Problem Statement and Background
Crimes against national security lie at the intersection of national security and citizens’ rights and freedoms. In the Global South, the concepts of security and security-related crimes cannot be analyzed independently of the historical, social, political, and structural contexts of these societies. The legacy of colonialism, external interventions, and structural inequalities have influenced the formation of the concept of security in Southern societies. Iran, as one of the societies of the Global South, has historically experienced classical colonialism, neo-colonialism, and epistemic colonialism. From this perspective, crimes against security in Iran are not merely the product of offenders’ individual actions; in some cases, they are also connected to historical and social structures and domestic and international power relations.
By contrast, Iranian criminal law concerning crimes against security has, in many cases, been shaped by the prioritization of security and the preservation of the political system over citizens’ rights, placing security offenders in a different position from ordinary offenders. This has resulted in the emergence of certain elements of enemy-oriented criminal law, in which offenders are considered not merely on the basis of their past criminal conduct but also in terms of their potential future danger. Preventive criminal intervention, the criminalization of preparatory conduct, severe punishments, restrictions on certain defense rights, reliance on special legislation, and the possibility of prolonged detention are among the characteristics of this approach. Such elements can be observed in both substantive and procedural criminal law in Iran.
Southern Criminology is a theoretical and practical project aimed at decolonizing and democratizing criminological knowledge. By criticizing epistemic imperialism, it seeks to reconsider the power relations embedded in dominant Northern knowledge. The present article, adopting a critical approach and drawing upon the conceptual framework of Southern Criminology, examines Iran’s criminal policy toward crimes against national security and seeks to answer the fundamental question of how Southern Criminology can provide a basis for redefining Iran’s criminal-law approach to security-related crimes. The significance of this question lies in the fact that mainstream criminology has largely been based on the experiences of Northern societies and, in some cases, lacks sufficient capacity to explain the historical and structural contexts of Southern societies. By challenging the epistemic dominance of the Global North and emphasizing the experiences and knowledge of Southern societies, Southern Criminology makes it possible to reconsider concepts such as crime, security, threat, and punishment within the historical and social context of each society.
Research Objective
The main objective of this study is to explain the capacity of Southern Criminology to criticize and redefine the enemy-oriented approach of the criminal law of the Islamic Republic of Iran toward crimes against security. The study seeks, first, to identify the historical and structural context of security-related crimes in Iran; second, to examine the components and manifestations of the enemy-oriented approach in Iran’s substantive and procedural criminal law; and third, by drawing on the epistemological foundations of Southern Criminology, to provide a theoretical framework for moving from an enemy-oriented approach toward an independent, context-sensitive, justice-oriented, and human-dignity-based criminal law. Accordingly, the study does not merely seek to criticize existing regulations but aims to demonstrate that reconsidering criminal policy concerning security-related crimes requires a coherent theoretical foundation.
Research Method
This study is fundamental-applied in terms of purpose and descriptive-analytical in terms of method, and adopts a qualitative and critical approach. The theoretical framework of the research is Southern Criminology. The research data were collected through documentary and library-based research, drawing on primary legal, criminological, and theoretical sources concerning crimes against security, enemy-oriented criminal law, and Southern Criminology. The analysis first examines the concept of national security and the position of security-related crimes in the Global South. It then explains the formation and characteristics of enemy-oriented criminal law and analyzes its manifestations in the substantive and procedural criminal law of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Subsequently, the theoretical foundations of Southern Criminology, including postcolonialism, contextual knowledge, critique of epistemic colonialism, and cognitive justice, are employed as analytical tools for reconsidering security-related crimes in Iran. Accordingly, the final analysis is conducted at three levels: classical colonialism, neo-colonialism, and epistemic colonialism.
Research Findings
The findings indicate, first, that national security in Iran cannot be analyzed solely within the framework of external threats or the individual actions of security offenders. Security in Southern societies has domestic, regional, and global dimensions, and in Iran, the interaction among these levels has contributed to the emergence of security challenges. Therefore, a purely criminal and individual-centered analysis of crimes against security overlooks part of their social reality.
Second, the examination of Iranian criminal law indicates that elements of enemy-oriented criminal law can be observed in both substantive and procedural domains concerning crimes against security. At the substantive level, these include preventive criminalization, consideration of thoughts and preparatory conduct, the breadth of criminal offenses, severe punishments, and restrictions on the application of certain leniency measures. At the procedural level, restrictions can also be observed concerning arrest, interception, pretrial detention, the selection of counsel, access to case files, and proceedings before Revolutionary Courts.
Third, from the perspective of Southern Criminology, the historical and structural contexts of security-related crimes in Iran are connected to the legacy of colonialism and newer forms of domination. At the level of classical and quasi-colonialism, border-making and external interventions; at the level of neo-colonialism, sanctions, hybrid warfare, and media interventions; and at the level of epistemic colonialism, the imitation of Northern epistemic and legal models may constitute contexts conducive to certain forms of security-related offending.
Fourth, the findings demonstrate that Southern Criminology has the capacity, through postcolonialism, situated knowledge, critique of epistemic colonialism, and cognitive justice, to challenge the dominant conception of the security offender as an “enemy.” Rather than disregarding the historical and social contexts of criminal behavior, this approach emphasizes understanding those contexts and recognizing the knowledge and experiences of marginalized groups. From this perspective, sustainable security cannot be achieved merely through expanded criminal intervention and harsher punishment; it also requires attention to the structural conditions that produce insecurity and greater citizen participation in the political and social order.
Conclusion
The present study demonstrates that the Iranian criminal law, regarding crimes against security, incorporates elements of an "enemy-oriented" approach in both its substantive and procedural dimensions. However, it is the Southern Criminological analysis that reveals that this approach should not be regarded solely as a domestic choice, but can be understood in relation to historical colonial and quasi-colonial power relations. From this perspective, the roots of security-related crimes can be examined at three levels: classical colonialism, manifested in artificial border demarcations; neo-colonialism, reflected in hybrid warfare and sanctions; and epistemic colonialism, manifested in imitative and neoliberal development models.
Accordingly, the adoption of an enemy-oriented approach not only fails to ensure national security, but may itself contribute to undermining security from within through the extensive exclusion of citizens, the erosion of social capital, the weakening of citizenship rights, and the reproduction of violence. Therefore, breaking this vicious cycle requires a fundamental redefinition of the criminal-law approach to crimes against security, drawing on Southern Criminology and moving beyond an enemy-oriented logic toward a model grounded in cognitive justice, social contextualization, and human dignity.