Given the importance of the offence of smuggling of goods and currency, the legislature has taken a strictly Differential approach to this offence, but in some cases, the legislature has taken a more Differential approach to some instances of this offence. Organized smuggling of goods and currency is one of them. With a descriptive and analytical approach, this article seeks to identify the concept of organized smuggling and then the measures taken by the legislature to combat it and the challenges in front. In the Law of Combat Against Smuggling of Goods and Currency, for the first time, the legislator introduced the concept of organized smuggling of goods and currency to the Iranian legal literature and, with the aim of a strict response, envisaged Differential substantive and formal measures, such as: Absolute Criminalization of this behavior, intensification of punishment of organized members and leaders of the organized group, the anticipation of jurisdiction for the Revolutionary Court, identification of special discoverer organizations and provision of special powers and duties for them. Despite the large volume of smuggling in the country for reasons such as the narrow interpretation of the offence of smuggling of goods and currency from the Supreme Court, the lack of familiarity with the characteristics and criteria for detecting organized smuggling and the haste of attending authorities of smuggling of goods and currency, in practice, many detected smuggling cases are considered normally.

Criminal Policy may be assessed in a framework that is defined by the logical basic elements of crime. These are the motivated and able offender, the victim or target, and control. It is only in certain combinations of these three elements that a crime can take place, and Criminal Policy addresses one or several of these elements. The objectives of Criminal Policy are defined being fourfold: to minimize the social costs of crime,to minimize the costs of crime control,to distribute these costs,and to do this in a fair manner. It is such considerations that are to be accounted for if knowledge-based Criminal Policy is to be defined and implemented. In reallife terms, this is rarely being done comprehensively. Criminal Policy is, in contrast, often simplistically understood as „, fighting crime“, , i. e. in terms of warfare. Today, Criminal Policy requires careful consideration in particular because both crimes and their environment are undergoing rapid change. This puts decision-making in a particularly demanding situation and accentuates the need for valid knowledge of the situation. Therefore, there is great need of updated research on old and new forms of crime, and such research should address all central elements of crime. The near future of Criminal Policy is much influenced by financial crisis. This creates high demands for a more consciously knowledge-based and better quality crime control. The near future may see both positive and negative developments, the negative ones being more likely if Criminal Policy is not made in a responsible and comprehensive manner. The alternative of a positive Criminal Policy is suggested as a utopian but achievable goal.

Diyat in unintentional crimes is not just a punishment, but rather the nature of compensation. Therefore, in order to respect the rights of the perpetrators of these behaviors, which in terms of lack of Criminal malice, it is not correct to refer to them as Criminals, as well as to avoid labeling and compensation for the victim (damaged) quickly and definitively, the legislature formulates Criminal Policy. Differentiate and enact different formal and substantive laws, adopt a new approach with a different mechanism in dealing with this issue, because it is clear that the perpetrators of these behaviors (crimes) are treated the same as the perpetrators of other intentional crimes in the process of issuance. And the implementation of the verdict in the judiciary is not compatible with Criminal justice.

Background and Aim: Differential Criminal Policy in criminology is one of the first manifestations of pluralism in Criminal law systems. The purpose of this study is to investigate and apply Differential Criminal Policy in the field of unintentional crimes causing diyat. Materials and Methods: This research is of theoretical type and the research method is descriptive-analytical and the method of data collection is library and has been done by referring to documents, books and articles. Results: He observed manifestations of Differential Criminal Policy in the design and adoption of Criminal laws, especially the new Islamic Penal Code. In recent laws, we can see examples of the legislator's Differential approach in dealing with judicial authorities from the time of discovery to the execution of sentences for unintentional crimes causing diyat. However, it seems that the mentioned regulations do not have the necessary comprehensiveness and at present it is not possible to explicitly confirm the existence of a Differential Criminal Policy in unintentional crimes causing diyat. Ethical considerations: In order to organize this research, while observing the authenticity of the texts, honesty and fidelity have been observed. Conclusion: Looking at the world of law from the perspective of postmodernism and the complexity of the relations of the subjects of law has caused failure and refraction in the world of law; This means that traditional classifications cannot cover the current complex relationships of legal entities. The discriminatory Criminal Policy in relation to unintentional crimes causing diyat is no exception to this principle. From this perspective, a comprehensive and unified order for all areas of Criminal law cannot be considered.

