فصلنامه پژوهش حقوق کیفری
پیاپی 16 (پاییز 1395)

In the case of forgiving the murdered by the victim of crime, the victim enjoys the right to forgive the murderer or ask for the retaliation, especially when s/he finds herself/himself on the verge of death. There is consensus among the Islamic jurists and lawyers on existence of such right for the victim. However, there are controversies and different approaches on the post-forgiveness consequences. Therefore, in this article, I focused on the initiative right of victim on the right of retaliation, and as a result his/her heirs, along with the analysis of Islamic jurists’ opinions and adopted approach by the Art.365 of Islamic Penal Code (2013) concerning the given issue.

Cyberspace or virtual environment is a concept which has been recently considered by criminologists and lawyers. Along with the creation of this environment, there are some crimes which are committed in the given environment; therefore, the legal fight against these crimes requires taking some significant steps. The first crime was criminal behavior. However, the criminalization without creation and proof of criminal liability is deemed to be almost pointless. Perhaps, it was on this basis that the legislator of the law in Iran has emphasized on the criminal liability of legal entities regarding the cybercrimes and explicitly targeted at the criminal liability of legal persons for the first time the legal system of Iran. However, the issue of criminal liability and explaining the scope of computer crime law has been of the great importance. Many questions may be raised about the extent of the responsibility of individuals in a virtual environment. Legislator of Iran has allocated the sixth season of the computer crimes law to the subject of criminal liability and the most important changes that have been made in the above-mentioned law is to identify and establish criminal liability for legal persons in the virtual environment. .

The crimes committed against humanity are amongst the clear violations of criminal international law and are extra ordinary forms of collective violence which have escaped the notice of criminologists for a long time, since the prosecution, trail and punishment of those committing these crimes did not prevent them from perpetrating crimes. Studying the criminological nature of these crimes could be a good help for international criminal justice to fight against them knowingly and to achieve an effective international criminal policy to prevent them. A criminological approach to do so is the study of psychological state of those perpetrating these crimes. The present article aims to attain such a goal. The criminological findings indicate that those committing these crimes are common people. The us-them thinking and justifications of perpetrators to overcome cognitive dissonance and their natural inhibitions to deceive themselves have an effective role in realization of given crimes. Dehumanization of victims, scapegoating of victims and deserving them to be punished, resorting to the amnesty and forgiveness world views are amongst those justifications to be dealt with herein

After legislating for one century, jurisdiction regarding Iranian victims was established in Iranian Penal Act approved in 2013, as allocated in article 8 mainatining Iranian court is competent to investigate unconditionally offences committed aboard by foreigners against Iranians including crimes whose punishments are Hodud, Qisas, and Diya. In this respect, Sharia-based Mansous (written in holy Quran and sacred sayings)Taaziraat on due observation note of article 115 must also be included in the abovementioned Act; yet, as to Mansousless Taazir crimes, jurisdictional authority of Iranian court depends on the reciprocal criminality and non-conviction in the country where the crime is occurred; Additionally, when the complaint is introduced, victim must maintain Iranian nationality until the proceeding is ended. Iranian Penal Act is applied on lapse of time and extension of time if the offender is persecuted by Iranian court and when the offender is found in or restored to the territory of Iran. It should be noted that extension of time is not started at the time of crime occurrence. If the crime committed abroad against Iranian nationals is occurred in high seas or lands without government, then Iranian court is competent for all crimes except Mansousless Taaziraat crimes.

After legislating for one century, jurisdiction regarding Iranian victims was established in Iranian Penal Act approved in 2013, as allocated in article 8 mainatining Iranian court is competent to investigate unconditionally offences committed aboard by foreigners against Iranians including crimes whose punishments are Hodud, Qisas, and Diya. In this respect, Sharia-based Mansous (written in holy Quran and sacred sayings)Taaziraat on due observation note of article 115 must also be included in the abovementioned Act; yet, as to Mansousless Taazir crimes, jurisdictional authority of Iranian court depends on the reciprocal criminality and non-conviction in the country where the crime is occurred; Additionally, when the complaint is introduced, victim must maintain Iranian nationality until the proceeding is ended. Iranian Penal Act is applied on lapse of time and extension of time if the offender is persecuted by Iranian court and when the offender is found in or restored to the territory of Iran. It should be noted that extension of time is not started at the time of crime occurrence. If the crime committed abroad against Iranian nationals is occurred in high seas or lands without government, then Iranian court is competent for all crimes except Mansousless Taaziraat crimes.

Paragraph 3 of Art. 49 of the Securities Market Act explains two crimes with the same punishment: "violation of legal regulations in the process of preparation of documents, registration, declaration or prospectus of offering to SEO" and the other is "violation of legal regulations subject to study or preparing financial statements, economic statements in regard to verification of documents and information". In this paper, the actus reus and mens rea of the second crime have been studied. "Violation of legal regulations about comment or preparation of financial report, technical or economic information and documents that could be presented to the organization" and also "violation of documents and information authentication which are presentable to SEO" are the actus reus of this crime and «the existence of legal responsibility about commenting or financial, technical or economic reporting", "the existence of employment relationship with the company" and "commenting or reporting or verification of documents and information before presenting them to the organization”, are the most important circumstances and terms concerning committing the crime. The given crime is in the category of the absolute crimes and the intention to commit and being aware, and having knowledge regarding the subject of crime (common mens rea) would suffice to realize the offence.