Comparative Studying the Independence of Investigation Institution from Prosecution Institution in Legal System of Iran and Lebanon

Penal trial is a process which starts from crime detection and ends in a criminal conviction. In this regard, the stages of prosecution and investigation has special importance in criminal hearing. The close relationship and, in some cases, the conjunction of some detective and prosecuting procedures with each other and their belonging to a prior stage of trial would in effect made their absolute separation and thus their complete independence so severe. Meanwhile discovering of the accused’s real conduct is the cornerstone of justice in respect to the other stages of judicial proceeding and hence the independence of the interrogator could be resulted in a fair trial. Comparatively studying of the independence of Interrogatory institution from that of Prosecution in both Iran and Lebanon, we may find that the principle of their independence has been recognized, though in Iran the Interrogatory authority which is placed amid the structure of Public prosecutor’s office and under the administration of the Attorney General has defected such independence that in several cases obliges the Interrogator to administratively serve under the attorney general’s authority. However, both-mentioned institutions are separated and independent in Lebanon and although the Interrogator has to acquire the Attorney General’s opinion in the process of investigation, but the ultimate decision would be independently issued by him and in case of conflict in their views the dispute would be referred to a distinct authority which may be called “Accusation Bureau” and as such the principle of independence is better guaranteed in Lebanese legal system.