نشریه اندیشه حقوقی معاصر
پیاپی 3 (زمستان 1399)

This role has been highlighted in such a way that the issue of observing the defendant's defense rights, including declaring reasons in his favor and preventing the presentation of corrupt reasons against him by the prosecutor, has been considered insignificant. In Turkish law, the Budapest principles of the past have been accepted, and this issue was adopted in 2005 after the sixth sessions of the conference of European prosecutors, organized by the council of Europe in cooperation with the Hungarian prosecutor, and these points were adopted in those principles. The prosecutor performs his or her duties fairly, impartially, coherently and expeditiously, and also seeks to strike affair balance between personal interests and rights and the public interests. In Iranian law, he should not refuse to present arguments in favor of the accused and prevent corrupt arguments against him. This duty of the prosecutor, although not explicitly mentioned in Iranian law, arises on the hand from the duty of the prosecutor to be neutral with respect to the reasons for the accused, and on the other hand, from the duty of the prosecutor to protect the law. As article 49 of the law on the principles of the judiciary, adapted in 1307, stated about the prosecutor (the public prosecutor). Public prosecutors are officials who work for public rights and oversee the implementation of laws in accordance with legal regulations, the research method is library.

It is with the perpetration of a crime that the criminal should be normally exposed to suing, trial and punishment. In most of the criminal files, the actions by the police, as the executive officers of the justice department and the substructure of the formation of the criminal files, and, on the other hand, the disciplinary force, as one of the pillars of the judicial body, play a prominent role in the formation of fair trial. It is necessary for the legislative officials to exactly elaborate the duties and authorities of the police as the justice department’s executive officers, especially, in regard of the crimes against chastity that have to be taken into account with special sensitivity and delicacy for Islam rules that these crimes should not be performed at all. Based on the regulations of the criminal trial procedures and article 28 thereof, the general duty of the police as the justice department’s executive officers that work under the teachings and supervision of the judicial authority and that of the disciplinary force in the tangible crimes or in cases that there is a private plaintiff and/or when the forcible crimes against chastity and/or organized crimes are perpetrated is only limited to the preservation of the traces and proofs of the crime and prevention of the culprit’s escape and hiding and this limitation has become more intensified and more sensitive in the intangible crimes in such a way that the disciplinary force has no right to get involved in the investigation of such crimes that are perpetrated intangibly and in hidden places and such an authority has been granted to the penal courts and within the framework of the legal regulations. Based on article 44 of the law on penal trial procedures, the justice department’s executive officers announce the crime’s occurrence upon being informed thereof to the judicial authorities and they have no right to engage in such cases and such a prohibition of intervention in regard of the crimes against chastity has been due to Islam’s policy of hiding the offenses hence justifiable in the same line. The present article uses critical analysis method to study these principles and their exceptions.

Every day, all over the world, some people suffer and die due to corruption in the health sector. Corruption in the health system affects the access of vulnerable groups (who do not have sufficient knowledge and financial resources) to health care and vital and essential medicines, which can be from the highest to the lowest level. Its main effect can be to reduce the impact of health care on patients. Corruption affects health policy and spending priorities and can have a direct negative impact on the availability and quality of patient care and endanger the health of people in the community.

In all political systems, the judiciary plays an important role as it has numerous powers and responsibilities such as implementing justice in the society. The expectation of the society from the judiciary is that not only its members do not commit any intentional crime, but also they do not commit any wrongdoing as a whole. So in delivering this demand, the judges must obey the law as a way of following the huge responsibility that has been placed on their shoulders, as the failure to follow key principles such as the law and custom accepted by the society will result in dire consequences for them e.g. a crime or a disciplinary offence. To understand what constitute as an act which falls outside the norms accepted for a reasonable judge, different factors such as economical, educational, personal etc must be considered as a way of moving towards eradicating them. To do so, instead of finding solutions after a misconduct has been committed, by applying amendments to the existing law, the system can prevent such actions from taking place in the first place. The mentioned strategy is known as non-criminal prevention or active prevention, which will be discussed in this article, giving recommendation as to how to deal with the existing barriers.

As a general principle, the debtor cannot be forced to pay the debt before it expires, but in jurisprudence and positive laws, in some cases, due to a change in a person's civil status, his debt may be matured. While some jurists, based on the principle of non-existence, do not consider the death of a person as the cause of maturing of his debt, most of them insist on the effect of death of debtor maturing of his debt. The positive laws, especially the commercial laws, not only consider the debtor's death and bankruptcy to affect the maturing of his debts, but in some cases, the fluctuation of his financial situation alone can pave the way for maturing of debt contained in the negotiable instrument.

Maintaining public chastity and community safety is one of the major goals of the legislature. Therefore, a number of offenses have been criminalized as Crimes against Chastity. Obligatory Offenses in Iran Law are divided into two types of offenses, which are punishable by Islamic law, and the offenses of the offender. The offenses against ta'zirah are actually criminal behaviors that occur in the context of illicit sex but are not subject to the punishment of punishment. Each country's criminal policy includes legal, judicial, and administrative measures to deal with criminal phenomena. Concerning the Negligent Offenses of Investigating Legal Matters Related to this Crime in Iranian Laws and Courts, it indicates that the legislator's general policy of adhering to Islamic law on delinquency and the use of institutions such as the prohibition of evil and the prohibition of wrongdoing is to prevent crime. And in criminal law, it has used repressive and repressive criminal policy, which is inconsistent with judicial criminal policy that tends to be negligent and mitigated, and that Iran's criminal justice policy needs to be reviewed and revised. Correction is in many ways.