Journal of Criminal Law Research

Abstract Acid Throwing attack is a terrible violent crime against the person which
is not properly analyzed in criminal law, nor in criminology. Global
statistics, if they are not of concern to international community, affirm the
necessity of finding a solution for this problem. One of the most important
aspects to explore the phenomenon is the issue of acid violence victims
which requires a special consideration in theory and practice. Meanwhile,
Ameneh Bahrami Navaa Case has significant points from the victimological
perspective. The case shows that the Iranian society, as well as its legal
system, face serious defects to protect victims of acid violence. The
necessity of remedy of moral damage, providing and imposing proportionate
penalties, prevention of acid throwing attacks and control of its increasing
rate all are of issues which have a need of consideration.

Abstract Since the International Criminal Court has been established by the Statute
which was ratified at Rome Conference in 1998, a new horizon was opened
to the prosecution and trial of the international crimes offenders. One of the
goals to establish the ICC is fighting against the impunity; it raises some
questions in relation to developments in contemporary legal thoughts such as
restorative justice. This essay seeks to explain the concept of restorative
justice and its context in the trials of international crimes. It also seeks to
explain the Statute of ICC from the view of its proceedings and decisions by
inspiration of “purist model” and “maximalist model “approaches about the
restorative justice. The aim is to find the characters defined for restorative
justice in ICC, and explain the contexts of the restorative justice.

Abstract Nowadays, the participation of non-governmental organizations are
considered as a one of a good elements of the governance from the economic,
social and cultural points of view. The mentioned participation in legal system
can play a prominent role in the efficiency and public confidence. The new
criminal procedure law aiming at operationalizing the above objectives, has
officially recognized the Pursuing the Public Action in a special category of
crimes by these organizations. Although the position of these organizations has
been cited in the text of law as a “crime reporter”, extensive authorities such as
presenting an evidence and protesting to an award which was made have been
granted to them. In fact, the law -due to discretionary spending in this arearefused
to name them as a “plaintiff ". Probably, due to the predicted authority,
the law considered an "intermediate" role between plaintiff and crime reporter.
In some cases in which a crime has a specific victim, the consent of victim or
his/her legal guardian is necessary and required. The matter which has been
neglected in the law is the mechanism of supervision for the activities of these
organizations. I hope it becomes possible to clarify the failures of this law by its
implementation and then take the better step under the light of the experiences.

Abstract Abstract
The legislator criminalized the invitation to suicide by enacting the
cybercrimes Act 1388. According to this Act, if the invitation to suicide is
considered as a crime, it shall be exclusively committed via computer
systems, communication systems and data carriers. The way of committing
this crime is not important, not restricted and it does not matter whether
suicide is committed in the way that caller prefers or not. The invitation to
suicide is not bounded to consequence although the specific intent including
special intent of invitation to suicide, is essential for committing the crime. If
suicide pact includes invitation to suicide by computer and communication
systems and data carriers, it will be considered as a crime. Invitation under
the condition is also considered as an invitation to suicide and it should also
be noted that disregarding the invitation by caller does not invalidate the
crime.

Abstract Police officers sometimes resorts to the sting operations to detect a crime.
American criminal law allows to use this sort of operation. In Iranian
criminal law, Islamic and legalprinciple forbid such an operation.However,
under the light of Tazahom principle, in serious crimes like diffusion of drug
according to the rule of The Most Important which is provided in penal code
(Article 158, section B), police officersresort sting operation. These sort of
measures, sometimes lead to commit a crime by a citizen instead of arresting
a professional criminal and entrapment comes to existence. To achieve the
entrapment, incitement must be done by the police officers and it must be
done in the way that might be able to influence any common citizens.

Abstract Public disclosure of conviction is accounted as a shaming sanction which
pursues old promulgating sanction. Regarding to the fact that recognition of
the philosophy of punishments and comparing the sanctions with them have
a significant role in increasing the efficiency of the mentioned measures,
public disclosure of conviction has been analyzed from the criminal
philosophy perspective. In general, the philosophy of criminal sanction can
be divided into consequentialist and non-consequentialist philosophies.
Consequentialist philosophy with the element of deep insight into the issue
usually intends to acquire some utilities as a result of punishments while
non-consequentialist philosophy usually wants to put the blame on the
guilty. As the background of public disclosure of conviction is an old
promulgating punishment, and has merely been modernized as a shaming
method, this criminal sanction conforms with non-consequentialist
philosophy more than consequentialist philosophy and would not rejoice in
securing consequentialist philosophy. The above- mentioned fact can be
regarded as an encouragement for the Iranian legislator to abandon or at least
limit this sanction.

Abstract Abstract
Various economic systems caused different social reaction toward the
actions which disturb policy and economic activities - according to the
different times and places. The multiplicity of economic and social
interactions, makes it difficult to define the economic crime. On the other
side, it causes providing the definition, restricting the true sense of the word
and consequently limiting the legislature's reaction and difficulty in
achieving prevention goals. Therefore, explaining the criteria can be useful
instead of defining. This essay seeks to view the criminological and
economic criteria; according to the former, the motivation and the
atmosphere in which crime was committed of economic might assist to
recognize the economic crime. And according to the latter, disruption of
macroeconomic policies (monetary, fiscal and income) and operating
companies and businesses, the production, distribution and consumption will
show the another side of economic crime’s face. Thus, it is possible to take a
step toward the identifying the economic crime, under the light economic
criteria and considering the criminological criteria.