جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « the principle of innocence » در نشریات گروه « فقه و حقوق »

One of the rules of jurisprudential and legal education is the principle of judicial protection of individuals, which means that no one is a criminal unless his crime is proved by a court of law، Therefore, the stripping of freedom and the restriction of the rights of individuals is subject to the existence of a definitive argument that the individual is guilty. This principle is so important that many of the basic laws have established this principle in their own constitutions. The Iranian constitution, given the importance of citizenship rights, has also laid the foundation for this principle in principle 3. But lawyers, given the negative effects that some crimes in society cause, are important crimes of the economic world، Safeguards and organized crime have been excluded from this principle and have stated that in these crimes, the criminal is sufficient and can be based on the execution of criminals، it limited some of the freedoms and rights that are created by the principle of innocence for individuals. This article attempts to provide an analytical and descriptive method and, by adhering to the principle of judicial proceedings, a solution in the face of important crimes of Ghana؛ Therefore, this research emphasizes that fish for important crimes of comparison and organization should be analyzed in the context of crimes that lead to the weakening of the Islamic system. In this regard, this article believes that safe and organized crimes are a crime of Baghi and the believer of the people who are recognized in the crime of Baghi، there are also crimes in these crimes. In this case, the confrontation between security forces and law enforcement with the perpetrators of these crimes is in order to establish order and security of your health؛ Therefore, their action is not a judicial act that is the basis for the principle of criminal offence.

The bulk of criminal cases and the increase in the criminal and prison population is a fundamental and necessary issue in the criminal justice system, and it has negative social, political, economic, etc. consequences. In order to solve this problem, lawyers have suggested changing the path of less important cases from the path of criminal justice. This research was done with analytical-descriptive method and using library tools. The purpose of this article is to answer the question of what is the position of decriminalization in the criminal policy of Islam and Afghanistan. By following the jurisprudence and criminal law sources of Afghanistan, the conclusion is reached that in the criminal policy of Islam, in the stage of discovery, prosecution of the crime, sentencing and its execution, due to the legislator's importance to the principle of innocence and the emphasis on the forgiveness of the plaintiff, ignoring petty crime, rehabilitation, judgment, etc. have a special place. In the criminal law of Afghanistan, factors such as the passage of time, conditional release, suspension of the execution of the sentence, etc. prevent the criminal case from entering the formal investigation stage and even cause it to leave the judicial process. These mechanisms show the importance of decriminalization in Afghanistan's criminal policy.

Re-prosecution of the accused after the issuance of a restraining order is one of the solutions envisaged by the legislature to ensure justice for persons who did not have access to sufficient reasons or reasons at the time of the trial. The grounds for re-prosecuting the accused are in line with the objectives of the criminal proceedings. These include achieving the Judicial truth, preventing norm-breaking in society. The main source of criminal investigation is the prosecutor's office, so the legislator has made the possibility of re-prosecuting the accused based on Article 278 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in this institution. In some cases, depending on the type of charge, the judicial organization and the personality of the perpetrator, step-by-step investigations are carried out in a source other than the prosecutor's office, and it is possible to issue a restraining order. according to the silence of the legislator, this ambiguity has arisen as to what the procedure of re-prosecution will be if the court issues a restraining order? Depending on the position of the court in Judicial system, if a restraining order is issued by the court at the preliminary investigation stage, it is possible to re-prosecute the accused, but contrary to Article 278, if the restraining order is finalized in a higher authority, there is no need to prescribe a higher authority because the court has independence. It is not like the prosecutor's office.

