جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « detention » در نشریات گروه « علوم سیاسی »

Detention is one of the most important powers conferred on criminals to effectively combat crime. In parallel with the exercise of this power by those authorities, possibly, the final proceedings will not lead to a conviction. The question that arises, in this case, is whether an innocent defendant can claim damages for the duration of his detention? Despite the grievances of some opponents, the arguments of the proponents of compensation are even stronger. In particular, compensation is in line with the principle of a fair trial, and ethics requires that the injustice to be compensated. Accordingly, in the French criminal procedure system since 1970 and Iran since 1392, this institution has been recognized. Therefore, despite some differences in substantive and formal conditions, in some cases, there are similarities between the regulations of these two systems.

This study seeks to answer this question: what grounds and reasons can be given for the withdrawal of the United States from the nuclear deal. Without examining the contexts and factors that influence the decisions of US foreign policy, it is impossible to trace the US withdrawal from JCPOA and start of  an economic war against Iran. This article takes advantage of “James Rosina’s theory of continuity.” Rosina, who is a representative of the combination of two levels of micro and macro analysis in theoretical models of analyzing foreign policy behaviors, believes that in examining and analyzing foreign policy of each country, we must pay attention to five categories of main variables: individual, role, government, society and finally international system. The findings of this study on the withdrawal of the United States from JCPOA and the confrontation with Iran’s asymmetric deterrence strategy show that although the central sign of this phenomenon is Trump’s individual and personality variable, other variables, despite direct impact on US foreign policy towards Iran, have largely emerged as intermediate, stimulating and influential opportunistic factors in the context of Trump’s personality conditions.

Electronic surveillance is proposed as a substitute for imprisonment. In the United States and some European countries, it is more than four decades old, which has been used and, according to the research, has had a positive impact on detention and a reduction in the number of convicted offenders. In Iran, for the first time in the new rules of the Islamic Penal Code of Iran, approved in 1392, But still it has not institutionalized as it should be. Electronic surveillance as an example of substitutions of imprisonment through house arrest and control of offenders by electronic technology can has a significant role to play in reducing the harmful effects of imprisonment for low-risk offenders as well as facilitate the criminalization of the socialization of the offender. giving a glimpse to electronic surveillance, this article examines the challenges and opportunities of this substitute imprisonment in Iran's criminal justice system.

Discretion is one of the concepts which has been prominent as a result of arriving empirical studies into criminal justice. Discretion is a set of powers that authorities on criminal justice utilize them in order to perform their duties. Such phenomenon often occurs because of legal shortcomings or legislative vagueness and sometimes through crossing the law borders despite its existense. Discretion is available in different phases of criminal process, ranging from the police entrance to implementaion of court orders. One of the issues that the criminal procedure act of 1392 only has been asserted its basic principles and judges have a relative discretion towards them is Criminal Warrants exept in detection. Although discretion is a neutral concept, it can bring about various positive and negative consequences for ciminal justice agencies. Drawing on qualitative method and deep interviews with a group of judges, this paper tries to study the concept of discretion. The finding in this paper is that judges actively use this discretion, which has lead to various, and sometimes conflicting, warrants and bails for the same crimes, which in turn can cause disorder and prevent justice from perfoming for the same charges. Amending the legislations, considering the discretion in the process of training the judges, and improving the regulatory mechanisms are considered as the possible ways for managing the discretion.