جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « معاونت در جرم » در نشریات گروه « علوم انسانی »

October 7, 2023, marked a significant turning point that not only disrupted regional dynamics and agreements but also once again brought the longstanding Israeli-Palestinian conflict to the forefront of global attention and legal discourse. Following an attack by the Hamas group, the Israeli occupying and apartheid regime launched a massive and unprecedented assault on Gaza.
When considering the right to use force in accordance with jus ad bellum, it is important to recognize that occupation is intended to be a temporary and transitional circumstance. Occupying territory during times of war does not strip the occupied government of its national sovereignty, nor does it confer national sovereignty upon the occupying forces. Furthermore, prolonging the occupation does not legitimize the act of occupation. It is on these grounds that international law does not recognize actions that seek to make an occupation permanent.
The International Court of Justice, in its advisory opinion on the construction of a barrier wall by the Zionist regime in the occupied territories, affirmed that member states of the Fourth Geneva Convention are obligated to not recognize the illegal situation created by the occupation, including the construction of the barrier wall, and to abstain from providing any assistance in its construction. Under the provisions of the four Geneva Conventions, the humanitarian rights of individuals in occupied territories are to be upheld, regardless of whether the occupation is met with armed resistance or not.
The guiding principle of occupation law is to safeguard the sovereignty of the occupied government and protect the security and rights of the inhabitants of the occupied areas. The post-World War II world order, founded on the United Nations Charter, emphasizes the prohibition of using military force and upholding the territorial integrity and political independence of nations, thereby deeming occupation a form of territorial aggression. Humanitarian law underscores the temporary nature of military occupation and prohibits any actions that seek to alter the demographic composition of occupied regions.
While it is possible to establish occupation without resorting to ethnic cleansing and to occupy uninhabited land, ethnic cleansing serves as a clear indicator of the occupier's intent to perpetuate and institutionalize the occupation, with the aim of supplanting the original inhabitants and establishing their own rule. Ethnic cleansing, while not explicitly listed as a standalone crime under international law, aligns with the broader category of forced population transfer and deportation, both of which constitute international crimes.
The occupied state of Palestine serves as a poignant example of the repercussions of such war crimes, particularly in terms of violating the fundamental right of a people to determine their own destiny, safeguarding against the enduring impacts of prolonged occupation, and preventing actions that seek to entrench the occupation's longevity.
Expulsion entails the removal of individuals from one country to another, whereas forced population transfer involves the displacement of civilians within a country's borders, without necessitating their crossing into another nation. While deportation is explicitly defined in the statutes of international criminal tribunals, forced population transfer has been expressly codified in the Rome Statute, under the broader category of "other inhumane acts".
In conclusion, the perpetuation of occupation through actions such as ethnic cleansing, forced population transfer, and deportation not only flouts international law but also undermines fundamental human rights and perpetuates cycles of conflict and injustice. It is imperative for the international community and legal scholars to remain vigilant in upholding the principles of temporary occupation and safeguarding the rights and integrity of occupied populations.
The crime of population eviction comprises two essential elements: coercive behavior leading to forced eviction and displacement of the population. The mandatory element of the crime of deportation involves what is known as "open behavior," where the perpetrator may engage in various acts such as murder, sexual violence, robbery, and torture to carry out the deportation. Coercion in this context does not necessarily involve violent actions; the use of coercive conditions alone is sufficient. In addition to eviction, the destruction of homes and available resources to establish new settlements violates the right to occupation.
In its 2004 advisory opinion, the International Court of Justice explicitly declared Israel's policy of constructing and developing settlements from 1977 onwards as contrary to Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. This policy was deemed an example of the illegal transfer of the population to occupied territories, a blatant violation of international law. The transfer of settlers to illegal settlements is considered a criminal act, similar to the settlements themselves, as it is typically done voluntarily and with the complete consent of the settlers. Thus, accountability falls upon the settlers themselves, a responsibility that is often forgotten.
The Rome Statute, like the Geneva Convention, considers voluntary transfer as part of the crime, aiming to protect the population of the occupied territories rather than the transplanted individuals. Even in cases where settlers voluntarily move to occupied areas with various motivations, individual criminal responsibility may still apply. This aspect sheds light on unexplored facets of occupation rights, challenging the common notion that population transfer is solely a state crime attributable to the occupying government's actions.
Some argue that ordinary individuals settling in occupied areas without governmental support should not be held accountable, as voluntary settlement may not always be malicious. However, according to experts such as "Dinstein," an Israeli authority on humanitarian law, voluntary settlement can still pose legal implications if done in coordination with occupation forces or through organized efforts.
The research herein analyzes the settlement actions of the Zionist regime in Palestinian occupied territories and the influx of Jewish settlers into these regions. The study concludes that Israeli settlement constructions, necessitating ethnic cleansing of the occupied areas, constitute criminal behavior, alongside the resettlement of settlers within these territories. Settlement involves the acquisition of land and property from original non-resident inhabitants, an act constituting war crimes and significant violations of humanitarian rights, punishable under the Rome Statute.
Voluntary settlement, being a form of population transfer, carries criminal responsibility for the settlers involved. Thus, under international criminal law, the construction of Israeli settlements and the relocation of settlers to occupied territories, achieved through ethnic cleansing and forced displacement of native Palestinians, are deemed war crimes for which both settlers and those facilitating or encouraging such acts are held accountable.

