Document Type : Research Article

Authors

• mahmod Espanlou ¹
• mahdi Razaghi ²

¹ ph

² Ph.D

Abstract

Establishing the elements of coercion and force in rape cases constitutes oneof the most complex issues in Iran’s criminal adjudication system. Although the legislature has sought to expand the conceptual scope of these elements to strengthen victim protection, judicial practice in interpreting and applying them remains inconsistent and marked by divergent approaches.Thisstudy, conducted through a descriptive–analytical method and based onthe examination of judgments issued bycriminal courts andthe Supreme Court, demonstrates that courts, in determining actual coercion, occasionally rely on extra‑legal criteria such as prior relations betweenthe parties, allegedly provocative behavior of the complainant, or minor inconsistencies in her statements. Such reliance imposes a heavy evidentiary burden on victims and makes the establishment of rape particularly difficult in practice.Conversely, in cases involving unconsciousness, mental incapacity, threat, fear, or deception, some judicial decisions have treated the absence of valid consent as a basis for recognizing constructive coercion, although this approach also lacks sufficient coherence.The findings indicate that the reliance of courts on non‑legal and customary criteria not only leads to inconsistency within judicial decisions but also diverges from legislative objectives and underlying jurisprudential principles.Accordingly, the study highlights the necessity of revising the standards for establishing coercion andforce and developing aunified judicial framework.

Keywords

• violence
• reluctance
• rape
• judicial procedure
• Adultery

Main Subjects

• Criminal Law