Valiollah Sadeghi; Hasan Moradi
Abstract
From the point of view of criminal policy, the coronavirus Covid-19 can be examined in two ways; Corona as a crime and Corona as a context of crime. In this paper, the only criminal policy governing the corona is recognized in the light of the general rules and regulations governing these types of diseases ...
Read More
From the point of view of criminal policy, the coronavirus Covid-19 can be examined in two ways; Corona as a crime and Corona as a context of crime. In this paper, the only criminal policy governing the corona is recognized in the light of the general rules and regulations governing these types of diseases and regulations issued in the past year, especially the approvals of the National Corona Headquarters. In this criminal policy, on the one hand, various health-action measures are implemented to prevent the transmission of Quaid-19 virus, and on the other hand, in response to the violation of these measures, classic and modern criminalization / minor offence have been imposed. Minimal criminal intervention, Status-oriented, Colorful responses, Gradual punitiveness and intolerance in some matters have been features of the preventive criminal policy against Corona. Therefore, the body of criminal policy governing this virus is a combination of criminalization and irregular responses, which has led to the creation of a special justice system within the criminal justice system. It seems that the developing tendency of the mentioned headquarters towards criminal policy based on situational prevention and contentment with fines and deprivation of violators has led to neglect of the etiology of non-compliance and insufficient attention to social preventive measures. It seems that with the prolongation of its prevalence in the country and the decrease in the value of official norms, it may lead to an increase in the number of violations.
hasan moradi
Abstract
Sometimes the harm inflicted on a person of not treating or not effecting it, Infection and spread to other parts or other organs, or the self-perpetrator, and may be, cause amputation or breathing. This in intentional crimes against retaliation before or after retribution. Altogether, it about Johnny, ...
Read More
Sometimes the harm inflicted on a person of not treating or not effecting it, Infection and spread to other parts or other organs, or the self-perpetrator, and may be, cause amputation or breathing. This in intentional crimes against retaliation before or after retribution. Altogether, it about Johnny, and he will die due to the transgression of retaliation, or the corruption of a member of my community, leading to his amputation or other members. The question is whether the spread of deliberate crimes with the inclining of unintentional crimes complies with a ruling, and whether in the two of them the principle is based on the interference of the organ in the memberor the member in the soul or the principle is that it does not interfere, or Should it be detailed in detail? Imams 'jurists' fatwa often is difernt. this article, while explaining the concept of contagion, the judgment examines various instances of it in terms of the opinions, and the views of Islamic law-makers, especially the legislator of 1392, do not apply to the inconsistency of intentional and unintentional crimes, except in cases where The resulting result and the damage or damage sustained by the citation relationship is confirmed.
hasan moradi
Abstract
Standardization of multiplicity of injuries for how to get a retaliation or compensation has been a significant part of the jurisprudential doctrines about rules of Qisas. Contrary to the rule of multiplicity of crime which is one of the factors of aggravation of punishment, multiplicity of injuries ...
Read More
Standardization of multiplicity of injuries for how to get a retaliation or compensation has been a significant part of the jurisprudential doctrines about rules of Qisas. Contrary to the rule of multiplicity of crime which is one of the factors of aggravation of punishment, multiplicity of injuries has various assumptions: Sometimes a injury may be committed by one person against another person or others or by a few people against a person. It may also result from a blow or multiple blows, at a time or at different times. The jurists of the Imamieh religion have expressed different opinions in this regard. Some of them believe in interfering absolutely, Some of them believe in not-interfering absolutely, and Some of them, have a different opinion depending on the unit or multiple and consecutive or alternate blows. In the Islamic Penal Code, with the following the famous opinion in Imamieh jurisprudence and by accepting the not-interfering opinion, except in exceptional cases, provided that the multiple intentional injuries result in a multiplicity of retaliation. In this article, by analyzing the related jurisprudential doctrines, the criteria set out in the above mentioned law have been criticized and proposals for amending the law are provided.
Hassan Moradi
Abstract
در کنار تأسیسات حقوقی همچون معافیتهای «قانونی» و «قضایی» ، نهاد «تبدیل مجازات» قرار دارد. تبدیل مجازات در مفهوم اعم اقدامی در راستای فردی کردن مجازات، ...
Read More
در کنار تأسیسات حقوقی همچون معافیتهای «قانونی» و «قضایی» ، نهاد «تبدیل مجازات» قرار دارد. تبدیل مجازات در مفهوم اعم اقدامی در راستای فردی کردن مجازات، جلوگیری از تضییع حقوق مجنی علیه یا اولیای دم، جلوگیری از وهن دین، تحدید استفاده از زندان و نیز تحقق عدالت قضایی و تعذیبی عادلانه است. در حال حاضر تبدیل مجازات در حوزه مجازاتهای حدود، قصاص و تعزیرات جاری است. لیکن پرسش اساسی این است که آیا جهات تبدیل قصاص عیناً همان است که در تعزیرات یا حدود مقرر است یا هر یک از اینها تابع احکام و ضوابط خاص خود میباشند؟ تبدیل مجازات های تعزیری به دو نوع «قانونی» و «قضایی» تقسیم می شود. تبدیل قانونی به شدت تابع شرایط مقرر در قانون است و تبدیل قضایی اصولاً تابع شرایط تخفیف مجازات میباشد و تشخیص آن به قاضی محکمه محول شده است. اما تبدیل حد همچون تبدیل قانونی تابع شرایط مقرر در قانون و منوط به موافقت مقام رهبری یا رییس قوه قضاییه میباشد. در مجازات های قصاصی دو نوع تبدیل «اجباری» یا «قانونی» و «شخصی» یا «اختیاری» قابل اجراست. هنگامی که قصاص شرعاً جایز یا ممکن نباشد، اجباراً به دیۀ مقدّر تبدیل میگردد
hasan moradi
Abstract
Abstract In the case of forgiving the murdered by the victim of crime, the victim enjoys the right to forgive the murderer or ask for the retaliation, especially when s/he finds herself/himself on the verge of death. There is consensus among the Islamic jurists and lawyers on existence of such right ...
Read More
Abstract In the case of forgiving the murdered by the victim of crime, the victim enjoys the right to forgive the murderer or ask for the retaliation, especially when s/he finds herself/himself on the verge of death. There is consensus among the Islamic jurists and lawyers on existence of such right for the victim. However, there are controversies and different approaches on the post-forgiveness consequences. Therefore, in this article, I focused on the initiative right of victim on the right of retaliation, and as a result his/her heirs, along with the analysis of Islamic jurists’ opinions and adopted approach by the Art.365 of Islamic Penal Code (2013) concerning the given issue.
Hasan Moradi; Ali Shahbazi
Abstract
One of the main constituents of murder is mens rea or mental element. Actually, the difference of murder and involuntary manslaughter is mens rea which has different components including general ill will (intention of behavior or the purpose of action) and particular ill will (intention of the result ...
Read More
One of the main constituents of murder is mens rea or mental element. Actually, the difference of murder and involuntary manslaughter is mens rea which has different components including general ill will (intention of behavior or the purpose of action) and particular ill will (intention of the result or purpose of the result). The current paper, in addition to explaining mens rea of murder, analyzes the knowledge and volition as the first and the most important components of mens rea and also the status and role these two components. This paper concludes that although the Islamic Penal Code (2012) comparing with former codes has innovation, has still some failures. Hence, there are some issues which shall be rethought about them including: murder by omission, attention to leaving an action in murdering, affirmation of the action purpose done on victim as the authentication of intention in crime, voluntarily behavior in murder and also making difference between first degree murder (premeditated killing) and second degree murder (non-premeditated killing).
