Criminal Law Doctrines - Articles List

Universalizability" is one of the three formulations of the "Categorical Imperative" in Kant's theory, which considers the morality of rules to lie in their universality and applicability ... Read More

Responding to Evil with Evil A Philosophical-Ethical Reflection on the Retributive Justification of Inflicting Pain and Suffering

Ahmad Fallahi

Volume 21, Issue 27 , June 2024, , Pages 233-262

https://doi.org/10.30513/cld.2024.5903.1972

Abstract

In addressing this fundamental question of whether punishment is morally good/just, proponents of retributivism - emphasizing principles such as desert, blameworthiness and proportionality ... Read More

Evaluation of Lenient Institutions in Iran’s Criminal Policy (By Emphasis on Extreme Expansion and Inefficient)

Hadi Rostami

Volume 20, Issue 25 , July 2023, , Pages 153-178

https://doi.org/10.30513/cld.2023.1735

Abstract

Lenient institutions, which encompass a wide range of exempting and mitigating provisions have a long history of playing a role in Iran’s criminal policy. The tendency towards ... Read More

The Place of Mens Rea and Criminal Responsibility in the Definition of Crime

Fereydoon Jafari

Volume 19, Issue 24 , January 2023, , Pages 33-62

https://doi.org/10.30513/cld.2023.4840.1780

Abstract

Crime is the fundamental and first pillar of the four pillars (crime, offender, punishment and victim) of criminal law and it shows the importance of common norms and values so that ... Read More Crime is the fundamental and first pillar of the four pillars (crime, offender, punishment and victim) of criminal law and it shows the importance of common norms and values so that their violation is considered undesirable and unacceptable and is subject to punishments and reactions. In all national and international systems, one of the main functions of criminal legislatures is to define crime in a way that includes all its components and elements in a comprehensive and preventive manner. A brief view of Iran’s criminal acts from the Constitution era until now, confirms this task, because without any exception, the first attempt of criminal legislatures is to define crime in general. “Actus Reus” and “legal element or official expressions” are common elements of crime in the study of various definitions of crime all over the world, but the third mentioned element that is considered as one of the main components of crime in many books of criminal law (Mens Rea or mental element) consciously or recklessly is missing in crime definitions. Therefore, this basic ambiguity can be raised and, finally, crime has two elements (legal and material) or three elements (legal, material and mental). On the other hand, the relationship between the mental element and criminal responsibility in defining crime is unclear. Is criminal liability the other form of Mens Rea, or is criminal liability a subset of criminality and will essentially be the next stage after committing a crime? These key ambiguities are examined in this article and a new look is taken at the traditional and classical concepts of general criminal law. The research method in this article is analytical and descriptive and current and former acts and regulations and the expert views in this field have been reviewed and analyzed. The result of this study and analysis is the separation of criminality from criminal responsibility by resorting to imputability in which the mental element can also be explained.

Objectives and Effective Factors in Punishing the Perpetrators of Crimes against Cultural Heritage in the Light of the Al-Mahdi Case and the Procedure of the International Criminal Court

Keyvan Ghani; Fadlullah Foroughi azlollah

Volume 19, Issue 24 , January 2023, , Pages 261-294

https://doi.org/10.30513/cld.2023.4600.1742

Abstract

Cultural heritage has always been an attractive target for achieving the economic, religious and political goals of organized criminals and terrorists in internal, regional and international ... Read More Cultural heritage has always been an attractive target for achieving the economic, religious and political goals of organized criminals and terrorists in internal, regional and international armed conflicts, so supporting this heritage considering that at the international level It is respected by the world and human society, it has always been a matter of consensus, approval and emphasis, and this support, although incomplete, has been reflected in various legal and judicial, political and ideological dimensions. One of the influential institutions that has an effective capacity to support these works at the international level is the International Criminal Court. Although the possibility of filing lawsuits involving the protection of world cultural heritage in the court is not explicitly mentioned, but the review of the existing procedure confirms the jurisdiction of the court in dealing with these issues. One of the important cases in this regard is reflected in the lawsuit of the court prosecutor against Al-Mahdi, which investigation will be the desired military organizer including the goals and effective components in punishing the perpetrators of crimes against cultural heritage. This article seeks to explain the objectives and effective components in punishing perpetrators of crimes against cultural heritage in the International Criminal Court and states that due to the lack of a uniform punishment model in the court’s procedure, the efficient protection of cultural heritage relies on the traditional goals of punishment. Such as punishment, rehabilitation and deterrence are not enough, and other goals such as restoration and revival of historical and cultural monuments and compensation for the emotional pain of the victims who have a historical and religious connection with these places, are more important than the traditional aspect of the goals of punishment, and the criminal punishment system should be based on be organized on these issue.

Aggravating Factors of Punishment in the Rulings of the International Criminal Court

Sadegh Salimi

Volume 16, Issue 18 , January 2020, , Pages 169-198

https://doi.org/10.30513/cld.2020.617

Abstract

On December 7, 2019, equal to 16 Azar 1398, the International Criminal Court issued the heaviest sentence of imprisonment for 30 years for Ntaganda. In this verdict, the aggravating ... Read More

The Principle of “Legitimacy of Offences and Punishments in Islamic Jurisprudence

Sayid Ahmad Sajadi Nejad

Volume 3, Issue 20 , June 2006, , Pages 89-114

Abstract

In this article, the principle of legitimacy of offences and punishments which in turn involves in itself different principles, including the principle of legitimacy of crime and legality ... Read More

The Basis for the Principle of Individualization of Criminal Responsibility within the Scope of Religions

iraj goldozian; Bahman Hoseyn jani

Volume 1, Issue 15 , October 2005, , Pages 127-146

Abstract

Crime, criminal responsibility and punishment are the three golden parts of criminal law. Exercising punishment depends on establishing criminal liability and its establishing also ... Read More

Volume 22 (2025)

Volume 21 (2024)

Volume 20 (2023)

Volume 19 (2022)

Volume 18 (2021)

Volume 17 (2020)

Volume 16 (2019)

Volume 15 (2018)

Volume 14 (2017)

Volume 13 (2016)

Volume 12 (2015)

Volume 11 (2014)

Volume 10 (2013)

Volume 9 (2012)

Volume 8 (2011)

Volume 7 (2010)

Volume 6 (2009)

Volume 5 (2008)

Volume 4 (2007)

Volume 2 (2006)

Volume 3 (2005)

Volume 1 (2004)

Keywords = punishment

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract