Abstract
In the recent decades, Iran has been faced with this challenge too. The research question is that, by using of systemic formwork, what are the important approaches related to crimes pre-emption in Iran? The important crimes pre-emptive approaches consist of: boost of communicative and information approach ...
Read More
In the recent decades, Iran has been faced with this challenge too. The research question is that, by using of systemic formwork, what are the important approaches related to crimes pre-emption in Iran? The important crimes pre-emptive approaches consist of: boost of communicative and information approach between judicial system and society, civil associations, elites and citizens, boost of civil and informal control frameworks, serious using of socio-cultural control frameworks and new-institutional capability- building in judicial system as well as a serious willing to crime pre-emption and law sovereignty. The final conclusion of research is that, in spite of legal frameworks and new institutional capability building, yet the judicial system has not been complete successfulness in pre-emption of crimes. Earning of this aim entails using of mentioned communicative-systemic approaches and security and economics ones that needed another researches. This study has been conducted with analytic- theoric method and functional approach by using of systemic theory and model in pre-emption of crime.
mohammad sadr touhid-khaneh
Abstract
According to the Afghan Constitution, in the absence of relevant statutory laws, courts shall refer to Hanafi jurisprudence. However, there are other explicit and implied constitutional conditions, which should be taken into consideration, including compliance with the principle of legality ...
Read More
According to the Afghan Constitution, in the absence of relevant statutory laws, courts shall refer to Hanafi jurisprudence. However, there are other explicit and implied constitutional conditions, which should be taken into consideration, including compliance with the principle of legality of crime and punishment, which as one of the most fundamental principles of modern criminal law is guaranteed not only in the current Constitution but also in all the six most recent Afghan constitutions. However, Article 1 of the Afghan Penal Code of 1976 stipulates that it regulates only Tazirat punishments and refers Hodud, Qisas and Diyat punishments to Hanafi jurisprudence. This article is repugnant to these explicit and implied constitutional conditions, and as a “weak law” can be ignored. Generally speaking, although Sharia enjoys a prominent position in the Afghan Constitution, its status is different from the Iranian Constitution, which governs generally and absolutely over all articles of the Constitution itself, as well as over all other laws and regulations. Besides, the legislator’s approach in the subsequent articles of the Afghan Penal Code of 1976 shows that even the legislator himself did not believe deeply in his own Article 1. Moreover, among recent laws, there are some examples that implicitly confirm the fact that Article 1 is not valid.
