Drug crimes, regardless of the economic consequences, have threatened public and individual health and determined the international community to combat them effectively. Therefore, in the laws in question, CONFISCATION of property is considered as a punishment for criminals of drug crimes,while from a jurisprudential point of view, this punishment has faced challenges. The findings of the present study performed using descriptive-analytical method and based on library sources show that the legislator has accepted the CONFISCATION of property as a punishment for some drug crimes in article 18 of the Law on Medical and Pharmaceutical and Food and Beverage Regulations. According to jurisprudence, although man has the right of ownership over his property and assets, it does not mean he is absolute owner. According to special circumstances and assuming the existence of public interests, this right can be ignored in the form of CONFISCATION of property provided that other deterrents to committing drug offenses are not applicable.

Nowadays, the principle of personality of punishment is one of principles that is accepted by different countries, This principle requires that each kind of social reaction will be applied only to the perpetrator of crime, who takes part in criminal phenomena as principal offender, aider and abettor, or counselor and procurer. Therefore, those who do not participate in the crime occurrence must never encounter such reaction. CONFISCATION is one example of social reaction to crime. Although it may apply as civil forfeiture, its punitive nature is admitted by most jurists and lawyers. For this reason i.e. penal nature of CONFISCATION, it is compulsory that such a penalty is infected merely on the perpetrator of crime him/her self. So, it is necessary that as a result of enforcement of such a punishment, third parties that have no participation in crime should not be affected. But, in some cases, the application of this reaction is in opposition to the third parties rights.In this article, our aim is to analyse the circumstances of this opposition, and the possible rights of third parties in the CONFISCATION's process, and to find the methods and techniques to assert and protect the third parties' rights in juridical and law systems in Iran and England.

Changing the nature and method of committing traditional crimes to cyber crimes such as cyber fraud raises this main question in the criminal proceedings law that what changes of search and CONFISCATION will this nature of change bring about in the method of obtaining evidence through issueing search and CONFISCATION order of the system or data in the physical domain and what rules and regulations will be needed, as well? This article has attempted to answer this question in a descriptiveanalytical method and using data collection through note-taking and library research. Computer system as the place of searching for electronic evidence has considerable differences from a house as a search place of physical evidence. Rules governing the attainment of electronic evidence in Iran and in America, requires the search order having two issues: firstly, CONFISCATION of the computer system in the place where this system is and secondly search order for the files residing in the system. In regards to the CONFISCATION of the system or data, the US Criminal Law emphasizes on the role of the computer hardware and distinguishes between the system which are the subject of crime themselves and the systems that are only the place of maintaining the incriminating evidence, but Iran’ s Law emphasizes on the CONFISCATION of data unless in certain exceptional cases such as time-consuming search or large volume of data. If for any reasons, the system is confiscated, regarding the time it takes to search in the computer system which is in police stations, it is not necessary for police agents to comply with the physical evidence search rules, for example; to do the search order only in daytime, but they can do the search in the systems or data at any time of day.

The CONFISCATION of delinquent official’s properties for their punishment was started from the early Islamic era, certainly, during Umar reign. The benefits of that persuaded the caliphs to count on the CONFISCATION as a temporary and sometime permanent income source and thereby they established institutions and even dewans to inquest about those properties. In the present paper, the financial reliance of Abbasid caliphate on this source and consequently, the role of CONFISCATION of property in control of the wealth and power of elites have been surveyed.

Background and aim: Research of the Effectiveness of CONFISCATION of Certificate of Offended Drivers is carried out with aim of reducing road accidents in our dear country IRAN. Traffic accidents and deaths caused by it, are one of the daily news that is the most people in society injured in terms of financial injuries, personal injuries or psychological injuries. One of the ways to regulate traffic and reduce road accidents is appropriate and principled treatment with offending drivers that can be greatly reduced in accidents in accordance with the rules. Method: . This article is Descriptive-survey in kind of nature and method. The statistical population of this research is all drivers' certificates that were confiscated or seized because of a violation in the Arak city in the first 10 months of 1396. the statistical data recorded in the traffic police are used in order to study the variables findings: The results of this study indicate that the severity of dealing with violations and proper implementation of the rules by the traffic and driving officers, especially the CONFISCATION of certificate of the offender drivers, can be effective in reducing the incidence of incident offenses and thus reducing the occurrence of accidents. Discussion and conclusion: In this research, all the research hypotheses were confirmed and the overall conclusion was that by correct implementation of the rules by the traffic and driver officers and CONFISCATION of certificate of the offender drivers and their exclusion from driving have a direct impact on reducing the occurrence of violations, in particular accidental violations, as well as decreasing accidents.

