Code of Criminal Procedure
Gholam Hassan Kooshki; Rohollah zandi
Abstract
The law "Mitigating Ta'ziri Imprisonment Punishment" was approved in July 2019 with the aim of de-imprisonment by accepting a relative standard to consider theft and fraud crimes as forgivable, leading to challenges and gaps in terms of form and substance. Today, with the identification of the disadvantages ...
Read More
The law "Mitigating Ta'ziri Imprisonment Punishment" was approved in July 2019 with the aim of de-imprisonment by accepting a relative standard to consider theft and fraud crimes as forgivable, leading to challenges and gaps in terms of form and substance. Today, with the identification of the disadvantages of deprivation of liberty and the failure of the prison system in rehabilitating criminals, penal systems, under the influence of criminological teachings and criminological findings such as the increase in recidivism and the crime-causing nature of prisons, are more and more limited in terms of punishment. They have become anti-freedom. On the other hand, the bad effects of this punishment were noticed by criminologists, and today, although many efforts have been made to improve the condition of the prison, the reformation and treatment of criminals, which was considered one of the main goals of this punishment, doubts still prevail. It became serious, and experience showed that, with the help of recidivism statistics, repeated professional crimes are more often committed by those who have had a history of prison. In this way, imprisonment is not only ineffective in rehabilitating and reforming criminals, but also harming the country's economy.
By approving the law on mitigating penal punishment, the legislator implemented the policy of de-imprisonment through the development of erfaq institutions, reducing the amount of imprisonment and increasing the range of forgivable crimes. Although the mentioned law is useful in mitigating the prison sentence, it has caused wide challenges and created gaps in the legal system and judicial procedure. The challenges related to the relative impossibility of fraud and theft crimes due to their amounts are one of the factors that have caused changes in the process of criminal prosecution. In the discussion of the initiation of prosecution and actions of the bailiffs in this field, despite the many differences between the jurists, it seems that the principle is that these crimes are unforgivable and the criminal prosecution by the bailiffs is based on the assumption of committing the above crimes.
In the matter of determining the appropriate order, the judicial authority should determine the monetary penalty for the issuance of the security order, regardless of whether the crimes are forgivable and based on the initial estimate, and after referring to the expert, he can determine the necessary amount. On the other hand, the most important challenge that has caused a strong difference in the judicial procedure is the issue of the number of crimes that can be forgiven and the appropriate criteria for determining the crimes that can be considered forgivable. It should be such that it justifies the application of the aggregate criterion, despite such a criterion, there is still a wide difference of opinion among the judicial authorities, and it is better to determine the task through a unanimous vote on the above issue. Among the other loopholes governing the law on reducing the punishment of imprisonment are related to the calendar of non-calendarable property, obtaining biometric records and interpreting the concept of the absence of a victim in fraud-related crimes, which should be addressed by the legislator. In addition to the above challenges, which mainly covered issues and cases related to formal matters, some challenges also governed substantive issues and cases. The results indicate that the formal challenges in this field are mainly related to the stage of starting criminal prosecution by the officers and the preliminary investigation stage that oversees the issue of paying expert fees and issuing orders to secure and calendar non-calendarable property and obtaining biometric records. Also, the substantive challenges are related to the criterion of considering the crimes as forgivable in the assumption of multiple crimes, determining the monetary punishment in the assumption of multiple and the resistance of the judges to the given law. In this talk, it has been tried to explain each of the above challenges and then solve them with a descriptive-analytical method.
Code of Criminal Procedure
Hadi Rostami
Abstract
The criminal procedural may be exposed to the state of collapse by security-oriented policies resulting in suspense of the usual formalities of criminal proceedings and replacing them with emergency-oriented mechanisms. The collapse is due to the emergency of the country's political situation and social ...
