under He controlled and supervised the ruling forces of the society.

The Rohingya people are the native inhabitants of Arakan (Rakhine) land in Myanmar, who have faced a series of CRIMES by the Myanmar army and government. Based on the norms and regulations of international and customary international LAW and the principles of international criminal LAW and considering the incidents that occurred against the religious minority group of Rohingya Muslims, the continuous violation of human rights and the occurrence of the crime of genocide by the Myanmar government are a matter of fact. There are numerous examples of deliberate actions, which prove the governmental steps to eliminate the Rohingya group, and deliberate measures, which cause the international responsibility of the Myanmar government. Iran has raised three specific positions regarding the Rohingya Muslim crisis.The major question of the research is to evaluate the occurrence or non-occurrence of violations of international criminal LAW, the CRIMES of genocide, and CRIMES against humanity by the Myanmar army and government against the Muslim minority in Rakhine state.The hypothesis emphasizes the definite occurrence of violations of humanitarian LAW and international criminal LAW, especially committing CRIMES of genocide and CRIMES against humanity. The purpose of the research is to examine one of the important cases of violation of Muslim rights in today's world, which has not been noticed by international legal societies. It tries to discuss briefly the Iranian positions on the Issue. The analytical-descriptive research method is based on official docs and undeniable facts, especially the documents issued by the International Criminal Court.

Criminal protection of the capital market is considered as a separate matter in the rights related to investment. The purpose of this support is to protect the rights of shareholders, to create order in the stock trading market, and also to prevent harmful behaviors. In order to achieve these objectives, it is necessary that the determined criminal execution guarantees are appropriate to the committed behaviors and have been formulated and approved in order to achieve these objectives. The 6th and 7th degree punishments, which were modified and suspended in different ways in the reforms of 2019, cannot be considered as a deterrent and, of course, a reformer in the case of harmful stock market behavior. On the other hand, due to the spread of stock market activities at the community level and the involvement of different groups of people in this economic scene, and following the occurrence of some harmful behaviors with a wide range, the proportion between the behavior criminality and determined legal punishments, to be violated in an obvious way. It seems that in order to compensate for this shortcoming in Iran's criminal policy, it is necessary to carry out a fundamental review of criminal behavior and on the other hand, taking into account the amount of damage caused to individuals and the economy as a whole, appropriate CRIMES should be established that have deterrent power and restorative properties. to have ​

Penal LAW defines the CRIMES and the penal reactions appropriate to those CRIMES, on the one part and describes the manner of penal investigation process, on the other part. The regulations of Penal LAW are applied to all its subjects. However, some special regulations are allocated to part of the subjects based on the social advancements. One of those special regulations is criminalization in the area of Labor LAW. The Iranian legislature has explained a series of social values and criminalized over forty titles in this LAW upon the enactment of the Labor LAW in 1990 with the aim of supporting the labor rights. These values are required to be considered separately. On the other hand, it is crucially important to control the employer and employee relations with various levers due to the special situation of the employees. In particular, the penal regulations contained in the Labor LAW have been entirely enacted through a specific process by the Expediency Discernment Council. Here comes this question: What was the reason for criminalization by the legislator in the field of Labor LAW and what special conditions do the specific penalties contained in the Labor Code have? The present Article seeks to find the answer to the said questions by collecting data based on the library and descriptive-analytical method. Finally, an attempt has been made to explain the special rules and conditions that govern employer CRIMES. This research can help to develop the range of studies on the penalties caused by working.

A survey of the history of changes in criminal LAW makes it clear that once the concept of "public order" was first recognized and its violation as an essential component of crime was acknowledged in various societies, " the principle of unremissionability of CRIMES" was accepted. In the Iranian statutory LAWs, the legislator has also considered two aspects for a crime: public aspect and private aspect. Due to the priority given to the public aspect, the above-mentioned principle was accepted. With respect to those CRIMES for which the private aspect was dominant, the principle of remissionability was accepted but only extended to those ones which were clearly included in the LAWs concerned. After the Islamic Revolution in Iran (1979), the religious concepts of "Haqollah" and "Haqonnas" (the right of God and the right of people) were used, by the legislator for public aspect and private aspect of CRIMES respectively. CRIMES for which the Haqollah aspect was dominant were considered unremissionable and CRIMES for which the Haqonnas aspect was dominant were regarded remissionable. With this change, the number of remissionable CRIMES was increased. During the two decades of 1360s and 1370s, first the jurisprudence and then the legislation, with due regard to social realities and analysis of religious precepts, emphasized the public aspect of crime and the unremissionability of certain CRIMES on the one hand and enumerated remissionable CRIMES as before the 1979 Revolution on the other thus, looking at the subject from a new perspective.

