Criminal Law and Criminology
Atiyeh Vejdani Fakhr; Seyyed Mohammad Hosseini
Abstract
The permission of a non-innocent judge to rely on his personal knowledge as a judge is one of the long-standing issues recently become a problem which is afflicted by the judiciary. The matter of whether a judge can consider himself as non-reliance in a trial and vote only with his knowledge or whether ...
Read More
The permission of a non-innocent judge to rely on his personal knowledge as a judge is one of the long-standing issues recently become a problem which is afflicted by the judiciary. The matter of whether a judge can consider himself as non-reliance in a trial and vote only with his knowledge or whether being adhered to the reasons proposed by both parties in the trial has long been raised in our law and jurists have discussed its practice. Arbitration between the people and the resolution of lawsuits is a provincial position and the judge is in charge of this position. Judgment is a religious position and one of the duties of a comprehensive jurist other than the guardianship. It is one of the prominent pillars of the Islamic government, and perhaps it can be stated with confidence that the most basic duty of any government is resolving hostility and the issue of conflict between citizens as well as justice realization in numerous social areas. If we want to rely merely on jurisprudential and religious standards, we find that in the era of the absence of judicial guardianship, “in vain” is entrusted to a comprehensive jurist, and in principle, judging a non-jurist or not authorized by the jurist is illegitimate and non-influential. Hence, the proposed study has been dedicated to identify the significance, definition, impact and evaluative techniques of judge knowledge and finally, after discussing the relevant issues, it is concluded that in Iranian law, according to existing laws, only science of the evidence is valid. And the judge's personal knowledge is only in charge of controlling function of the other evidence. In other words, it merely stands for the untrue evidence, but cannot try to prove anything.
Criminal Law and Criminology
Seyyed Mohammad Hosseini
Abstract
In Imami jurisprudence and Islamic Penal Code, the theft issue has been introduced as one of the crimes against human property and ownership: a) Theft which is comprehensive of the penance condition and is referred to as the penance theft; in this case, the thief is sentenced to theft. b) Robbery committed ...
Read More
In Imami jurisprudence and Islamic Penal Code, the theft issue has been introduced as one of the crimes against human property and ownership: a) Theft which is comprehensive of the penance condition and is referred to as the penance theft; in this case, the thief is sentenced to theft. b) Robbery committed in the form of armed robbery or banditry and causes public terror, in which case it is regarded as combat and corruption on earth and its perpetrator is condemned as combat and corruptor on earth. c) Theft that does not meet any of the above- mentioned conditions; in this case, it is known as canonical punishment theft and the thief is canonical punishment. This article deals with partial theft in the Islamic Penal Code of 2013 and its compliance with jurisprudential texts. Through studying the jurisprudential sources related to the issue of theft, they have determined the limits and punishments appropriate to the form and dimensions of theft crime. The proposed article has of course never been attempted to provide comprehensive research; however as far as possible, the related issues should be presented based on the research topic.