One of the prohibited and criminal acts is aiding and abetting in a crime, which is considered under the rules of jurisprudence and law. What has been explicitly stated in both jurisprudence and law is the allocation of aiding and abetting to positive acts, but by examining cases in both fields, it is found that both have accepted the truth of aid in relation to negative acts (abstaining from an action); especially in the field of law, where aiding and abetting in a crime is not only accepted as an independent offense in various legal provisions, but it can also be considered as one of the cases of aiding and abetting in a crime. Just as in jurisprudence, it has been explicitly stated that aid is attributed to abstaining from an action. In addition, examining the nature of aid and abetting shows that these two abilities have this generality, and therefore, they have been used with the same semantic scope in customs and some narratives. Therefore, it can be claimed that aid and abetting, even according to the practical confession of opponents, do not apply solely to existential prerequisites and can also include negative prerequisites; just as the principle of sin and crime is also included in this generality.

The principle of legality of crimes and punishments has been called the most important principle of criminal law. This principle, which requires a precise definition of the crimes and determining their sanctions in law, has various effects, the most important of which is the protection of citizens' rights and freedoms against the rule of law and judicial tyranny. Therefore, the legislature is expected to meet the requirements of this principle throughout the criminal laws. The generalization of Article 43 of the Islamic Penal Code (1370) in expressing the punishment of the aider in a crime was contrary to the mentioned principle, and although by enacting the Article 726 of Chapter of T’azirs</em> in 1375 and determining the minimum punishment of the crime for the abettor, this generalization was reduced to some extent, the problem of determining the punishment of the abettor and its inconsistency with the principle of legality remained to a large extent. After three decades of experience in Islamic legislation in the field of criminal law, the legislator, by stating the principle of legality in Article 12 of the Islamic Penal Code (1392), in Article 127 has tried to legalize the punishment of abetting in crime by avoiding generalization. However, the preference of the Sharia over the law and the lack of determination of the relationship between Article 127 and the special articles of abetting in crime can lead to disharmony of judicial decisions, which itself requires amending the law or issuing a uniting verdict in line with the principle of legality and non-discrimination

One of the instances of accessory of "abuse of power" is added to the instances of accessory in Article 126 of the Islamic Penal Code. The legal language refers to the "abuse of power" of official organizations and institutions, and in Iranian law, the abuse of power is a criminal offense and its implications are not explicitly stated in the law. Jurists have not been given a definitive definition of the concept of abuse of power; and what the concept and implications of the law are not precisely defined, in terms of scope and model, with concepts such as the abuse of physical, situational, financial, ideological, persuasive, persuasive Sexual and administrative have semantic affinities, although semantic affinities and its intimate relation to similar concepts are distinctive of abuses of power, with some similar concepts general and particularly absolute. The expansion of the concept of instances of abetting limits individual freedoms in society, and the importance of criminalizing "abuse of power" for the criminal defense of its victims. Therefore, the purpose is to examine the conceptual realm of abuse of power and its implications in the victimization measure. The method is descriptive-analytical. The dominant individual, the basis of power, is not only political but also a working relationship, a kinship, and so on.

