جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "territorial jurisdiction" در نشریات گروه "علوم اجتماعی"

Territorial jurisdiction is the state's criminal jurisdiction over crimes committed in its territory, in other words, it means that the crime committed in the territory of a country is subject to the laws of that country. The principle of territorial jurisdiction has two aspects, a positive aspect and a negative aspect, the positive aspect is that basically all persons who commit crimes within the territory of Iran's sovereignty can be tried according to the laws of Iran except in exceptional cases and the negative aspect is that basically People who commit crimes outside the jurisdiction of Iran cannot be tried in Iran except in exceptional cases. According to the nature of the subject, the present research has been conducted in terms of practical purpose and in terms of gathering information by documentary method and through the study of valid laws and sources, and the obtained information has been analyzed in a descriptive-analytical manner. It should be noted that exceptions to the principle of territorial competence, including political and parliamentary immunity, which in our country are limited to the performance of representative duties, have also been discussed.

In order to confirm the competence of the penal institution of any country, it is necessary to establish a true connection among place of crime, perpetrator and the competent court. In this regard penal laws must be territorial bound. Due to the Deficiency of Territorial Competence Principal, internal laws of countries are affected by some sorts of Transnational Legitimacy Principal. TCP includes: individual competence principal (positive and negative side), actual Competence Principal and international Competence.This is to say that, execution of Transnational Legitimacy Principal does not violate the Sovereignty of any country. According to this principal when a crime happens by or against the citizens of governments or against the fundamental interests of their respective country or crimes which breach international order, governments expect to retain the right to take care of the committed crime by themselves and to punish criminals who by the virtue of Transnational Legitimacy Principal may not be brought to justice. Though execution of Transnational Legitimacy Principal involves some provisions including the importance of committed crime and where dual criminality is not the case, these provisions may not be considered as inefficient just in Actual Competence Principal. Among these principals, individual competence Principal, mainly its negative side, has a great deal of importance because it protects the citizens of a country. I.R.I penal code like other countries, regardless of current conditions and quality and quantity of laws, admitted the three principals of Transnational Legitimacy. Though, it seems that it can be criticized as the law maker did not consider the provisions of international penal code and especially did not consider the consequences of rejecting the negative side of individual competence principal.