Read More
The criminal procedural may be exposed to the state of collapse by security-oriented policies resulting in suspense of the usual formalities of criminal proceedings and replacing them with emergency-oriented mechanisms. The collapse is due to the emergency of the country's political situation and social chaos, which is caused by the protests of a number of citizens against some policies. One of the most important factors of inception of such movement is the expansion of criminal law and maximum interference in people's freedoms and maintenance of political ideology. The Gap between the official norms and accepted values by citizens and insistence of the government to retain the norms via criminal protection of them gradually leads to social crises and civil disobedience. Conservatism, retrogression, standing against social and cultural changes, maintaining the status quo, refraining from fundamental reforms in political and social structures, have no result other than "crisis" and inevitably puts the citizens or a large part of them against the government. One simple solution to quell crisis is to declare the state of emergency and expand powers of the security forces and judicial authorities to arrest, prosecute and adjudicate the cases of protestors rapidly and secretly. The networks of control and supervision on citizens and the power and freedom of action of the police in this situation will be expanded and the logic of confrontation and repression are applied at high level. Due to the crowding of criminal cases in the judicial system as a result of these policies the rules of proceedings and some defense rights are ignored, including the right to have lawyer or the right to public trial, and prompt measures are taken into account due to the government's need to deal quickly and decisively. In such circumstances the guiding principles, especially the presumption and the principle of neutrality, and the government justifies its actions by claiming to maintain order and security of citizens. Summoning and arresting political dissidents without complying with legal frameworks and creating restrictions in cyberspace through filtering social networks and preventing the free flow of information are part of the strategies to deal with the crisis. When the political and social conditions are in an emergency, the fair criminal procedure inevitably collapses, and "extraordinary criminal procedure" prevails, which does not pay attention to the conventional and well-known rules of procedure and is often the product of the will of the political authorities and are dictated in the form of "judicial circulars". Thus, circulars have priority over the law. In this approach, the presumption of guilt is used instead of the principle of innocence, and the accused is treated as a criminal or a convict.The collapse of fair procedures is caused by factors that are mainly related to public strategies and macro policies. Incorrect policies or making wrong decisions regarding some social events and phenomena, legislation without paying attention to the basic needs of the people and ignorance of the political dissidents inevitably aggregate protests and social uprisings. Criminal policies based on arbitrary and baseless criminalization and merely based upon defending and protecting ideology, expanding criminal laws and maximum interference in people's freedoms, as well as the lack of transparency in statutes have unpleasant consequences in long term, and provide confrontation between citizens and policy makers.The substantive and procedural rules on security in the Iranian criminal law indicate that criminal policy makers have ignored some fundamental rights such as the right to choose a lawyer. In addition, following the expansion of the jurisdiction of special courts, which sometimes originates from circular, as well as the increase of the powers of judicial authorities and military forces, they have provided a legal basis for threatening the rights of individuals and the collapse of fair procedures. Holding secret and non-public trails and preventing the communication of court’s decisions are part of these challenges. Adjusting the criminalization and decriminalization of acts that are contrary to the values of citizens or a significant part of them, reforming public policies and avoiding criminal actions that create tension, and saving the criminal justice system from criminal inflation, and most importantly, paying attention to the phenomenon of "generational change" and normative gaps and ideology might be some solutions to prevent the collapse of fair criminal procedure. The Recognition of protests, changing policies and decriminalizing behaviors that have only an ideological aspect, removal of rights-threatening processes, accountability and prescribing discourse instead of criminal threats can prevent the criminal process from collapse.
Code of Criminal Procedure
Anahita Seifi; jabrail nozohour
Abstract
Economic crimes are one of the major challenges of societies at the national and international levels and have devastating effects on the economic order and security of countries. The security of some economic crimes based on jurisprudential views and hostile discourse towards macroeconomic criminals ...
