Iran's new criminal policy in the legislative, judicial, and executive dimensions is in line with the rapprochement. On the other hand, the individualization of the execution of the punishment guarantees the reformative goals of the punishment. The present article emphasizes the necessity of "combining the policy of individualization of punishment with the criminal policy of rapprochement in the light of the role of the execution judge".The question Is: to what extent do the current powers provide the possibility of adapting the execution of the punishment to the personal, family, and social conditions of the criminal in line with the arbitrary criminal policy? In this article, in a descriptive-analytical way, the discretionary authority of the judge in the execution of the sentences has been criticized and analyzed from the perspective of arbitrary criminal policy. The findings of the research show that the authority of the judge to execute sentences is defined only in the framework of "primary exclusion" - based on the individual characteristics of the convicted person, while le the individualization of fraternity requires the creation of "secondary exclusion" mechanisms - based on conditions outside the personality of the convicted person and her/his behavior during the execution of the sentence.1.Introduction The criminal process does not end with the determination of the punishment, but the main stage after the verdict is the "execution of the punishment" and the effectiveness of the reaction against the crime and the realization of the goals of the punishment depends on how the punishment is applied and how much and how much the behavior of the "judge who executes the sentences" in the "pre-decision" stage. On the other hand, arbitrary criminal policy has many benefits for society, the accused, and the judicial system.Some believe that the execution judge entered the criminal system with the purpose of individualizing punishments and has duties and powers in the field of suspension, postponement of sentencing, parole, partial release, and alternative punishments of imprisonment. (Mousavi Fard et al., 2016: 13) Therefore, the judge must know that she is an independent judge and her decisions can be appealed (Cartier, 2001: 90).From the analytical point of view, what distinguishes the "current situation" from the "ideal situation" is the type of activism of the executive judge to combine the policy of individualization with the arbitrary policy. In this context, the main question of the research is whether the current authority of the judge to execute the sentence and the legal mechanisms of individualizing the execution of the punishment can be considered in line with the arbitrary criminal policy. MethodologyIn this article, in a descriptive-analytical way, the discretionary authority of the judge in the execution of the sentences has been criticized and analyzed from the perspective of arbitrary criminal policy.For this purpose, the legal powers of the judge for the execution of sentences include "independent actions" and "dependent actions" and under each section, examples of "mandatory actions" and "discretionary actions" of the judge have been reviewed and in each case, to create areas of "individualization of rapprochement", while identifying and highlighting existing gaps and weaknesses, solutions have been proposed to improve the role of the judge in the execution of sentences. Results and DiscussionFrom the author's point of view, the authority given to the judge for the execution of sentences, rather than being a purposeful and intelligent mechanism in the direction of judicialization of punishment and "executive- arbitrary segregation", is merely a form of incomplete division of work and removal of the workload from the shoulders of court judges.On the other hand, merely involving a person with judicial expertise in the execution stage of the sentence, without giving independent legal powers and without taking into account a corrective approach in the application of punishment, is only an administrative shift rather than a