Department of Criminal Law and Criminology
Sajjad Momeni
Abstract
The present article is an attempt to provide a comprehensive criminal approach to the relationship between causality, criteria analysis, and challenges of this pillar of criminal responsibility in the light of judicial rulings and criminal law, and more particularly the novel Islamic Penal Code. Assuming ...
Read More
The present article is an attempt to provide a comprehensive criminal approach to the relationship between causality, criteria analysis, and challenges of this pillar of criminal responsibility in the light of judicial rulings and criminal law, and more particularly the novel Islamic Penal Code. Assuming multiple reasons, it is one of the most difficult issues in criminal law, determining the causal relationship between a criminal act and the obtained result, especially in the case of multiple causes, is one of the most difficult issues in criminal law. When several individuals are involved in the crime at various (longitudinal) times and there is a relatively long time gap between the interveners’ behavior and the result (such as murder), this issue sometimes appears as a serious problem and unsolvable dilemma, as well. Article 494 of the Islamic Penal Code explicitly states that; “Abetting is to commit a crime directly by oneself” and refers to Article 492 in the discussion about crimes against the physical integrity, the others’ lives, and in the manner of cooperation in murder commission, as well as in the discussion of cause, the abettor, and its relationship to the contagion in crimes; “A crime is punishable by retribution or blood money if the result is the evidence of the perpetrator’s behavior, whether it is committed directly, through the intercourse, or in their community.” It can be concluded that in premeditated murder, one of the cases that, despite the perpetrator’s intention to kill, can break the citation relationship between the perpetrator’s behavior and the result, is the behavior of the victim. Besides, this behavior by the victim is “intentional or unintentional”, or it is further in the omission form, which can interrupt the citation relationship between the perpetrator’s behavior and the resulting murder.
Department of Criminal Law and Criminology
Sajjad Momeni; Firozeh Geravandi; Ahmad khosravi
Abstract
Background: The civil liability of the physician is of high significance as one of the issues argued in the civil liability and private law. Civil liability in Iranian law, based on the majority of jurisprudence, is relied on the theory of loss and causation. Accordingly, most jurists have justified ...
Read More
Background: The civil liability of the physician is of high significance as one of the issues argued in the civil liability and private law. Civil liability in Iranian law, based on the majority of jurisprudence, is relied on the theory of loss and causation. Accordingly, most jurists have justified the physician’s liability by relying on these two rules.
Materials and Methods: In this study, all articles published up to the winter 2021 in Persian on the liability of the influential factors in surgery with view to jurisprudence teachings were reviewed. By searching databases, Quarterly Journal of Medical Law, Iranian Journal of Surgery, sid. ir, Quarterly Journal of Medical Jurisprudence and Civilica Publications, Quarterly Journal of Private Law Research, through keywords as civil liability, Islamic jurisprudence, commitment and liability of physician, medical error and criminal liability, these articles were obtained. It has also been derived from reliable scientific journals from the above-mentioned articles and websites.
Findings: According to law historical course on physician’s liability in Iranian law, based on 2013 Penal Code, if the physician is not at fault in science and practice, there is no guarantee for him, even if he has not been acquitted (paragraph 1 of Article 495); indeed, the new penal code has adopted guilt basis.
