Comparative Criminal Jurisprudence

Comparative Criminal Jurisprudence

Presumption of Guilt in the Crime of Money Laundering, a Comparative Study in Iranian Law, Imami Jurisprudence and the Palermo Convention

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
1 Assistant Professor in Law at Ayatollah Ozam Borujerdi University, Borujerd City, Iran. (Corresponding Author)
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Private Law, Faculty of Law and Political Science, South Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
3 M.A. in Law
10.22034/jccj.2024.441316.1482
Abstract
One of the strategies to fight the crimes with which the classic criminal legal methods have reached a dead end, and on the other hand, public order, including has disrupted the national and transnational, is the acceptance of the presumption of guilt, which through international documents as an effective criminal policy in It is recommended to deal with organized crimes, especially money laundering. The presumption of guilt in Imami jurisprudence as the main source of legislation in Iran is approved by jurists and jurists On this basis and according to international documents, Iran has been accepted as a legal emirate in the field of combating money laundering. In this research, the presumption of guilt has been investigated based on jurisprudential and legal foundations, and then, in the light of the guidelines of the Palermo Convention, the necessity of legalizing the presumption of guilt in criminal policy has been proven.
Keywords

Volume 4, Issue 2
Spring 2024
Pages 145-157

  • Receive Date 26 January 2024
  • Revise Date 06 April 2024
  • Accept Date 18 May 2024
  • Publish Date 21 June 2024