Persons assisting in the crime without any interference in the material property of the crime are considered accomplice in crime. Despite the adoption of a policy of accepting the criminality of the deputy in the crime, its rules are different in Iran, Scotland and the United States. The Islamic Penal Code has accepted a relative moratorium and milder punishment, in contrast to the offense of crime in Scotland and the United States; it varies according to the occurrence of the crime or its absence. Upon occurrence of crime, the approach of sentencing to criminal has the criminal offense of the deputy in relation to the incomplete crime of incitement or collusion in the the crime of dominate. Various approaches have been adopted on the quality of the material element. For example, leaving the verb with a legal obligation to prevent crime only in Scotland and the United States and assistance after committing a crime is considered only in the United States as a vicegerent in the crime. In Scotland and the United States, despite the common criminal downgrade Mens rea carelessness lessen. The present paper, by analyzing the differences between approaches, descriptively analyzes with a study-library, seeks to differentiate and in crime in the studied countries.

The criminal legislation, more than any other branch of law, requires respecting principles that are consistent with sources of legislation. The connection between Islamic law and legislation and proceedings, especially in the criminal field, is also a long-standing debate which has experienced certain changes in the new legal transformation. In the present study, the extent to which the legislator adheres, in the Islamic Criminal Code, to one of the most important principles applicable in the criminal field, i.e. nulla crimen sine lege in two instances of abetting (the subject of article 127 of the aforementioned Code) and Hadd Crimes (the subject of article 220 of the same Code) will be assessed. The authors have critically analyzed two examples of such changes in the form of conflict assessment of articles 127 and 220 of the Islamic Criminal Code passed on 21/4/2013 with principles 36 and 169 of the Iranian Constitution and the nulla crimen sine lege rule. The outcome of this research also provides a general moderate approach to the question of whether religion is a source of criminal legislation and it seems that it has the capability to make legislation interact, in some way, with the legislative principles and the religious culture of the Iranian society and is able to slow down or stop the acceleration of confusion in the Iranian criminal legislation and finally, religion in positive criminal law, is a source of legislation and may not be a direct source of rendering judgment.

In international documents, collective criminal responsibility is expressed in frameworks such as supervision, causation, command, incitement, group membership. In dealing with the interlopers, four methods have been mentioned, which are: the system of rejecting the company and deputy, the system of accepting the company along with the manager and rejecting the deputy, the system of accepting the deputy along with the manager and rejecting the company, and the system of accepting three independent titles. The fourth system is used in Iran. The first system, that is, the negation of the company and deputy, which aims to simplify criminal law from the existing titles, believes that the title of steward and stewards is sufficient to fight against direct and indirect intervenors in crime. In fact, according to this opinion, it is better to differentiate between The partners in crime and the criminal associates (deputies) should be removed and the direct and indirect intervenors in the crime should be dealt with as a single title. In the sub-set of the second system, i.e. acceptance of participation and stewardship and negation of the deputy, there are two independent thoughts: the denial of the deputy and its non-acceptance in general, and the conditional acceptance of the deputy as an inseparable part of the act of the main criminal and the overseer of the crime. In the third system of the deputy And stewardship is accepted, but participation in crime is treated as stewardship. Finally, in the fourth system, these three titles are recognized independently.