Read More
Economic crimes are one of the major challenges of societies at the national and international levels and have devastating effects on the economic order and security of countries. The security of some economic crimes based on jurisprudential views and hostile discourse towards macroeconomic criminals and the globalization of some new forms of these crimes have led to the use of security-oriented strategies in the process of prosecuting economic crimes in Iran. This study intends to analyze the effects of security-oriented approaches and the challenges they face in teaching economic crimes in the Iranian legal system through descriptive and analytical methods. The findings of this study show that the country's judicial system does not have the necessary coherence in this regard. Applying a security-oriented approach in responding to the perpetrators of these crimes has led to its confrontation with the global model of fair trial and deviation from its standards and has limited the right of defendants to defend themselves. Extreme securityism is corrupt in the long run, regardless of human rights standards. It requires the existence of a coherent and differential criminal policy, especially in the procedure of these crimes in the organization and the trial, and attention to professionalism in all its dimensions.Economic crimes are one of the major challenges of societies at the national and international levels and have devastating effects on the economic order and security of countries. The security of some economic crimes based on jurisprudential views and hostile discourse towards macroeconomic criminals and the globalization of some new forms of these crimes have led to the use of security-oriented strategies in the process of prosecuting economic crimes in Iran. This study intends to analyze the effects of security-oriented approaches and the challenges they face in teaching economic crimes in the Iranian legal system through descriptive and analytical methods. The findings of this study show that the country's judicial system does not have the necessary coherence in this regard. Applying a security-oriented approach in responding to the perpetrators of these crimes has led to its confrontation with the global model of fair trial and deviation from its standards and has limited the right of defendants to defend themselves. Extreme securityism is corrupt in the long run, regardless of human rights standards. It requires the existence of a coherent and differential criminal policy, especially in the procedure of these crimes in the organization and the trial, and attention to professionalism in all its dimensions.Economic crimes are one of the major challenges of societies at the national and international levels and have devastating effects on the economic order and security of countries. The security of some economic crimes based on jurisprudential views and hostile discourse towards macroeconomic criminals and the globalization of some new forms of these crimes have led to the use of security-oriented strategies in the process of prosecuting economic crimes in Iran. This study intends to analyze the effects of security-oriented approaches and the challenges they face in teaching economic crimes in the Iranian legal system through descriptive and analytical methods. The findings of this study show that the country's judicial system does not have the necessary coherence in this regard. Applying a security-oriented approach in responding to the perpetrators of these crimes has led to its confrontation with the global model of fair trial and deviation from its standards and has limited the right of defendants to defend themselves. Extreme securityism is corrupt in the long run, regardless of human rights standards. It requires the existence of a coherent and differential criminal policy, especially in the procedure of these crimes in the organization and the trial, and attention to professionalism in all its dimensions.Economic crimes are one of the major challenges of societies at the national and international levels and have devastating effects on the economic order and security of countries. The security of some economic crimes based on jurisprudential views and hostile discourse towards macroeconomic criminals and the globalization of some new forms of these crimes have led to the use of security-oriented strategies in the process of prosecuting economic crimes in Iran. This study intends to analyze the effects of security-oriented approaches and the challenges they face in teaching economic crimes in the Iranian legal system through descriptive and analytical methods. The findings of this study show that the country's judicial system does not have the necessary coherence in this regard. Applying a security-oriented approach in responding to the perpetrators of these crimes has led to its confrontation with the global model of fair trial and deviation from its standards and has limited the right of defendants to defend themselves. Extreme securityism is corrupt in the long run, regardless of human rights standards. It requires the existence of a coherent and differential criminal policy, especially in the procedure of these crimes in the organization and the trial, and attention to professionalism in all its dimensions.
Code of Criminal Procedure
Morteza Rasteh; Nasrin Mehra; Amir Ghofrankhah
Abstract
Protection of witnesses and victims is one of the most important issues related to criminal proceedings, which has been emphasized in global and regional documents and has come to the fore through human rights judicial authorities. Lack of proper support for the witness or the victim may impair the correct ...
Read More
Protection of witnesses and victims is one of the most important issues related to criminal proceedings, which has been emphasized in global and regional documents and has come to the fore through human rights judicial authorities. Lack of proper support for the witness or the victim may impair the correct execution of justice; Because the courts will have no choice but to close the case or acquit the accused if the necessary documents are not collected. In the meantime, the judicial authorities are required to consider and protect the defense rights of the accused. Therefore, neither the interests of witnesses and victims nor the rights of the accused can be considered as an absolute principle; But in any situation there is room for mutual interests to be balanced. Therefore, creating this balance as well as adopting correct and path-breaking measures in this regard is one of the challenging issues in criminal proceedings that must be taken into consideration by the criminal justice system. One of the most important measures that may be taken to create this balance and according to the interests of justice is to limit the publicity of all or part of the proceedings. However, due to the fact that publicity of the hearing has been emphasized in human rights documents as a basic