Somayah sadat Mirilavasani; Mohammad Ghorban zadeh; Behnam Akbari
Abstract
Embezzlement is one of the economic crimes, which undermines public confidence. Embezzlement has a history parallel to the formation of the state. It has had a negative impact on people-government convergence and the economy since the formation of the nation-state in 1649. It has been mentioned in various ...
Read More
Embezzlement is one of the economic crimes, which undermines public confidence. Embezzlement has a history parallel to the formation of the state. It has had a negative impact on people-government convergence and the economy since the formation of the nation-state in 1649. It has been mentioned in various domestic and international documents. However, there are differences between domestic and international anti-embezzlement platforms including the lack of criminalization of embezzlement in the private sector. There is also a lack of mechanism of international judicial assistance in embezzlement, non-explanation to elaborate on whistleblowing rules on combating embezzlement in Iranian domestic law and there is no warranty of effective international enforcement against embezzlement. The current research is practical as far as its aim is concerned and has been carried out by applied by a qualitative method and the data collection has been carried out through libraries and documents.
Arsalan Ashrafi; Amir Iravanian; Mahdi Hooshyar
Abstract
AbstractAlthough one of the requirements of the implementation of the Merida Convention is the criminalization of "bribery in the private sector", the Iranian legislature has not yet considered this issue and there is no clear approach in the judicial process in this regard. From the point of view ...
Read More
AbstractAlthough one of the requirements of the implementation of the Merida Convention is the criminalization of "bribery in the private sector", the Iranian legislature has not yet considered this issue and there is no clear approach in the judicial process in this regard. From the point of view of international instruments and comparative law today, there is no doubt that bribery in the private sphere, as well as doing it in the public sphere, can be a manifestation of financial and administrative corruption that should be specifically criminalized and punished. However, in Iranian law, the question is what is the nature of paying and receiving bribes in the private sector. And, what is the reaction to it? Findings of the research indicate this: in Iranian criminal law, according to Article 588 of the Criminal Code of 1996, a specific type of private bribery (a receipt of money or property by judges, auditors and experts) has been criminalized. The judicial practice seeks to extend this prohibition to all private sectors responsible for public services in accordance with the principles of the crime and other related provisions. In particular, it seems that the provisions and basis of the "Unanimous Vote of Procedure No. 798 of the General Assembly of the Supreme Court", which has just been issued, have made this possible even more. Because, in this vote, by considering the criterion of "public services" and considering the employees of private banks as "public service agents", the said employees are considered to be subject to Article 598 of the mentioned law. According to this rule and the stipulation of "public service officers" in Article 3 of the Law on Intensification of Punishment for Perpetrators of Embezzlement, Bribery and Fraud, there is no distinction between the mentioned crimes and a single procedure should be established for them. However, jurisprudence cannot compensate for the shortcomings of the legislation in this area. Keywords: Financial and administrative corruption, Public services, Public service agents, Embezzlement, Illegal occupation.
