Criminal immunity of MPs in Iran and Afghanistan

The necessity to protect to parliament and its members led to determine and assure a particular privilege named parliamentary immunity in the Constitutions or ordinary laws of majority of the countries. To define and justify the necessity of it, different theories have been introduced. The legal supports which observe the parliamentary immunity, can be generally studied in two categories with distinct descriptions and effects. First, is called "the principle of non-liability". Second, it supports the members of parliament against legal proceedings, arrest, imprisonment and the rest judicial measures, except by the permission and allowance of the respective parliament, because of irrelevant exercises and non - parliamentary duties and prevents the possibility of immediate prosecution of MPs because of the attributed crimes. The stand of every country of the world in relation to the various forms of parliamentary immunity is a little bit different. In some countries, one of these two forms and in others. both of them are accepted to guarantee the whole immunity of MPs. In this article, based on a comparative study, Approach to Iran and Afghanistan in the forms of parliamentary immunity has been investigated. The study results show that In Iran, Representatives are only entitled to one of the forms of parliamentary immunity. But in Afghanistan,are accepted Admission forms of parliamentary immunity on a integrative approach.