principle and one of the defense rights of the accused, therefore, only if a person appears as a witness in a public court session or is a victim of a crime, is, it cannot be recognized as an acceptable justification for the necessity of implementing protective measures; Rather, standing as a witness and testifying in a public session, or revealing the victim's identity through the presence of the public and the media, should be considered a serious threat to the witness and the victim, and the court by presenting acceptable evidence confirm the existence of such threats verify and prove, and as long as other protective measures can be applied, the court should not resort to holding hearings in private.Considering that nowadays the human rights documents and the rights recognized in the constitution of the governments are increasingly mixed together and have caused the formation of a single and comprehensive model related to the principles of procedure, identifying the criteria and the policy It is necessary to accept the international human rights system and model these standards in criminal laws and domestic judicial procedure. Therefore, the purpose of the issue, is to untangle the mechanisms of the international human rights system and conceivable measures to establish a balance between the protection of witnesses or victims and the accused's right to a public hearing, as well as to strengthen the components and criteria of its guarantee in national courts and in It is the light of the findings of the law of the present age.The current research, which was carried out with the descriptive-analytical method and the use of library and documentary sources, will seek to answer the question that, What is the most important programs and measures imaginable to support witnesses and victims in order to create the balance with the accused's right to a public hearing?Regarding the background of the research as well as the innovation aspect of this article, it should be mentioned that although due to the basic importance of protecting witnesses and victims, there have been researches about it, but so far the study of the contents of the cases submitted to the human rights judicial authorities in order to identify the procedures and actions of these authorities regarding the creation of a balance between the protection of witnesses or victims and the right of the accused to a public trial has not been carried out in the present; In particular, a special attitude to the interpretations of the Human Rights Committee as the only authority interpreting the rights contained in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as well as the rulings issued by the European Court and the Inter-American Court as the executive arm of the European Convention on Human Rights and the American Convention on Human Rights, which have so far been In relation to this topic, it has been less discussed, it is one of the special features and innovations of the present article.The findings of the research show that in the international human rights system, despite the fact that the protection of witnesses and victims has not been specified as one of the exceptions to the public hearing, it is clear from the provisions of the documents and procedures of the human rights authorities, It is possible that despite special circumstances, the protection of witnesses and victims may be included in the framework of "interests of justice" and considered as one of the legal examples of closed hearings. But in order to avoid the unreasonable and widespread application of this exception, such an action is only possible "to the extent of necessity and in compliance with the principle of Proportion".Based on this, it has been concluded that creating a balance between the interests of the witness and the victim (protection of dignity and security) and the rights of the accused (publicity of the hearings) requires that restrictive measures in this regard are precisely defined and absolutely necessary. be In addition, if a minimal restrictive measure is sufficient to establish a balance, only the same measure should be carried out, and restricting the public holding of hearings should be considered as the last measure in relation to the protection of witnesses and victims. On this basis, concealing the identity of witnesses; Taking necessary measures for the physical protection of witnesses and victims, such as the presence of a person as a bodyguard; Removing the accused from the court during the hearing of witness and victim statements; Making statements in a shielded manner that prevents physical identification of witnesses and victims, such as using curtains, walls, or any other type of cover; Listening to the statements of witnesses and victims through the use of communication technologies such as video conferencing and similar measures is one of the most common and practical measures and mechanisms related to the protection of witnesses and victims, which should be carried out by the judicial authority. Therefore, as long as these protective measures are applicable, the court should not ignore the accused's rights to a fair trial and resort to making the hearings closed.
Code of Criminal Procedure
MohammadMahdi Saghian; Alireza Noorian
Abstract
Constitutionalisation means entering the legal rule into a group of fundamental rules that the government is obliged to support and implement. In fact, Constitutionalisation is a process of change and transformation that occurs due to the influence of basic norms in different trends of law and it may ...
Read More
Constitutionalisation means entering the legal rule into a group of fundamental rules that the government is obliged to support and implement. In fact, Constitutionalisation is a process of change and transformation that occurs due to the influence of basic norms in different trends of law and it may be as a result of imbuing the set of legal order with these norms. In Iran, some articles of the Criminal Procedure Law approved in 2013 are in conflict with some of the principles of Constitutional law that are related to the Procedure. Based on this, it seems necessary to analyze the existing conflicts and examine the possibility of the criminal judge for referring to the constitutional law and not implementing the legal articles that are in conflict with the constitutional principles. The Constitutionalisation of criminal Procedure gives judges the possibility to refer to the constitutional law in the face of conflicting laws. In addition, it will be possible to invalidate the proceedings and decisions by the higher judicial authorities based on the contradiction of the ordinary law with the constitutional law. One of the tools to achieve this goal is redefining the principles related to criminal Procedure. Redefinition with using Constitutionalisation tool give the possibility to the criminal judges to reach the mentioned results after knowing those principles that govern the criminal Procedure.
