Rereading the Jurisprudential Principles of Money Laundering

Money laundering is one of the most important financial crimes that has been committed in various societies today. Since the legislative system of the Islamic Republic of Iran is based on Shiite jurisprudence; therefore, the jurisprudential dimensions and angles of criminologies should be examined to determine to what extent they are compatible with jurisprudential logic. The question of this research is what the jurisprudential bases of money laundering criminality are and how accurate are the expressions? The present article, using the principles and rules of jurisprudence and with a descriptive-analytical method, examines the jurisprudential aspects of the crime of money laundering and proves that in the field of jurisprudential doubts, the rules of "donation on sin and aggression", "encroachment on falsehood" And "all property laundering" is not effectively related to the crime of money laundering and none of the above rules are applicable to all cases of money laundering. The iodine rule can also be investigated in thematic suspicions, not in legal suspicions, and therefore does not directly interfere in money laundering criminalization. Of course, assuming the crime of money laundering is proven, money laundering acts in cases such as iodine being accused and unsafe or iodine is caused by other causes of the country conflict with the iodine rule and cause the discovery of iodine statistics to be diminished.