judicial transformation in line with the knowledge of criminology.In such a situation, where the final decision regarding the use of reconciliation mechanisms is in the hands of the court judge, perhaps we can talk about "judicial exclusion", but talking about "executive segregation" is very difficult and far from the realities and existing legal capacities. From this point of view, the exclusive jurisdiction of the judge for the execution of sentences requires having independent powers and turning "dependent actions" into "independent powers".In this regard, the author's proposal, on the one hand, is to amend the legal provisions related to the authority of the judge of execution sentences to increase the independent authority of the judge of execution of sentences to individualize the execution of punishment and on the other hand, the collection of scattered provisions in the Islamic Penal Code and the Criminal Procedure Law is under Article 489 of the latter law. ConclusionsMerely giving authority to the judge to execute sentences without formulating and drawing a specific criminal policy will not only cause the punishments to be effective and not have a corrective effect but rather, sometimes the neglect and even abuse of the executive authority's aggravating powers will cause strictness on the convict and her exclusion from correctional institutions.From this point of view, drawing and understanding the arbitrary criminal policy - which is the new strategy of Iran's criminal policy - and justifying the judges who execute sentences to use the capacity of arbitrary institutions, will provide the basis for the individualization of arbitrary and the realization of the reformist character of punishment.Also, the individualization of punishment should not be based only on personality traits and individual conditions of self-condemned (primary segregation), but family, environmental, and peripheral factors and possibilities of punishment should also be considered in individualization (secondary segregation).For example, the density of the prison population the spread of disease in the prison, or the prevalence of drug use or gross immorality in the prison environment should be a reason for the individualization of the execution of the sentence by the judge.The intended mechanism can be in the form of adding a clause to Article 18 of the Islamic Penal Code, with the content that the court takes into account the following matters when issuing a penalty sentence:”… Side factors beyond the defendant's will and conditions such as prison facilities and population, natural disasters such as floods and earthquakes in the defendant's residence or the place of punishment, general health conditions such as widespread diseases and…” Selection of ReferencesAhmadi Movahhed, Asghar (2007), execution of criminal sentences, third edition, Tehran: Mizan publishing house. [In Persian]Ahmadzadeh, Rasul and Tam, Mojtabi (1402), Procedure of Punishment, first edition, Tehran: Judiciary Publications. [In Persian]Heydari, Ali Morad (2016), General Criminal Law; Jurisprudential-legal review of reaction against crime, second edition, Tehran: Samt Publications. [In Persian]Jessica Breen(2008), “Prisoners’ Families and the Ripple Effects of Imprisonment”, Studies: An Irish Quarterly Review, Vol. 97, No. 385, The Family Today (Spring 2008), Published By: Messenger Publications, pp. 59-71. Louise Robinson, Sue Tucker, Claire Hargreaves,(2022), “Providing Social Care following Release from Prison: Emerging Practice Arrangements Further to the Introduction of the 2014 Care Act”, The British Journal of Social Work, Volume 52, Issue 2, March 2022, Pages 982–1002,Miller v. Alabama, (2012), “Banning mandatory juvenile life-without-parole sentences”, Washington and Lee Law Review, Volume 76 Issue 1 Article 4. pp 312-320.Rahmdel, Mansour (2014), Criminal Procedure Code, third volume, second edition, Tehran: Justice Publishing House.Tavajjohi, Abdul Ali (1402), Arbitrary institutions in the Islamic Penal Code approved in 2013, first edition, Tehran, Judiciary Publications. [In Persian]

