عنوان مقاله [English]
The concept of “dangerous state” was introduced in the nineteenth century on the basis of the necessity to provide social protection by positivism theorists. There are signs of Legislator’s attention to this concept, and the legalization of the “danger” concept can be seen in numerous place of Islamic penal code. What gives credit to all these criminology analyzes is the legislative model that determines the efficiency and effectiveness of a legal entity. The present article examines the specific condition of the existence of a criminal conviction based on the danger concept in alternative punishments for imprisonment (paragraphs A and B of ICL) independently and also compares this concept in other penal law institutions in order to assess the Danger Concept in this legal institution and according to that, analyze the legislator’s performance in using criminology concepts. What comes to mind at first is the right and proper use of this concept, but after analyzing this material it will be clear that in addition to the gaps and shortcomings in this article, the legislator’s use of danger concept in comparison to other legal institutions is wrong as well. It will also be clear that the inappropriate application of the concept of dangerous state in relation to alternative imprisonment sentences by the legislator involves instances of dangerous state that are not significant and, on the other hand, some form of dangerous state that are important and significant are ignored. Legislative action has also led to a duality in the danger concept in comparison between detention alternatives and other law enforcement leniency institutions, and totally, has resulted in failure and rupture of legislation.