Comparative Criminal Jurisprudence

Comparative Criminal Jurisprudence

Criminalization principles of inconclusive Criminal acts in Jurisprudence and Criminal Law of Iran

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
1 PhD Student, Department of Criminal Law and Criminology, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran.
2 Professor, Department of Law, Faculty of Law and Political Sciences, Mazandaran University, Babolsar, Iran. (Corresponding Author)
10.22034/jccj.2022.356243.1076
Abstract
Criminalization of an certain act is based on principles that justify criminal interference in the freedom of actions. Besides complete crimes, other crimes that are carried out with the intent to commit a specific complete crime, but due to the intervention of involuntary factors, remain ineffective, are also implied as a crime. These types of acts are known as “inconclusive criminal acts,” and their instances in Iranian criminal law include attempt, failed crime, and impossible crime. The crime subject to Article 122 of the Islamic Penal Code of Iran (2013) and its subsequent notes are in accordance with the mentioned criminal cases. Realization of the mentioned acts threatens others’ rights and disrupts the public order and security in addition to revealing the dangerous state of the offender, and is considered contrary to the conventional morality of society. The criminalization of these acts can be justified by relying on different principles governing the concept of criminalization in the conventional criminal law, such as harm principle, preventive criminal justice, dangerous state of the offender, and in the Islamic criminal law, based on the rules of ta’zir (Discretionary Punishment), is justified by preliminary unlawfulness (Haram) and disobedience.
Keywords

Volume 5, Issue 2 - Serial Number 2
Spring 2025
Pages 117-133

  • Receive Date 16 November 2024
  • Revise Date 02 February 2025
  • Accept Date 17 March 2025
  • Publish Date 22 June 2025