execution of judgments is the most dangerous stage of the judicial process, which can guarantee individual and public rights. In this regard, the judge of the execution of criminal sentences entered Iran's criminal law with the aim of individualizing and deterring punishments, and, in order to implement this goal at the stage of sentence execution, along with social workers and other institutions related to the pathology and clinical examination of the convict, a definitive punishment is in force. According to his/her current character and during the time period of execution of the sentence, he/she adjusts and implements it, so that after issuing the sentence and during the appeal process, the convicted person is placed in the hands of the judge who executes the criminal sentences, and this judicial authority can in order to realize and guarantee the principle of individualization of punishments, personalization of punishments, the principle of equality of arms, the principle of the legality of crime and punishment, and the correct supervision of the execution of criminal sentences, it should play an effective role, and by having a modifiable approach, in addition to creating reconciliation at the community level, provides a suitable space for the implementation of justice and makes all people partners in the implementation of this justice. Of course, the powers of the execution authority are supervisory and executive powers, and they do not have the right to adjust and modify the punishment. Therefore, individualizing punishments can play an important role in preventing criminals from returning to crime. The legislator should also expand the authority of the judge to execute the criminal sentences and try to solve the existing legal challenges.

In the Code of Criminal Procedure adopted in 1392 in the field of execution of sentences and in the discussion of respect for the rights of convicts and convicts and supervision of prisoners, useful measures have been taken. The purpose of criminal proceedings is to achieve the realization of the crime and its attribution and the realization of the criminal responsibility of the accused and the punishment or security and educational measures for the convict to be implemented in a timely manner so that no criminal remains unpunished and unreformed in society. execution of the sentence, lack of access to the residence and residence of the convicted person, failure to introduce the convicted person to execute the sentence by the guarantor or guarantor, imprisonment of the convicted person, or obstacles of judicial origin can be mentioned as lack of supervision over the lawsuit and notice The judge also sentenced corporal punishment, including life imprisonment and corporal punishment for amputation and flogging, or negative punishment and restriction of liberty, rights and dignity, including imprisonment, deportation and deprivation of residence in the border strip and expulsion or expulsion from the country. Compulsory residence in a certain place or financial punishment, including blood money, fines, confiscation, confiscation and destruction of property, is supervised, and the case will not be closed until the sentence is carried out.

One of the most important stages in the criminal process is the implementation of the sentences, and the result of a high and progressive prosecution of crimes is highlighted. Because, on the one hand, the efforts of all the activists of the criminal justice system have not been achieved and, on the other hand, by carrying out the guarantees of criminal proceedings, the basic objectives of punishment, namely, the deterrence, reformation and reinstatement of the prisoners, and thus the right to benefit the community and the victim of the investigator It turns out. In French law, the execution of a criminal conviction is also considered a judicial stage in which the judge for the execution of the sentence, the penal court and the sentencing committee may, based on the change in the behavior of the convicted personality, without reference to the court issuing the sentence of the sentence Moderate. In the English Penal System, the judiciary institution is not individually predicted to execute sentences, but is differentiated by different institutions outside the judicial system, under the supervision of the Interior Ministry, to enforce the sentences and to adapt them to the convicted person; however, in some cases, the issuing court It can make a modification or reduction in the initial order. However, in Iran's penal system, judges have more enforcement and supervisory powers and prosecutors are employed in an administrative capacity. However, it seems that judicializing the institution of execution of judgments and creating indigenous changes in proportion to the size of the cases can lead to ensuring that the execution of sentences is proportionate and individualized with the convicted person.

The principle of judicialization of execution, which expresses the necessity of the intervention of the judicial authority, along with wide powers in the execution of the punishment and in order to make the punishment appropriate to the character of the convicts, is one of the most important principles of fair proceedings at this stage. Many legislators, realizing the necessity of this principle in the implementation phase, have accepted and applied its requirements for a long time. Appointing a qualified judge to execute judgments, granting the necessary powers to him and the enforcement body, and the possibility of protesting his decisions, are the most important requirements and requirements of the principle of judicialization of the execution of criminal judgments. Now, while recognizing the execution judge, he has granted him powers; However, this is facing serious criticisms and challenges due to the non-determination of conditions such as expertise and experience, non-granting of full judicial powers and the impossibility of protesting his decisions. It seems that the approval of the "Law on the execution of Criminal Sentences" and the creation of an independent structure of the institution of the execution of criminal judgments along with the granting of the necessary powers in the field of the use of correctional institutions, the right to change the punishment and the recognition of the decisions of the execution judge as objectionable in a higher authority, seem to be the solution.

According to the popular philosophical theories, the subject matter of metaphysics is "absolute existence" or "existent as existent". For this theory to be correct, it is necessary for existence to be capable of accepting any judgment. It means that one should be able to judge on existence by some judgments or attributes. This article wants to argue that it is impossible to do that. Therefore, it is impossible for. "existence" to be the subject matter of philosophy.

Witness is one of proofs that when its requirements are gathered proves the subject of action and judge is obliged to render the verdict according to it and its validity is not contingent on certainty of judge. But its depending on not certitude of judge against it, is discussable and the research on this field shows that in religious jurisprudence, the certainty of judge against testimony causes the invalidity of witness and the judge should deny rendering judgment according to it. Our Civil Code has accepted this matter and has explained it in article 1319. Meanwhile, about certainty of judge against testimony, situation in religious jurisprudence and in law is not similar and despite the fact of emphasis on necessity of reversal of judgment in such situation in religious jurisprudence, in law, reversal of judgment in such situation depends on requirements, respites and regulations of complaint against judgments.