When there is doubt in the obligation and there is no reason, it is the time to implement the practical principle. What is the verdict of basic rule in case of doubt in the obligation? There is disagreement among fundamentalists. The famous fundamentalists believe in the implementation of the innocence by virtue of reason and by citation of the rule of ugly rule of unspoken punishment.Contrary to the popular opinion some people, by rejecting the popular view, considered the rule of reason as a necessity of caution. Martyr Sadr (RA) called this theory the right of obedience and he believes that as long as the release is not from the legislator, whoever opposes the suspicious duty, deserves the punishment.From these two professions, we have accepted the theory of obedience. But in accepting this theory, we have a nominal understanding and a fundamental disagreement with Martyr Sadr. Because Martyr Sadr considered the issue of the right of obedience as an obligatory task, but we considered the issue of the right of obedience as a duty in the real world according to the practical rational rule.While reviewing criticizing and rejecting the two mentional professions, we have explained and presented arguments and defended our point of view and we have named it finalized of duty or new method.I invite you to read this article to get more accustomed with the new method.

The addition of the clause of "by oath of defendant" in Article 197 C.P.C. (Approved in 1379) raised questions, doubts, and discussions about the possibility or impossibility of issuing a sentence of acquittance of defendant without his oath, in cases of failure to provide evidence and not requesting the oath by the claimant, as well as the power or omission of the judge to swear defendant without asking. The analysis of this article requires the study of the subject in jurisprudence and the study of the viewpoint of the jurists. In jurisprudence, the issuance of verdict in favor of the defendant was not permitted solely on the basis of practical principles, including the principle of innocence, in cases of failure to provide evidence or requesting the oath by the claimant, and also the swearing of the defendant without the applicant's request. In the analysis of Article 197 C.P.C. it is necessary to provide an interpretation that does not contradict this article with jurisprudence and what is known as certain among the jurists.

The principle of acquittal in criminal law plays a fundamental role in defending the rights of the accused, but the absolute nature of the said principle in the face of some crimes such as disciplinary and security crimes is one of the important challenges that is the subject of debate. The purpose of this article is to examine this important question, what is the status of the principle of innocence in security and law enforcement crimes from a jurisprudential and legal point of view? The findings indicate that despite all the interpretations of the original principle of innocence, it is not absolute and unconditional, despite the application of the principle of innocence in criminal matters and its ruling over other principles and rules of criminal law, in certain cases, the application of this principle is avoided. The basis of deviation from the principle of innocence in many cases is the same basis that justifies the rule of the principle of innocence in criminal matters. In this way, the principle of acquittal towards the accused is distorted, and as a result, despite the lack of conclusive evidence, the judge resorts to exceptional methods of proceedings, including obvious cases of resorting to exceptional methods of proceedings in Islamic criminal law can be found in the cases of law and order and public security. As a result, the evidence of guilt takes precedence over the principle of innocence.

the rules of ghusl are more sensitive because due to the existence of the major impurity, the interruption in the ghusl also prevents the correctness of ablution (removes the lesser impurity). What is the quality of performing sequential ghusl in terms of arranging the washing of body parts based on valid jurisprudential evidences? How is the quality of performing tartibi ghusl in terms of the order of washing body parts in terms of body washing based on valid jurisprudential reasons? Is the popular theory more consistent with the content of the evidence or the unpopular theory? The research method is critical analysis. Is the popular theory of jurists more consistent with the content of the sources or the unpopular theory? The research method is critical analysis. After explaining the popular and less popular fatwa on the condition of the order of washing the body in ghusl, Jurisprudential sources and their meanings are examined. According to the famous fatwa of the jurists, it is necessary to perform tartibi ghusl in three stages. The whole head should be washed first, then the right side of the body thoroughly and then the left side of the body thoroughly and disruption in this way is detrimental to the correctness of ghusl. Their reason is consensus is narrated fatwa reputation, some hadiths, and the principle is precaution. These reasons can be criticized from different angles based on the contents presented in this article. Based on the application of some hadiths and also with the impairment of citing narrations, consensus and fame and the principle of innocence as a condition of redundancy, the popular theory is that it is sufficient to wash the body after the head and the necessity of arranging between the right and left sides of the body is stronger.

