Theory of Agreement on Hadd (Prescribed) Punishments, Religious Jurisprudential Principles and Executive Challenges

In the Islamic jurisprudence, "prescribed punishments (Hudud)" are an important group of the punishments that are often physical; they have also been taken into consideration by the Iranian criminal legislator after the victory of the Islamic Revolution of Iran and have been executed for more than three decades. During these years, the execution of some hadd (prescribed) punishments especially the murder and stoning to death has caused some problems for the country. A useful strategy to reduce the negative consequence of executing the physical punishments is to use the agreed reactions. Because based on this strategy, the physical punishments also are in the texts of the laws and can equally fulfill the horrendous target of the punishments. On the other hand, ignoring the execution of the physical punishments and using the agreed punishments in exceptional cases, the criminal can be encouraged to perform the positive and constructive behaviors, to compensate for the damage to the victim and the community and to make up the past, to understand his/her bad behavior and ultimately to improve and to rehabilitate physically and mentally. Regarding the emergence of theory of having an agreement on criminal justice, the question is arisen that is it possible to use the agreed punishments for the crimes that deserve hadd? In the present article, in addition to emphasizing the existence of religious jurisprudential principles and non-negligence of the executive challenges, the possibility of the case execution of the theory in the hadd crimes has been concluded.