General and exclusive criminal law
Hossein Mirmohammad Sadeghi; Nastaran Aghaee; Mohammad javad Darvishzadeh
Abstract
Under Article 136 of the Islamic Penal Code (approved in 2012), the legislator has outlined the sentence of repetition in Hadd crimes. In accordance with this article, the punishment for committing a Hadd offense for the fourth time is death. However, neither the text of the law nor the legal doctrine ...
Read More
Under Article 136 of the Islamic Penal Code (approved in 2012), the legislator has outlined the sentence of repetition in Hadd crimes. In accordance with this article, the punishment for committing a Hadd offense for the fourth time is death. However, neither the text of the law nor the legal doctrine addresses the case in which there is a mistake in counting the number of times the Hadd is applied. As an example, in the event that the perpetrator is punished four times with the same Hadd punishment, the death sentence can be imposed on them the fifth time, in accordance with Article 136.The present study is intended to answer the following question: "What is the effect of making a mistake in counting the repetitions of the Hadd punishment?" There are many examples of making a mistake in counting the number of times the Hadd punishment has been enforced, and it is possible to approximate more or less the number of repetitions, even though a number of examples are provided in the jurisprudence in this case.It is possible to consider three hypotheses in relation to the impact of the mistake on the punishment for repeating the Hadd: 1) The absolute absence of the consequence of the mistake in counting how many times the Hadd is executed, and the allowance of executing the death sentence in subsequent rounds. 2) The relative impact of the mistake, in such a way that if the perpetrator is responsible for the mistake, the mistake is not effective in counting the number of times the sentence is executed, and if the perpetrator is not the person responsible for the mistake, the fulfillment of the mistake will result in the exemption from the death sentence. 3) The absolute effect of the mistake and the prohibition of executing the death sentence in future rounds.In the present research, firstly, various cases in which a mistake was found in counting the number of repetitions were examined, then the three hypotheses mentioned were assessed based on the examples mentioned, and finally, the hypothesis of the absolute effect of the mistake in the number of repetitions, which caused the punishment prescribed in Article 136 to be extinguished is favored.
Morteza Asghari; Hossein Mirmohammad Sadeghi
Abstract
There was serious controversy in the 1996 negotiations on the drafting of the ICC Statute on putting aggression on the list of crimes under the jurisdiction of the tribunal, which in turn stemmed from disagreements over the terms of Exercise of the ICC’s jurisdiction. The Review Conference's amendments ...
Read More
There was serious controversy in the 1996 negotiations on the drafting of the ICC Statute on putting aggression on the list of crimes under the jurisdiction of the tribunal, which in turn stemmed from disagreements over the terms of Exercise of the ICC’s jurisdiction. The Review Conference's amendments in 2010 and Assembly state parties 2017 introduced specific rules regarding ICC’s jurisdiction for aggression that differ from the usual jurisdiction of the Court in respect of other crimes within its jurisdiction. It also lacks a clear and precise explanation for ICC’s specific jurisdiction over the crime of aggression, which has sometimes led to disagreements among jurists. Therefore, this paper will examine the ambiguous points of this jurisdiction regime in the Statute as well as the difficulty of applying ICC’s jurisdiction over the crime of aggression after July 17, 2018.
Hossein Mirmohammad Sadeghi; Ali Rahmati
Abstract
The key issues surrounding hybrid courts are the reasons and the legal bases of their establishment. The reasons for the establishment of hybrid courts are debatable on both national and international levels.From the national perspective,it can be due to reasons such as the inability or unwillingness ...
Read More
The key issues surrounding hybrid courts are the reasons and the legal bases of their establishment. The reasons for the establishment of hybrid courts are debatable on both national and international levels.From the national perspective,it can be due to reasons such as the inability or unwillingness of the local legal system to deal effectively and fairly with international crimes,the immunity of the heads of state in national courts,the increase of differences and political tensions in the event of the intervention of the local judicial system and existence of legal barriers for international crimes have been addressed by national courts.From an international perspective, constraints on the jurisdiction of the ICC and the unwillingness of the SC to establish a dedicated international criminal tribunal are among the most important reasons for the establishment of hybrid courts.In terms of legal bases, these courts are divided into several categories.Some of them are established on the basis of a treaty between the relevant state and the UN or other international and regional institutions.Some others are freely formed by the UN and without a treaty.In some cases,the establishment of these types of courts is based on the national law of the State where crime is committed.