One ofthemain problems of the country's penal system is thelack of properand practical attentionto the principle ofinnocence in the trial, which is one ofthe inalienable rights of individuals not to be punished. The rational rule of ugliness ofthe eagle of Balabian,along with the principle of innocence,is one of the important practical principles in jurisprudence,which is widely used in relievingtheobligationoftheobligatedandtheforbidden.This important principle has a long history and alongplace in the laws and rights of countries,including the rights of Iran,and benefiting from it helps to preserve the human dignity of society.In this article, while analyzing the position of the principle of innocence in the science of the principles of jurisprudence,the principle of innocence in the laws of our country has been explored as a right to impunity,and by lookingat the constitution and looking at Article 37 and otheconstitutional principles,the findings show The principle ofinnocence has a special place in the supra-legislative system of Iran and inother laws, especially theprocedural and substantive penal laws, because in the trial the principle is the innocence of individuals so that no one is punished for no reason and in the shadow of the principle of innocence, human dignity In the same way, it has been pledged to be safe, and as a result, it was found that the principle of innocence, which is the right not to be punished and has a direct effect onthe stability of society and the preservation of human dignity and human dignity, is not properly observed in the trial.

In the last few decades, when and where have come together and have Worded a Term, called globalization. This social term led to widespread and radical changes in the social and revolutionary system of the humanities and social sciences. Criminal law, too, was not without its effects and led to complex and dangerous crimes. One of the most important of these crimes is money laundering. Also, globalization has transformed the traditional rules of criminal law. One of the important issues of formal criminal law is the proof of the lawsuit. The process of filing a lawsuit for money laundering is one of the important issues that must be addressed in the context of criminal justice globalization developments.The present article analyzes the impact of globalization on three major cited reasons for money laundering by analyzing the descriptive-analytical method and examines Iran's legislative developments. Finally, in light of these developments in the field of political-international economics, criminal policymakers need to shift away from traditional theories of proof to the evidence and, with global experience, be inclined to accept new positive reasons to prosecute these crimes.

In order to achieve the goals of the judiciary from the point of view of Islam, which is the establishment of justice and justice, it is necessary to follow the principles of justice and, in different stages, to respect the rights of the defendants, especially the accused and the accused. The fair trial requires observing the defendant's defense rights in the proceedings. Defensive rights are the legal collection that the accused has in the process of trial to establish a fair trial, and is required by the criminal justice system. These rights are largely synonymous with the concept of a fair trial, and in fact a fair trial, the accusation of defending the rights of defense. These rights have been regarded as sacred, and in the quadruple sources of inference of judgments (book, tradition, consensus, reason) expressly or implicitly expresses some of these rights, such as the principle of innocence, independence and impartiality, respect for the dignity and dignity of individuals, Publicity, revision has been addressed. The purpose of this article is to study the position of the principles of fair trial in Islamic justice system and to study these principles in the Islamic law and the opinions and opinions of the jurists.

Presence before the judges in criminal proceedings for preliminary investigations and the hearing process. Ensuring the rights of victims to compensate for losses and damages and preventing disruption in normal process of criminal proceedings by the defendant are two important purposes in issuing the writ in order to gain fair and equitable hearings. Todays, the use of alternatives to pre-trial detention is internationally considered. For instance, the changes in new Code of Criminal Procedure include development of alternative arrangements for detention or requiring judges to use the arrangements described in the Criminal Procedure. Precision or the method of some articles on writs and judicial supervision implies the principle of "banning the issuance of detention and requiring judges to decree alternative arrangements for detention". Articles 217, 237, 239, and 254 in Code of Criminal Procedure can be mentioned on this matter. Furthermore, the adverse effects and negative individual, social, and judicial consequences of the use of pre-trial detention emphasize on the theory of "mandating the use of alternatives to pre-trial detentions". The French Code of Criminal Procedure, particularly Articles 137, 143, and 144 emphasize on the principle of "requiring judges to use the judiciala supervisory alternative arrangements for pre-trial detention".