Code of Criminal Procedure
Hossein Goldouzian
Abstract
Despite the fact that the interrogation and initial questions and answers of the victim in the primary investigations process play a prominent role in the detection of crimes, but the physical and mental characteristics of the interrogator and the manner of the interrogation process have been disregarded ...
Read More
Despite the fact that the interrogation and initial questions and answers of the victim in the primary investigations process play a prominent role in the detection of crimes, but the physical and mental characteristics of the interrogator and the manner of the interrogation process have been disregarded in Persian criminal law studies. This article aims to answer the question with a descriptive-analytical method, what requirements should be considered in the interrogation process in the primary research stage to detect the victimization of children? To achieve this, according to the available data, the article is divided into three topics.The first topic examines the selection of the interrogator and his training. If the first step, which is to have an expert interrogator with special physiological and mental characteristics, is not taken correctly, it will definitely not be time for the other steps. In relation to the physical characteristics of the interrogator, various studies indicate that people have a tendency to disclose crimes for women in sensitive matters such as sexual crimes, and this tendency is more prominent in the case of children due to their sensitive nature. Out of all the requirements regarding the interrogation of children, the Iranian legislator has explicitly and correctly set criteria for the gender of the interrogator. Article 42 of the Criminal Procedure Law stipulates: "If possible, the interrogation and investigation of women and minors should be carried out by trained female officers and in accordance with religious standards." In addition to physical characteristics, the main thing that plays an important role in doing an accurate and reliable question and answer is the mental characteristics and capabilities that he acquires. The increase in skill and expertise leads to the reduction of bias and incorrect mental backgrounds, and as a result, more correct and reliable information is obtained. In many countries, such as the United States, Canada, and England, training courses are held to improve the expertise and skills of interrogators, and the interrogation process is subject to pre-determined and taught protocols. The most widely used and important of these protocols, which have many similarities with each other, are: 1 Step-Wise Interview Guidelines; 2. cognitive interview; 3. Ten-step Investigative Interview; 4. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development research interview protocol.The second topic deals with the issue that after the selection and training of the interrogator, he should be able to get to know the child's condition and gain his trust in the beginning. The age of the victim, his physical, mental and spiritual abilities and problems, evolutionary or developmental considerations, ethnicity, language, culture, religion and the economic status of the family where he grows up and the places he went and comes are examples of information that should be obtained before the main question and answer session. This information can be obtained from the child's relatives, the school and kindergarten he goes to, and his doctors and teachers. After the initial acquaintance with the child, the interrogator should gain his trust by using them and by applying communication methods. Verbal and non-verbal communication, respecting the child's personal space by maintaining a proper distance and asking if the child feels comfortable with the distance between the interrogator and himself, calling him by name, Choosing words and arranging them next to each other in such a way that the child believes that the interrogator understands his painful situation and sympathizes with him has a great effect on creating empathy and intimacy between the two parties.In the last topic and after communicating with the child, It is time for the interrogator to give basic training to the child and ask the main questions and answers related to the crime. Explaining the child's role in the interrogation, teaching how to answer the questions, explaining the concepts of truth and lies to the child and gaining a detailed understanding of him in answering the questions are the effects of basic training. In the main questions and answers and according to the protocols, the beginning of the main question and answer process should be with "open questions". After the interrogator has heard the child's free interpretation and everything that was in his mind since the day of the incident, he should add to its quantitative and qualitative richness through specialized questions. The questions should not be suggestive or in such a way that their answer is yes or no.These explanations and information in various sources about this subject show that the primary investigations process, especially the interrogation session, question and answer session, interview or any other title that is placed on it, is one of the most important parts of criminal justice system, which is ultimately a huge part of the justifications for sentencing, but so far no special law or regulation has been written for its technical part. In other words, issues such as the existence of an expert and trained interrogator who has a special card should be included among the rights of the parties to a criminal case. It is clear that having legal information or work experience of the judge and officer who is responsible for the interrogation is not a guarantee for holding a useful and quality question and answer session.
Code of Criminal Procedure
Javad Salehi
Abstract
The ICC ruling on jurisdiction in the Myanmar situation by relying on Article 19(3) of the Statute at the request of the Prosecutor, results which have not been known before. The ICC jurisprudence in relation to the application of Article 19 of the Statute to the situation in the Myanmar has led to conclusions ...
