Comparative Criminal Jurisprudence

Comparative Criminal Jurisprudence

Internet Gambling from the Perspective of Jurisprudence and Criminal Law

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
1 PhD Student, Department of Theology and Islamic Studies, Jurisprudence and Fundamentals of Islamic Law, Mashhad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Mashhad, Iran.
2 Associate Professor, Department of Theology and Islamic Studies, Jurisprudence and Fundamentals of Islamic Law, Mashhad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Mashhad, Iran. (Corresponding Author)
3 Assistant Professor, Department of Jurisprudence and Fundamentals of Islamic Law, Mashhad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Mashhad, Iran.
10.22034/jccj.2024.403171.1302
Abstract
Jurists respect internet gambling. From their point of view, all kinds of virtual games, as long as they are not subject to the two conditions of playing with gambling devices and winning and losing, there will be no prohibition in playing them. Gambling is also criminalized in the Islamic Penal Code and the punishment is set for it. Of course, in the Islamic Penal Code, the condition of becoming a gambler and as a result of the game being considered criminal, gambling with gambling devices and equipment or any other means is prohibited. In fact, the legislator has only mentioned gambling because in reality, winning and losing, which are necessary to be considered gambling, are covered in the concept of gambling. Although traditional gambling was criminalized in criminal law, due to the principle of narrow interpretation of criminal laws, it was not possible to punish internet gambling based on existing laws. On the other hand, in the existing laws, betting and lotteries were not criminalized and there was a kind of legal vacuum in this regard, especially in the virtual space, which was solved by the introduction of the single article of the amendment law of Article 70 to 711 of the Penal Code. Of course, although the single article of the mentioned amendment has provided for a monetary punishment, it has dealt with the punishment of imprisonment, which is not compatible with the lawmaker's de-imprisonment approach and criminal policy.
Keywords

Volume 4, Issue 1
Winter 2024
Pages 195-207

  • Receive Date 17 April 2023
  • Revise Date 28 June 2023
  • Accept Date 08 August 2024
  • Publish Date 20 March 2024