Document Type : scientific

Author

• Hadi Rostami

Associate Professor, Department of Law, Faculty of Humanities, Bu-Ali Sina University, Hamadan, Iran.

Abstract

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 across all times and places. Based on this, a law is universalizable if its generalization does not lead to contradiction, which requires that the rules be free from personal aspects, non-discriminatory, and unconditional, allowing everyone to abide by them. The goal of universalizability is to eliminate conflicts and unjust privileges among rational agents. In this perspective, every rational will is self-legislating in practice, and a rule that is valid only for "me" or "us" is unworthy of universal legislation and disregards humans as ends in themselves. Therefore, retributivism, which views punishment as a logical response to crime, aligns with universalizability more than utilitarianism, which merely reflects the interests of the majority. Criminal legislation based on racial interests, religious considerations, or the ideology of the ruling class is rejected and unacceptable in this theory. Universalizability is alien to approaches that seek to localize criminal laws with ideological and false motives, and it considers the validity and legitimacy of law to lie in its morality, such that individuals comply with it out of duty and for the sake of duty alone—an idea that ultimately leads to the convergence and unity of criminal systems worldwide. The principles and foundations of criminal law are universal and comprehensive, and these principles cannot be localized.

Keywords

• Universalizability
• Categorical Imperative
• Kant
• Punishment
• Self Legislation

Main Subjects

• Criminal Law