hasan bavi

Military law, as one of the areas of criminal law, has many differences in comparison with civil law and related doctrines, which causes a challenge between these two sensitive areas. Due to the age in the codified laws of military rights and its lack of up-to-dateness and non-compliance with the modern doctrines of civil rights, especially the Charter of Civil Rights which has benefited from the latest standards of human rights, military law does not have this characteristic and needs to be transformed and has evolved and continues to show resistance to changes in civil rights, and for this reason, those subject to military rights, especially the general officers of justice (Naja), show the greatest friction in dealing with citizens in the confrontation between the rigid and inflexible military laws. have given. In the end, it seems that military rights are in conflict with the doctrines of civil rights, but the link between these two rights can be found in the responsibilities and duties of public officers of justice. Therefore, in this path, in addition to the above, there are other obstacles and challenges, including: Not updating and not amending the existing military laws, The inflexibility of military rights in front of the new developments of citizenship rights. There is a lack of awareness and general knowledge of officers and citizens regarding the issues of citizenship rights, etc. In this research, we have tried to identify the challenges facing the evolution in the field of military criminal law by analyzing the legislative history and its adaptation to modern legal doctrines, in order to reach the components and standards of the charter of citizenship rights.

One of the goals of criminal procedure is to protect the right to liberty.Temporary detention is a violation of this right, which in the present study is examined for a maximum period of time in the light of criminal policy findings. Some countries, under the influence of security-oriented criminal policies, consider the accused as a dangerous enemy and violate his right to liberty under the pretext of providing maximum security to the society and increase the maximum period of temporary detention or indefinite detention.The approach of Saudi and Lebanese law in terms of not setting a maximum period of temporary detention in criminal investigations is influenced by the security model of criminal justice and expediency.In these systems, the judiciary has full authority at its discretion and in order to achieve the good of the offender and the victim, and can violate the right to liberty; In this case, the atmosphere of the criminal justice system will take on the color and smell of security, and criminal policy will move towards the dehumanization of the criminal response. Contrary to the above view, the adoption of a tolerant criminal policy with a little tolerance in Egypt and Iran has led to a shorter maximum detention period. From an interactionist criminological point of view, which views criminal justice institutions as labeled institutions and processes, this reduces criminal intervention and, as a result, defendants are less likely to face criminal labeling. However, in some countries, such as Egypt and even Iran, sparks of security-oriented criminal policy have prevailed in the legal system that have empowered the political authority to detain individuals without maximum detention.This article seeks to discover the strengths and strengthen them and find the weaknesses and reduce them by analytical and descriptive methods, and therefore can be effective in improving criminal policy.

One of the most important areas in criminal justice of countries is criminal policy in determining the type, rate and how to enforce criminal reactions to the delinquency of children and adolescents, regardless of age or gender segregatio.This problem is to observe the observanceof gender and age, especially in Islamic countries. Since the two countries of Iran and Egypt are the two Islamic countries with the legal regimes of the Shari'a and are on the other hand, they are coordinated with customary criteria tailored to the presence of and international documents and regulations.Some criminal laws clearly cause the failure of criminal justice in this Two countries.Therefore, the aim of this study was to explain the sharing points and differentiation of the legal systems of the Egyptian orbit, based on the late jurisprudence of religious religions and the legal system of the Shari'a of Iran, based on Shiite jurisprudence. In the present study,we investigated four issues.The age of the criminal responsibility of children and adolescents, the effect of sexuality on the type, rate and criminal responsibility and the difference in criminal reactions based on the age and genderof adolescent and young people, and ultimately,how are the relevant sentences.This research has been done with an analytical descriptive approach.Findings and The findings of the research show that the judicial justice system of customary organizations and compliance with international regulations and coordination with them, as well as adoption of scientific and cognitive and criminal approaches of religious teachings in