جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « individualization » در نشریات گروه « فقه و حقوق »

Criminal justice management by abandoning traditional methods and eliminating retaliation aspects while preserving the effects of restoration aims at reducing the criminal record, the aggravation of cases and the costs of criminal justice. In economic analysis and that of the cost of criminal prosecution, when prosecution, sentencing or execution is not necessary, granting a victim an opportunity to rehabilitate is appropriate, and the crime committed is not an important one, criminal regressive policy proceeds. Our country also in line with the globalization of criminal law and the observance of the UN recommendations has established new institutions such as postponement of prosecution, file archiving, etc., and has expanded the scope of the institutions by adopting the Islamic Penal Code and the Penal Procedure Code 2013 as well as utilizing the capacity of the legal system and the public institutions along with the “criminal validation” approach, while validating the arbitrary institutions that are sometimes neglected. Legislative, judicial and executive Criminal policies changes are in connection with the development of a genuine human rights system, the individualization of criminal justice, prosecution alternatives, deprosecution, and so forth. In this paper, the individualization of criminal justice in the pre-trial phase is examined.

The individualization of custodial arrangements, such as the individualization of punishment, means the imposition and enforcement of criminal penalties commensurate with the nature of the offense or the characteristics of the offender as predicted in international human rights instruments in the international arena. The issue of criminal service contracts is a human protected by the principle of innocence and as a defendant and not a convicted person in the case, and therefore observing his dignity and his particular situation in issuing this sentence is more than the personalization of punishment and respect for the offender who is charged He proved to be important. Nevertheless, this part of the judicial decisions for the accused, in spite of the individualization of punishments, is less relevant to legal texts.The foundations for the individualization of custodial contracts are found in various theories of criminology and the legal principles enshrined in international documents and various regulations. Also, how to apply this, namely, proportionality or inappropriateness in the determination of general supply arrangements and the appointment of unnecessary arrest warrants in a specific sense, has explicit criteria in international documents, which necessitates these criteria as well as the degree of alignment of the Iranian legislator with that study And existing regulatory gaps

«The finding of similarity or difference is the key step in the legal process» (Edward H. Levi). This central importance of identity for law applies not only to things and actions, but also to persons. Identity seems to be central to law, probably because legal regulation presupposes coherent actors and their permanence, that is their stability in time and space as well as the constancy of the objects and categories they deal with. Personal identity essentially means the hope or the claim that a human being stays “the same”, in spite of spatial motion and change due to time. Now, from the point of view of the natural sciences, no phenomena stay identical. Therefore, identity is always socially constructed. Human rights contribute in different ways to this construction of the modern self, individual and subject, if not citizen. First, they participate in the general constitution of the single human being by defining, presupposing and isolating her from other members of the species, by giving her legal recognition and a legal status. Rights can indeed be seen as the formalization of mutual recognition (Hegel, Mead & Axel Honneth). This first contribution is hardly distinguished from other legal mechanisms, mainly civil rights and especially the possibility to contract, but also from social and political aspects associated with the existence of the individual self. Second, human rights construct the individual in a specific, if not technical way. They attribute prerogatives to single members of the species, hardly ever to groups. Significantly, the French Déclaration des droits de l’homme et du citoyen of August 26, 1789, mentions the human being in the singular, unlike the English term human rights. Usually only individuals can claim and use them; human rights for the benefit of groups are problematic,   because they easily collide with individual rights. For instance, the right of free movement within a determined – usually national – territory or the freedom to work and to choose one’s employment are by essence individual; groups cannot, as such, pretend to these rights, as this would imply imposing their choices on their members. Third, human rights contribute to the autonomy of the individual, by not mentioning the debtors of human rights’ beneficiaries nor any duties. By creating – or allowing to create – a prerogative, other legal provisions explicitly or implicitly also institute a duty and a debtor. Human rights, however, do not contain any indication as to who is obliged by them and what s/he is supposed to do. Thus nourishing the mirage of being beneficial for everyone, they sustain the illusion of human beings independent from each other. That is the idea of individual autonomy in its etymological sense: auto = self, nomos = rule or law, meaning that the single human being creates her own law and governs herself. Human rights can therefore be analyzed as the most prominent expression and guaranty of « possessive individualism » (Crawford B. Macpherson). They are simultaneously cause and effect of ongoing secular individualization and globalization. As these two related processes are indeed continuing, one may look into the future wondering to which extent the combination of human rights and personal identity may expand toward a “world legal subject”.

One of the ways to organize penal system is the enforcement of principle of individualization of punishments. Iran’s legislator, before enacting new rule of punishments, for applying this principle used some methods including probation and parole until in subsequent punishment law, more steps were taken to realize and enforce this principle and these methods were developed, and also institutions such as postponement of sentence were established by legislator. This is a new institution in penal law which allows the judge of a case to postpone issuing conviction sentence of offender by considering some conditions. In this paper, authors attempt to review the nature of this institution and articulate the requirements, effects, purposes of this institution. While putting forward different discussions, we study and analyze related articles.