Known Jurists stress that the judge needs to be a jurist; however, others, mainly contemporary ones, disagree, highlighting that a non-juristcan be a judgeif other conditions are fulfilled and a jurist has permitted him/her. According to the formers, a non-jurist being appointed by a jurist cannot judge, while based on the latters’ suggestion such an appointed judge is allegedly permitted.However, if being a juristis a necessary condition for being a judge, some jurists agree that in emergency conditions and for avoiding chaotic situations a non-jurist person can judge the case. Some others totally disagree even in emergency cases.

ABSTRACT Over the past 50 years since the first research in the field of urban development implementation plans, there has been a noticeable absence of a comprehensive literature review on this topic in the global arena. This article provides a textual analysis related to the subject of urban development implementation plans, to identify important and recurring themes alongside analyzing the relationships between authors, journals, and countries in this field. Along with the bibliographic analysis, documents related to the field of urban development implementation plans were reviewed to identify influential indicators in their implementation. To this end, 456 scientific articles were extracted from the Scopus scientific database as of October 28th, 2022, and analyzed using scientometric software. These analyses include examining author keywords, country co-authorships, journal bibliographic coupling, and author co-citations. In this study, 74 final indicators were identified as the most recurrent indicators in this field. The bibliographic analysis also produced several noteworthy results. The United States is the most active country in this field, with a link strength of 40 and 176 articles. Berke, P. is the most influential author in this field, with a link strength of 1623 and 99 citations. Among the journals examined, "Land Use Policy" has the highest bibliographic coupling strength of 84, and the "Journal of the American Planning Association" has the highest number of documents related to this field, with 22 documents; finally, among the identified. Extended Abstract Introduction The implementation of urban development projects has been a neglected topic in public policy research, despite its critical importance in ensuring the success of such projects. While there have been numerous studies on the factors that contribute to the success or failure of policy implementation, there has been a lack of systematic reviews on the subject of implementation as a whole. This study aims to address this gap in knowledge by providing a comprehensive overview of the implementation process of urban development projects. This study aims to address this gap in knowledge by providing a comprehensive overview of the implementation process of urban development projects. The study begins by collecting and categorizing existing research in the field, focusing on three main questions: -What are the key indicators for successful implementation? -What are urban journals and articles' current trends and performance? -How do countries and researchers collaborate in this area? The study also examines the relationships between authors, publishers, and different types of documents through bibliographic analysis. Ultimately, this study highlights the need for further research and a more structured approach to understanding the implementation process of urban development projects.   Methodology This study examined the literature related to implementation and evaluation plans in urban and land use planning. The authors used the Scopus database to extract and collect data, focusing on combining the keywords "implementation-plan" and "evaluation-plan" in the keywords, abstracts, and titles. Initially, 621 studies were extracted, but 456 articles were selected as the final database after filtering out non-article documents. The authors observed a general upward trend for studies from 1968 to 2022, with a significant increase in the slope of the trend from 2007. However, a slight decrease in studies was observed in 2021 and 2022, possibly due to the global pandemic and the emergence of new related topics. The authors used a four-stage process to analyze the bibliographic subject of the study, including simultaneous occurrence analysis, co-authorship analysis, bibliographic coupling analysis, co-citation analysis, content analysis, and thematic analysis. The authors identified the selected articles' research objectives, methodologies, findings, and main themes and sub-themes. Overall, this study provides a comprehensive analysis of the literature on implementation and evaluation plans in urban and land use planning.   