One of the special instances of abetment in crime against individuals is "imsak" or holding a person to enable a third party to kill him; of course it is not only the crime of killing in which "imsak" is regarded as abetment in a crime, but it can also be found in such crimes as kidnapping, theft, assault and battery, unlawful imprisonment and arrest. Although the punishment of  abetment in crime is in general included in Articles 127 and 128 of the Islamic Punishment Law, "imsak" in murder cannot be an instance of these two articles, because the beginning part of Article 127 states that the punishment under this article includes the crimes for which no penalty has been determined in Sharia and law, while in Sharia the punishment of the abetment in murder has been determined and Shiite jurists have regarded "life imprisonment" as the punishment for the abetment in murder. Logically speaking, too, a striking difference in punishment applicable to different examples of abetment is not justifiable; therefore a unique precedent must be practiced. This research is a fundamental study with an analytical-descriptive methodology. The main question is what strategy would be suggested for carrying out a punishment in abetment-related crimes, especially abetment in murder. This research, upon a review of the viewpoints of jurists and lawyers about the nature of "imsak", has come to the conclusion that the crime of "imsak" is of the type of crimes related to private rights and is therefore forgivable and negligible. Moreover, the views of those who have  proposed special punishment for abetment in murder by the legislator have been more strongly justified. Therefore, in order to disambiguate the case in order to prevent the issuance of different verdicts for the similar offence and with regard to the necessity of the accord of all laws and regulations with Islamic principles, by virtue of the Fourth Principle of the Constitutional Law, the punishment of "life imprisonment" for the abetment in a deliberate murder is suggested to be included as a single article in the Islamic Punishment Law.

Criminalizing the act of aiding to unintentional crimes appears to be onerous; especially with regard to the legal texts of the Iranian law system, thus addressing the issue requires a theoretical discussion on the substantiation of its possibility within a consistent structure. In this direction, initially, the prerequisites of the recognition of the theory on aiding to unintentional crimes such as “non-essentiality of the corroboration of the unity of the criminal intent of parties”, “the actuality of the title of aiding”, “non-essentiality of the intentionality of the aided act” are explored thoroughly, then through the analysis and review of its contradicting instances, such as “aiding to the commission of a conduct which is the origin of the crime”, “assistance in the commission of the  killing by mistake” and “intervention in the murder of a person deemed erroneously mahdour-al dam (or deserving of death)”, there exists the grounds to explain the criminological advantages derived from acceptance of the aforementioned theory, and at last, it is proposed to the legislator to expand the instances of aiding to the commission of crime as an effective measure to control  delinquency.

Offence of pandering is one of the offences that has direct connection to destruction of public morals and it also causes commission of several offences. Accoringly, recognizing the grounds of its commission and preparing for its removing is of high significant. One of the main and basic grounds of this offence is street girls. In this regard it is of high importance to study the phenomenon of street women and their relationship to offence of pandering. This offence may facilitate the commission of several crimes. This article deals with the street women and their activities as fasiciltator for commission of the offence of pandering and its related social abnormalities. The exploring of these activities will be answering to this question whether their activities may be regarded as the offence of pandering. It also is necessary to study whether basically this offence itself is a seperat offence from the other ones. The study must clarify the ambiguities.

Criminal participation as a subject including abetting, complicity and organized crimes created a joint field of study between criminal law and criminology. Basing the definition of criminal participation on “Intervention of at least two individuals” in both studies followed the empathy of those science in explaining concept and setting examples. However, according to the requirements of each area, criminal participation has allocated a different domain to itself. Criminological review of criminal participation suggests that substantiation of this title is based on proof of two elements: engagement with incompatible groups and individuals and effectiveness of incompatible party. Moreover, patterns of criminal participation can be limited in three cases: organized participation, conspiracy-based participation and unconscious participation.

From the viewpoint of Islamic law and jurisprudence, partnership in crime is coextensive with sin. The present article studies the commitment of offence, the material and psychological elements of offence and then sheds light on the conditions for the materialization of partnership in crime.It also discusses the punishment for the partnership in crime in accordance to the article 8 of penal code and Article 1 of the Islamic penal code. At the end of the article some allusions have been made to the Quranic verses as well as traditions, reason and consensus regarding the unlawfulness of partnership in crime.