In the context of the plurality of CRIMES, the question is that how the justice should distinguish between the criminals who have committed a crime for the first time and an offender who has committed several offenses. Based on the proportionally principle the punishment should be different in these two situations. To achieve this goal, the Iranian and the German legal systems have adopted two different paths. This article, by adopting a comparative-analytical method, seeks to systematically explain the legal term of plurality of CRIMES, and critically evaluates the similarities and disparities of the Iranian and German criminal LAW. Different practices of punishing the plurality of offenses after the Islamic revolution in Iran and the early reform of the regulations concerning the plurality of CRIMES in the Islamic Penal Code Iran, adopted in 2013, indicate the importance of this topic. The Iranian and German legal systems differ from each other in differentiation criteria of plurality from recidivism, the concept of unreal plurality of CRIMES, the separation of crime in real crime plurality and its punishment and the crime plurality of juvenile delinquents. Also in punishment of unreal plurality and recognition of non-independent CRIMES in the judicial procedures these two systems have similarities with each other. As a result, there are some ambiguities in the relevant legal provisions, regarding crime plurality including legislative or judicial criteria of the most severe punishment. In addition, some issues such as separation criteria of real plurality in the Islamic Penal Code of Iran and interference of penalties in this kind of plurality have no reliable justification.

Due to the growing development of technology in recent times, great changes have occurred in man’s life, having positive and negative aspects; among the most important achievements is the telecommunicative progress which has brought human from telegraph and first telephones to internet phones. Such progress has caused commitment of many CRIMES, including communicative ones, which can be divided into pure telecommunicative and telecommunication-related CRIMES; each of these classes includes a wide spectrum of CRIMES.The first category constitutes of CRIMES committed with telecommunicative tools and CRIMES against telecommunicative systems; while the latter consists traditional CRIMES which are transformed by telecommunicative systems.In the Iranian legal system, despite the attempts to cover the instances of such CRIMES, a lot of partial and limited regulations and fLAWed criminalization have been made; a fact that necessitates a change in legislator’s approach and carrying out structural amendments in this field.

COMPUTER CRIMES are CRIMES unique to COMPUTER spaces and electronic data, which can also go beyond the borders of a country and find an extraterritorial and international description. This type of crime, while being committed in a limited space, may have irreparable effects and even target a country or several parts of the world. In order to effectively deal with this type of crime, the legislator passed the Electronic Commerce LAW in 2003 and then the COMPUTER CRIMES LAW in 2009. Considering the existing regulations, although such a measure itself was necessary and essential, determining punishment for COMPUTER CRIMES without scientific attention and consideration of all important and strategic requirements and principles will not be fruitful. The present study, which was written using an analytical-applied method and using library resources, seeks to present the requirements governing the determination of punishment for this type of crime, by separating negative from positive requirements, in such a way that the legislator, in the capacity of punisher, can take steps towards effectively combating COMPUTER CRIMES by taking these requirements into account and reducing the inefficiency of existing punishments. The purpose of this study is to attempt to formulate extra-legislative requirements that, with a more complete view and based on existing principles, objectives, and realities, improve the situation of punishment for CRIMES in this area. 

Maritime terrorism is as old as its history. From ancient times to the first decade of the 21st century, perpetrators of all kinds of violence, including kidnapping, sabotage and direct attacks on targets, have inhabited the high seas as well as the wider marine environment. Terrorism at sea becomes important when a significant part of the world's trade is carried out by sea. One of the challenges of dealing with terrorism at sea and the inefficiency of the means to deal with it is found in the Convention on the LAW of the Sea. Therefore, security in the seas is also considered a part of this convention; But in it, the issue of maritime terrorism is not addressed separately. Therefore, terrorist CRIMES in the seas and the fight against them are among the issues raised in international LAW, especially the international LAW of the seas, so that the first measures in this direction also go back to the era of the League of Nations. However, this article tries to use the descriptive and analytical research method while measuring the mechanisms of dealing with CRIMES in the sea territory, and examines the way of dealing with and suppressing terrorist CRIMES. Of course, according to the concern of coastal communities and international organizations caused by maritime terrorism, a suitable solution can be proposed, which is the participation of private companies to help fight terrorism in the sea, despite the disagreement about this approach and legal basis. It acted in international LAW.