One of the most important actions taken against property related to a crime is the CONFISCATION of this property in the form of CONFISCATION, and ownership is respected only if it arises legally. Therefore, it is necessary to usurp the property of others and to seize or possess illegitimate public property and to reject or return them to the rightful owners. Accordingly, we seek to answer the question of what the CONFISCATION of property resulting from a crime under Article 49 of the Constitution includes, and on what basis can it be analyzed? Research Method: Due to the nature of the subject, the present study has been done in terms of applied purpose and in terms of collecting information by documentary method and by studying valid laws and sources and the obtained information has been analyzed descriptively-analytically. Findings and Results: CONFISCATION of property of the convicted person by the government in one of the legal methods based on the laws of the country (or especially Article 49 of the Constitution), verses and hadiths and examples of CONFISCATION of property in jurisprudence include: return of public property, taking property from the usurper, Retaliation, rejection, taking and its derivatives.

Examining the laws related to acquired property, including the rules related to the organization, CONFISCATION and CONFISCATION of property, ownership, management and the way of exploitation of this property is of particular importance, without a doubt, one of the fairest principles of the Islamic Republic of Iran is Article 49, which is based on that government is obliged to return the property resulting from certain crimes, one of the most important of which is contraband and any other illegal acts, to the people and its real owners, and if they are unknown, give them to Baitulmal, in which case The government can use these properties to achieve its economic goals, such as developing industries, creating jobs, distributing resources, and improving the country's economic conditions. Compliance and efficiency of government laws and regulations with economic programs in any country is considered a development factor, and appropriate, impartial and anti-corruption legal structures play a significant role in this matter. In today's economic conditions, the government's role in making any type of decision and any of its policies is very important. In this research, which is analytical-descriptive, we came to the conclusion that the lack of strict monitoring of the use and evaluation of government assets,Inefficient and inappropriate use of them, inappropriate assignment and serious damage to assets due to their mismanagement are problems that are often observed in different stages of property management, and one of the main challenges of the government in this regard is the deposition of goods in customs warehouses and The ports of the country and the weakness of laws and structural and organizational problems in the organization of collecting and selling property are property.

The CONFISCATION of delinquent official's properties as an administrative punishment started from the beginning of Islamic era and certainly, Umar's reign. Regardless of such function, this practice became one way of acquiring income for Muslim rulers. In this survey, besides investigating the conceptual changes of CONFISCATION, the practical domain of the term has been inquired in Iran at the Islamic period up to the end of Safavid era. From the concerned data about CONFISCATIONs exerted in Islamic Iran, the authors try to present the history of official's CONFISCATION, and show that CONFISCATION has usually been considered as a complementary programmable income source.

The bail CONFISCATION order is a guarantee of the performance of the obligation that the bailor accepts following the issuance of a criminal security order. In Section 230 of the Criminal Procedure Law, the lawmaker referred the way of implementing the bail CONFISCATION order to the provisions of the Civil Judgment Enforcement Law. The substantive difference between the bail CONFISCATION order and the final judgment issued by the courts makes the implementation of the bail CONFISCATION order in accordance with the provisions of the recent law with ambiguity and delay. In this way, Section 75 of the Law on the Execution of Civil Judgments in the sale of seized property, before the publication of the auction notice, foresees the notification of the theory of the property appraiser to the parties of the case and gives them the right to protest. According to Section 143 of the mentioned law, after the auction, it is mandatory to verify the validity of the auction process by the court overseeing the execution of the judgment. Considering that the last part of Section 230 and Section 537 of the Criminal Procedure Code has placed the enforcement of the bail CONFISCATION order under the responsibility of the deputy for the execution of criminal sentences and its branches, in the practice and process of the execution of the bail CONFISCATION order.

As organized crime increasingly spread through drug crime in the 1980s and became an international problem; the ineffectiveness of existing legal tools to deal with it emerged; because the conviction of several organized criminals behind bars and the exploitation of the benefits of their crime after their release could not have had a tangible effect on defeating organized crime. In this respect, the system of CONFISCATION of property to fight international organized crime was recognized as a fundamental principle in international and national legal systems and grew and expanded significantly in terms of type and scope; One of its modern and progressive forms is "extended criminal CONFISCATION" Among the international organizations, the Financial Action Task Force and the European Union, and among the European countries, the United Kingdom has the leading systems of extensive criminal CONFISCATION. Therefore, in this study, with the aim of pathology and optimization of the legal system governing the CONFISCATION of property related to crime in the Islamic Republic of Iran, with a comparative view, the components of the extended criminal CONFISCATION system in the leading legal systems are described and based on the legal system approach. Iran is assessed and pathologically evaluated In order to provide effective suggestions for reforming the laws governing property related to crime; Extensive CONFISCATION in leading legal systems has four components: criminal offenses, legal presumptions, reduction of the value of proof and litigation revolution. In Iran's legal system, although extensive criminal CONFISCATION is provided for in the Anti-Money Laundering Amendment Law approved in 2017; But it lacks the first and second components, and regarding the third component, although suspicion is close to science, it has been legislated; But it lacks objective and quantitative criteria; Therefore, it is suggested that the legislator, like other leading legal systems, formulates the component of predicate crimes and legal assumptions in the legal system governing extended criminal CONFISCATION and, like the English legal system, establish objective criteria such as "criminal lifestyle" and "period of criminal activity" to study suspicion. Legislate with science.it should be noted that this research has been done by descriptive-analytical method and in the collection of resources, the library method has been used.