Results and discussion This research aims to comprehensively analyze the implementation and execution of urban development plans using bibliometrics and systematic analysis. The study considers evaluation as a crucial part of the implementation process and seeks to answer three fundamental questions. Firstly, it identifies effective indicators of implementation and execution globally. Secondly, it examines the trends and performances of new articles and urban journals. Thirdly, it investigates the pattern of cooperation among countries and researchers. The study identifies 74 general indicators that significantly impact the implementation process of urban plans. The results show that "performance evaluation," "effectiveness," "land use," "zonation," "participation," "program quality," and "implementation program" are critical indicators in this area. The study also highlights the importance of evaluation in the discussion of program implementation and its separability from the implementation process. Using the scientometric software VOSviewer, the study analyzed 68 keywords related to the bibliographic topic. "Program evaluation" obtained the first place, followed by "Program implementation" and "Program quality." The co-authorship analysis based on author items revealed that Berke, P. has the highest number of citations and link strength. Additionally, the study found that 72 countries have research in this field, with 22 countries having at least 5 citations that were clustered into 5 clusters by the software. The "land use policy" journal had the highest link strength, and the "Journal of the American planning association" had the highest number of documents related to this field. In conclusion, the study provides valuable insights for policymakers and researchers interested in urban development planning. It comprehensively examines the implementation and execution of urban development plans, identifies effective indicators, and investigates the pattern of cooperation among countries and researchers. The study highlights the importance of evaluation in the implementation process and its separability from the implementation process.   Conclusion The main goal of this research was to fill the gap in research on the implementation and execution of urban development projects in the field, as no systematic review of the topic has been conducted from a global perspective since the first research in this field about half a century ago. Only in some studies, such as those by Talen (1996), Oliveira & Pinho (2010), Rudolf & Grădinaru (2017), has the evaluation of implementation been systematically reviewed, or the systematic review of experiences in a specific urban area, such as the review of various experiences in the Beijing urban area (Chu, 2020). In this research, with the comprehensive approach that the evaluation of implementation is an integral part of the overall process of implementing and executing urban development projects, this process has been examined from the perspective of bibliometrics and systematic analysis of this field. The main difference of this research, which makes it completely new, is firstly having a comprehensive approach to the implementation field, where program evaluation is only an important part of its structure, and secondly, using the scientometric software VOSviewer for the first time in this field. In essence, the conclusive outcomes of this investigation were entirely novel and exhibited some partial congruences with antecedent studies in the domain of appraising and discerning indicators. Significantly, this research has conferred a systematic appraisal of the literature concerning the urban implementation and execution of projects, which is an unprecedented contribution. It should be acknowledged that this is an initial survey of data intended to offer a comprehensive outlook on this scholarly field, and thus it is subject to certain limitations, such as its confinement to the Scopus database. As such, it is recommended that future research endeavors encompass an analysis of additional databases and undertake comparative evaluations of the results. Funding There is no funding support.   Authors’ Contribution Authors contributed equally to the conceptualization and writing of the article. All of the authors approved thecontent of the manuscript and agreed on all aspects of the work declaration of competing interest none. Conflict of Interest Authors declared no conflict of interest.   Acknowledgments  We are grateful to all the scientific consultants of this paper.

The principles of a fair trial, which guarantee a fair trial, cover the entire trial, including the execution of criminal sentences. The principle of judicial execution of criminal sentences, which expresses the necessity of the intervention of the judicial authority, along with broad powers in the execution of punishment and in order to make the punishment commensurate with the personality of the convicts, is one of the most important principles of fair trial at this stage. Many legislators, realizing the need for this principle in the implementation phase, have long accepted and applied its requirements. The appointment of a qualified judge to execute the verdicts, the granting of the necessary powers to him and the executive body and the possibility of appealing against his decisions are the most important requirements and requirements of the principle of judicial execution of criminal judgments. Now, although the Iranian legislature, by approving the Code of Criminal Procedure in 1392, while recognizing the executive judge, has granted him powers,However, this faces serious criticisms and challenges due to the lack of conditions such as expertise and experience, lack of full judicial authority and the impossibility of appealing against his decisions. It seems that the adoption of the "Law on execution of Criminal Judgments" and the creation of an independent structure of the institution for the execution of criminal judgments, along with granting the necessary authority to use correctional institutions, the right to change the sentence Get out of these challenges.