Read More
The ICC ruling on jurisdiction in the Myanmar situation by relying on Article 19(3) of the Statute at the request of the Prosecutor, results which have not been known before. The ICC jurisprudence in relation to the application of Article 19 of the Statute to the situation in the Myanmar has led to conclusions that are important to examine. Therefore, reviewing the results of the ruling on jurisdiction in the Myanmar situation and identifying the exit strategy based on jurisprudence is one of the objectives and subject of this article. Research method is descriptive-analytical and relies on the Statute provisions and the ICC jurisprudence to answer research question. What are the results of the prosecutor’s request for a ruling on jurisdiction in the Myanmar situation? Research findings show that the ICC jurisprudence in the Myanmar situation not only did not prevent the loss of costs, according to the prosecutor under the concept of judicial economy, but only transferred it from the prosecutor’s office to the ICC. This view is based on two conclusions drawn from the ruling on jurisdiction in the Myanmar situation in light of the ICC jurisprudence.First, the issuance of ruling on jurisdiction did not preclude the need to consider the prosecutor’s future request for authorization of the investigation in the Myanmar situation. However, if the prosecutor had resorted to the provisions of Article 15(3) of the Statute from the outset, both the ICC jurisdiction would have been established and the investigation into the Myanmar situation would have been authorized. This is a cost that the Prosecutor has paid for by wasting time, energy and the ICC’s facilities with the theory of judicial economy in her opinion in the situation of the Myanmar. Although the Prosecutor tried to make this cost zero by resorting to the mechanism of Article 19(3) of the Statute, but the ICC jurisprudence showed that this cost is not only not zero, but it is transferred from the Prosecutor’s office to the ICC. Of course, resorting to Article 15(3) of the Statute is subject to providing the necessary documents and reasons to prove the logical basis for the need to start a preliminary investigation in the situation in the Myanmar, which is obtained for the Prosecutor after a brief review of the issue and the supporting reasons according to Article 15(1) of the Statute. But there is a doubt that the Prosecutor was forced to resort to the mechanism of Article 19(3) of the Statute. If the prosecutor was sure that the principle of objective territorial jurisdiction and the effect of the Bangladesh’s membership in the situation of the Myanmar is the basis for exercising the ICC’s jurisdiction, perhaps she would not resort the mechanism of Article 19(3) of the Statute instead of the mechanism of Articles 15(3) and 18(2) of the Statute and preliminaries.Second, recourse to the mechanism of Article 19(3) of the Statute has led to the disregard of the requirements of Article 19(2) of the Statute governing Article 18(7) of the Statute, which is related to Article 15(3) of the Statute. The competent state’s objection to the ICC jurisdiction depends on the Prosecutor’s resort to the mechanism of Articles 15(3) and 18 of the Statute, which was missing in the process of hearing and issuing the ruling on jurisdiction in the situation of the Myanmar. Therefore, the Prosecutor’s resort to Article 19(3) of the Statute without observing the formalities in Articles 15(3) and 18 of the Statute had a negative impact on the position of the state objecting to the application of complementary jurisdiction of the ICC at the stage of issuing the decision to accept jurisdiction in the situation of the Myanmar. These requirements are one of the components of a fair trial and the granting of the opportunity to challenge the ICC’s complementary jurisdiction, which was fulfilled by the prosecutor in accordance with the procedures of Articles 15(3) and 18(2) of the Statute, but did not. The right to object to the application of the complementary jurisdiction of the ICC or to prevent it by using the mechanism in Articles 18 and 19(2) of the Statute is for the state claiming criminal jurisdiction in the crimes under the ICC jurisdiction in which the Prosecutor is applying for permission to start an investigation. According to Article 15(3) of the Statute, the Prosecutor requests permission to start a preliminary investigation, and the state claiming jurisdiction immediately objects to it by resorting to Articles 18 and 19(2) of the Statute to prohibit the ICC’s complementary jurisdiction. Although this possibility is weak in the situation of the Myanmar, it should not be prejudged. Therefore, the judicial procedure thought out a solution to avoid ignoring the rights of the competent state in this regard. Therefore, the competent state’s objection to the ICC jurisdiction at the stage of issuing the order accepting the ICC’s jurisdiction was postponed to the next stage, i.e. the stage of issuing the order for the prosecutor’s preliminary investigation in the Myanmar situation.
