Amir hossein Rahgosha; Yousef Niknam; Mehdi Hooshyar
Abstract
Exclusionary rule has been accepted in different legal systems and has not been clearly accepted in Iranian legal system. this rule can be justified both on the basis of individualism thinking and in the idea of collectivism. In the first approach, the goal is to further protect the accused and guarantee ...
Read More
Exclusionary rule has been accepted in different legal systems and has not been clearly accepted in Iranian legal system. this rule can be justified both on the basis of individualism thinking and in the idea of collectivism. In the first approach, the goal is to further protect the accused and guarantee his human and individual rights, in the second approach, the goal is to improve the quality of the trial and the performance of the judicial system. Studies show that the dominant approach in Iranian law, as well as in many other individualistic legal systems, has been the reason for the exclusionary rule. the changes that have taken place in the legal system have caused the ideological foundations of this rule to change and society to thinking be in the center of attention rather than the individual, which in turn raises the status of the judiciary and, in other words, increases legitimacy. This study was conducted with a comparative study in the USA and Iranian legal system and the result is the confirmation of the rise of both legal systems to collectivist thinking as the basis for identifying exclusionary rule and attention to social feedback on the performance of the judiciary.
Abdolali Tavajjohi; hossein mohammad kourepaz
Abstract
کشورها با به رسمیت شناختنِ حق دسترسی به وکیل در مرحلۀ پیشا دادرسی کوشیدهاند تا به این حق؛ به مثابۀ یکی از جلوههای بارزِ دادرسی عادلانه، عینیت بخشیده و جایگاه آن را ...
Read More
کشورها با به رسمیت شناختنِ حق دسترسی به وکیل در مرحلۀ پیشا دادرسی کوشیدهاند تا به این حق؛ به مثابۀ یکی از جلوههای بارزِ دادرسی عادلانه، عینیت بخشیده و جایگاه آن را در فرایند دادرسی کیفری مستحکم سازند. اگرچه در حقوق ایران این حق تاکنون دستخوشِ تحولات فراوانی قرار گرفته و همواره قانونگذار در شناساییِ کاملِ آن، به دیدۀ تردید نگریسته است اما این حق در جرایم عادی به رسمیت شناخته شد. البته در اصلاحات 1394، محدودیتِ در نظر گرفته شده از این فراتر رفت و با نقضِ حق دسترسی به وکیلِ مستقل (تبصره ماده 48) در جرایم علیه امنیت داخلی و خارجی و نیز جرایم سازمانیافته، محدودیت بحثبرانگیزِ دیگری وارد سنت حقوقی- قضایی ایران شد. این نوشتار تلاش دارد تا به این پرسش پاسخ دهد که آیا سایر کشورها نیز ایجاد محدودیت در دسترسی به وکیل در جرایم امنیتی را ضروری میدانند و دوم؛ اینکه به فرض پذیرش آن، این محدودیتها کدامند. پژوهش پیشرو، در ارتباط با نقضِ این حق، «الگویی» از گونههای مختلف این محدودیتها را شناسایی نمود؛ محدودیت مطلق، محدودیت زمانی در دسترسی به وکیل، نقض حق محرمانگیِ رابطۀ وکیل- موکل و نیز عدم برخورداری از وکیل مستقل (وکلای ویژه) از جمله آنها میباشد.
mohamad ashouri; jafar movahedi
Abstract
After legislating for one century, jurisdiction regarding Iranian victims was established in Iranian Penal Act approved in 2013, as allocated in article 8 mainatining Iranian court is competent to investigate unconditionally offences committed aboard by foreigners against Iranians including crimes whose ...
Read More
After legislating for one century, jurisdiction regarding Iranian victims was established in Iranian Penal Act approved in 2013, as allocated in article 8 mainatining Iranian court is competent to investigate unconditionally offences committed aboard by foreigners against Iranians including crimes whose punishments are Hodud, Qisas, and Diya. In this respect, Sharia-based Mansous (written in holy Quran and sacred sayings)Taaziraat on due observation note of article 115 must also be included in the abovementioned Act; yet, as to Mansousless Taazir crimes, jurisdictional authority of Iranian court depends on the reciprocal criminality and non-conviction in the country where the crime is occurred; Additionally, when the complaint is introduced, victim must maintain Iranian nationality until the proceeding is ended. Iranian Penal Act is applied on lapse of time and extension of time if the offender is persecuted by Iranian court and when the offender is found in or restored to the territory of Iran. It should be noted that extension of time is not started at the time of crime occurrence. If the crime committed abroad against Iranian nationals is occurred in high seas or lands without government, then Iranian court is competent for all crimes except Mansousless Taaziraat crimes.
ali afrasiabi; adel sarikhani
Volume 3, Issue 11 , June 2015, , Pages 63-83
Abstract
According European Court of Human rights interpretation on section 6 of European convention of fundamental rights, “penal realm” interred legal texts. In light of this legal institution, hearing process of offences naturally have penal sanctions must be done in observance of fair trial requirements. ...
Read More
According European Court of Human rights interpretation on section 6 of European convention of fundamental rights, “penal realm” interred legal texts. In light of this legal institution, hearing process of offences naturally have penal sanctions must be done in observance of fair trial requirements. This paper attempt to answer two questions: which Police disciplinary offenses can inter penal realm? Is process of hearings in semi judicial commissions in police Organization accord whit fair trial requirements? This Research firstly considers penal realm criteria and kinds of disciplinary sanctions in Police organization to identify which sanctions included in penal realm. After identifying offenses included in penal realm, the Paper considers hearing process of Police disciplinary commissions to answer second question and identify defects current in provisions and practices. In next game through identifying conditions of current situation, the Paper gives resolution to achieve good situation. Paper findings identify 10 disciplinary offences can be categorized in penal realm and hearing process of these offences must be done with consideration of fair trial requirements. In current provisions and practices, impartiality of hearing entity and defensive right of suspect extremely violated. In order to achieve good model, that is necessary amendment of provisions and executive practices to enhance defensive rights and create impartial hearing entity for proceeding offenses that police staffs suspect commit them.
Muhammad Farajiha; Jamshid Gholamlou
Volume 3, Issue 8 , October 2014, , Pages 63-86
Abstract
Wrongful conviction of the innocent is a type of miscarriage of justice. Thus, the perspective that believes these two concepts are equivalent is false. Innocence can be actual or legal. The actual innocent is who does not commit the crime. The legal innocent is who commit a crime but his/her conviction ...
Read More
Wrongful conviction of the innocent is a type of miscarriage of justice. Thus, the perspective that believes these two concepts are equivalent is false. Innocence can be actual or legal. The actual innocent is who does not commit the crime. The legal innocent is who commit a crime but his/her conviction was achieved through a violation of due process/fair trial. Despite some advantages of this division, it is somewhat misleading. Because, in practice, in many cases legal and actual innocence overlap each other. For example, researchers who provide this division, include insufficient evidence as a procedural error, not substantive. While, normally, an accused be wrongly convicted when there is no enough evidences. Actually, the criminal justice system ignores presumption of innocence. Despite disagreements, most researchers have applied actual concept of innocent and objective criteria in determining innocence in their studies.