Background and Aim: The reaction to the crime, which in the past was repressive in all cases and was formed only by considering the actus reus, during the evolution of Criminal law, was transformed into a combination of repressive-preventive responses and examining the mens rea as well. It has become one of the important foundations of Criminal responsibility. As a result, now the removal of Criminal responsibility from a person who does not have the power of perception and discrimination or does not act voluntarily is one of the principles of Criminal law. However, the victim's mental disorder is the another side of the coin. A look at the researches show that people with mental disorders are the victims of these crimes, rather than being dangerous and the perpetrators of particularly violent crimes,Therefore, it is expected that this important issue in the relationship between insanity and crime will be considered by the Criminal legislator. Materials and Methods: Our assumption in this study is that if the legislator expands the concept and examples in the subject of offender's insanity and cover more people consequently will be under Criminal protection as special victims because of their mental disorder. To this purpose, we will use a descriptive-analytical method to examine the question of whether the meaning that the legislator has adopted of insanity, where the victim of the crime is insane, can be used in the same way? Results: The establishment of insanity in two cases of offender's insanity and victim's insanity is the source of effect. However, what the Islamic Penal Code has provided regarding the definition of insanity and its examples, is a supportive approach that has been taken with the aim of removing Criminal responsibility from a range of patients with mental disorders. This approach will not be applicable in all cases where the victim has a mental disorder. Because of some discriminatory provisions in domestic law that deal with the insane victim this semantic adjustment is contrary to the protectionist approach, and in practice a wide range of individuals will become legal victims. Ethical considerations: In order to organize this research, honesty and fidelity have been observed. Conclusion: While the results of the researches indicate the vulnerability of victims with mental disorders, this issue in Iranian law faces legislative challenges and protective gaps. The legislator has ignored the mental state of the victim by focusing on the insanity of the offender. The study suggest incorporating the victim's mental disorder into the substantive Criminal law, this should first be considered in terms of aggravation of punishment in Tazirat or positive discrimination that uses sometimes for some Vulnerable individuals is intended to spread to people with mental disorders. Second, in crimes where the normality of the victim is one of the necessary circumstances in the commission of the crime, the commission of that crime on the insane victim should be provided with special conditions. And third, in Hudud and Retaliation, wherever the proof of punishment depends on the victim being rational, he should refrain from generalizing the current definition of insanity and its criteria to the victim and seek to establish an independent establishment from the victim of insanity.

The hard line Criminal Policy that has attracted attention from 1970s and specially 1980s, has several aspects and strategies including incapacitation through three strikes and you're out laws. This perspective has been welcomed in some countries including U.S.A. as we may name it as the overruled Policy for combating against some Criminals specially recidivists and career Criminals in this country.In this approach as emphasizing the Necessity of neutralization and incapacitation recidivists, It is supposed that we can diminish the rate of Criminality through dispelling some Criminals and keeping them behind the bars of prisons. In this article I will consider the history, aspects and also the results of this Policy in U.S. Criminal justice system. also the adherent and Critics to this Policy will be studied.

The science of law as one of the main sciences governing social relations, which, in addition to legislation and regulation of social relations, is also a supervisory pillar of the application of law in society, in order to prevent chaos and disorder in the social relations of individuals, it is necessary to react to emerging social phenomena. to show One of the new phenomena in the field of international economic order is the emergence of cryptocurrencies, which has overshadowed legal and economic affairs in Iran. Cryptocurrencies have raised new issues in the field of law and economics since their popularity in the country due to their different nature from common and traditional money. During this research, while examining the criminological causes, we will discuss how cryptocurrencies will increase the number of crimes committed directly and indirectly, and whether it is necessary for governments to adopt a Differential Criminal Policy in dealing with these crimes. Based on library sources, this article tries to describe and analyze the challenges of the unregulated spread of cryptocurrencies, and the achievement of the article is the awareness of the statesmen to adopt a Criminal Policy; that, while identifying and introducing illegal acts in the field of cryptocurrencies, succeed in formulating a comprehensive and preventive law.

Considering the sensitivity of the job of the armed forces and the need to control their performance, having a Differential Criminal Policy for the crimes of the armed forces is of particular importance for any country, as in the Criminal system of Iran before and after the Islamic Revolution, the Criminal Policy for the armed forces It was and is a distinction intended by the legislator. The purpose of the current research is to examine the Criminal Policy of the Iranian Armed Forces Law regarding the sale, pity and desire and handing over of military objects and property by the armed forces. Selling, stealing and handing over military objects and property are important crimes in the Criminal system of Iran's armed forces, so that in the laws of the armed forces before the Islamic revolution (the Law of Military Trials approved on 21/07/1928 and the Law of Procedure and Army Punishment approved 26/12/1939) and after the Islamic Revolution (Armed Forces Crimes Punishment Law approved 09/08/1992 and Armed Forces Crimes Punishment Law approved 30/12/2003). The present study, which is applied in terms of type and purpose, and has been carried out with a descriptive-analytical method, is trying to answer the question that the Criminal laws of the armed forces before and after the Islamic revolution in relation to the sale, pity and desire and transfer of objects. What kind of Differential Criminal Policy have the military and property followed? In response, It can be stated that the Differential Criminal Policy in this regard is both a strict Criminal Policy and a lenient Criminal Policy.

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.