فاطمه دهدارزاده

As a criminal phenomenon, environmental crimes require provisioning reactive strategies by administrators of criminal justice system. Restorative mechanisms as a considerable part of reactive strategies and their statuses in the criminal justice system are of subjects less studied analytically. Using descriptive-analytical methods and library data, the present research explained and evaluated restorative mechanisms against environmental crimes in the present Iranian criminal justice system. The results showed that although in the present Iranian criminal justice system and regarding environmental crimes restorative mechanisms don’t function as criminal and suppressive mechanisms, this doesn’t mean that criminal legislator has ignored them altogether; in fact, some strategies can be explained and evaluated including environmental mediation, provisioning restorative function for NGOs, damages awarded by courts as some complementary for criminal punishments, and also legal assistance for the victims of environmental crimes. Despite the fact that Iranian criminal legislator considered partially the restorative mechanisms against environmental crimes, some faults can be seen in implementing these mechanisms among which more important ones include limited intervention by NGOs in the preferring process and participating in hearings, approving by the head of the judiciary the names of NGOs authorized in performing these duties, making non-mandatory the environmental liability insurance for the future professions, lack of legal regulations on compensation funds for environment.

Adopting a penal populist approach by the criminal justice administrators and policymakers has been one of the most important damages the different systems of criminal justice have been faced with in the recent decades. By reviewing all the available literature on the issue and, using descriptive-analytical methods and library studies, the present research tried to study the penal populism phenomenon through a sociological approach. In other words, as its most important objective, the present research is concerned with explaining and analyzing sociological contexts leading to the formation of penal populism. The findings showed that different sociological contexts help in rising penal populism phenomenon in a criminal justice system and criminal policy - from which public ignorance, undeniable impacts of mass media, and ever increased public fear of crime can be mentioned as the most important ones. It seems that, controlling or decreasing social contexts which result in penal populism require ever more increasing of mass awareness, optima and consistent management of mass media, and ever more use of criminological and sociological findings in the process of fighting crimes.

This study aims to identify and prioritize the most serious crimes committed by mentally retarded people, causes and factors to prevent the commission of a crime from the perspective of police officers, lawyers and judges are doing... -member , which included set high standards seventh. Results of this study showed that Lowest and the most frequent crimes committed by mentally retarded people were killed and damage to property, the most important factors influencing their low average IQ delinquency and abuse by other perpetrators and the most important factors in the prevention of delinquency mentally retarded people, by the people through education and awareness Culturing them is correct. Since individuals with mental retardation, a series of social problems, economic, cultural and educational have to educate people on to support their rights and education & training of police officers, lawyers and judges necessary condition for justice it is.

Please cite this article as: Dehdarzadeh F, Mir Mohammad Sadeghi H, Ashuri M, Mahdavi Sabet MA. Mentally Retarded Persons Offences; Causes of Crime and Prevention from the Perspective of Police Officers, Lawyers and Judges. Iran J Med Law 2019; 13(49): 149-165.

There are A group of criminals that do not enjoy the full development of mind. This group are called mental retardation that are in low social intelligence and ability. Mentally retarded offenders for their inability to think and reason, often do not have the necessary conditions for criminal responsibility. So it is not fair that judicial system treat them as normal and ordinary criminals. In the UK, many people with mental retardation in the event of a crime are subjected to diversion or to punish as non-convicted detainees; But in Iran these people have faced with a higher risk of judicial errors and many of them are not identified and discovered in the time of entering the criminal justice system. In this study, we first discussed about the requirement for criminal responsibility. Comparing mental retardation people with children and mental illness, then we evaluate their criminal responsibility in the legal system of Iran and England.