مسئولیت کیفری

This study aims to conduct a comparative analysis of instances of negligent criminal liability in the legal systems of Iran and England. The research follows a descriptive-analytical method, utilizing library sources and online databases. In this study, inaddition to presenting specific instances, the role of criminal liability for reckless and careless actions in Iranian and English law is examined. Subsequently, the role of criminal liability for omissions resulting from negligence in Iranian and Englishlaw is analyzed. Finally, the role of the elements of imprudence and inadvertence in establishing negligent criminal liability in the legal systems of Iran and England is discussed. The findings indicate that "negligent criminal liability" does not exhibit significant differences between the criminal systems of Iran and England. However, there is also no substantial similarity in this regard between the two legal systems, as both have shown limited inclination toward expanding negligent liability and its instances.

In the Islamic legal system, young age is considered one of the factors that mitigate criminal liability, and jurists consider maturity as one of the general conditions of duty; As a result, they do not consider a child who has committed a crime or a crime to be entitled to punishment or retribution. In the penal regulations of Iran, the lack of criminal responsibility of minors has been explicitly accepted, but at the same time, in crimes with non-punishment punishments, educational and punishment measures have been established for them, which in the last part contradicts the principle of the lack of criminal responsibility of minors. In this regard, in addition to paying attention to the explanation and adaptation of the opinion of experts in the field of Sharia with the penal regulations for minors in the field of converting the limit of theft to Ta'zir, the effective causes of children's delinquency can be investigated and evaluated. Most of the studies and researches that are carried out on the axis of social structure are focused on reforming the behavior and thought of this particular group and analyze the effective factors in the deviation or guidance of this age group. Perhaps the most important reason for the special attention of experts and experts is the effective role that children will play in the future structure of society.

The high-speed entry of third-level robots, known as intelligent robots, into the social arena, on the one hand, provides countless opportunities for development, and on the other hand, causes many challenges and threats to the safety of humanity. The duty of criminal law is to support the positive achievements of this new phenomenon and to face the risks arising from it. The issue is that in the light of the dangerous activities of artificial intelligence and the commission of various crimes, the burden of criminal responsibility is focused on human actors - as the case may be, the programmer or the producer or the user or all of them, can we defend the criminal competence of robots and the need to identify them? In this research, conflicting viewpoints have been extracted and discussed with the descriptive-analytical method and library tools. According to the results, these phenomena have complex algorithms and as a result, their ability to learn, solve problems and make independent decisions, has convinced some of the possibility of their entry into the group of criminal law followers. But the majority are of the opinion that the mentioned beings are under the influence of human planning and guidance. Therefore, they are innocent agents in the violation of basic values, and criminal responsibility based on theories of causation is stronger than stewardship or vicarious responsibility. The accuracy of conflicting reasons has led to the negation of the first approach and not envisioning a perspective for it.

One of the methods of preventing theft is the use of electric fences and guards. If the owner uses high-voltage electricity, the thief will be seriously injured or even die if touched. Considering the fatwa of some contemporary jurists regarding the lack of the owner's guarantee, the upcoming research seeks to answer the question, "what jurisprudential documentation can be established for the lack of an owner's guarantee?" Additionally, by examining the criticisms received, “what ruling can be expected?" The research, which was carried out with the descriptive and analytical data processing method, found out that: Although the owner has the right to occupy his property, it is necessary to follow the order of the easiest to the easiest. I In case of the ineffectiveness of weaker shocks, measures such as installing a warning sign for strong electricity relieves the responsibility of the owner. In addition, despite the existence of definite evidences on the sanctity of the Muslim blood, and the realization of the assignment that fulfills the owner's guarantee, as well as the lack of sufficient reasons for the cancellation of the owner's guarantee, the judgment of his guarantee in illegal possessions will be correct.

Money laundering, as one of the major challenges in economic and commercial law, emerged in the 1970s, and its legal dimensions were first addressed in the federal courts of the United States in 1982. Today, the common focus of states regarding this issue is on preventing its spread and influence in the international economic-legal system. Iran's legal system, for the first time in 2007, took a serious legal approach toward this phenomenon with the adoption of the Anti-Money Laundering Law. The necessity of this discussion is to highlight the distinctions between the approaches of the U.S. and Iranian lawmakers regarding the material element of the crime of money laundering. Therefore, the main goal of this research is to conduct a comparative study between the two legal systems. It was found that the primary distinction between the two systems lies in the territorial scope of the application of legal rules. In this context, the U.S. approach focuses on combating money laundering in the international sphere, whereas Iranian lawmakers concentrate on the national jurisdiction of Iran. Furthermore, the U.S. legal system considers the crime of money laundering to be based on the element of "unusual transactions," while Iranian law does not emphasize intent to commit the crime but considers predicate offenses, such as drug trafficking, human trafficking, theft, etc., as the basis for the realization of the crime of money laundering. The research, conducted using a descriptive-analytical method and library-based studies, also shows that both legal systems share a common focus on the necessity of "transparency" and the non-intent to conceal the source of wealth as a moral element in the criminal liability for money laundering.

Criminal responsibility refers to an individual's obligation to be accountable for criminal acts, requiring the person to be sane, mature, and acting voluntarily at the time of committing the crime. Claims of mental disorders can lead to reduced sentences or acquittal of the accused. Insanity is recognized as a barrier to criminal responsibility, but many other mental disorders do not fall into this category. This research examines the conditions for establishing insanity in the legal systems of Iran and the United States, demonstrating that in both systems, insanity means a complete lack of will or power of discernment. Additionally, according to Article 149 of the Islamic Penal Code of Iran and U.S. laws, severe mental retardation can also negate criminal responsibility. To fairly implement laws concerning individuals with mental disorders, suggestions such as comprehensive psychiatric evaluation and determining degrees of responsibility have been proposed. Understanding the U.S. legal system and its experiences can help improve the situation for these individuals in Iran, but implementing these policies requires attention to existing challenges and limitations.

Sexual relationship is not generally a cause of violence or murder. However, difficulty in intercourse in a man or woman can cause irreparable harm to their sexual partner or even lead to their death in some cases. The knowledge and awareness of the individual about his/her illness that has deprived him/her of having a normal sexual relationship, as well as the awareness that having a sexual relationship will cause harm to others (intention of the result), especially assuming that the sexual partner does not consent, if retribution is not possible and the damage is stipulated in the law, he is sentenced to pay blood money, and otherwise, he/she is obliged to pay Arsh, because the evidence of permissibility of enjoyment is not absolute and in some cases, they also end up in Haraam, which entails criminal liability. However, if the individual is not aware of his illness or his/her purpose in having a sexual relationship is not to harm others or his/her sexual partner is satisfied, he/she lacks criminal liability and is sentenced to pay blood money or Arsh.

One of the indicators of people's responsibility in criminal law is age. The purpose of this research is to examine the criminal responsibility of children in Iran based on international documents, which is of the type of theoretical research and using descriptive-analytical methods based on library studies for the comparative description of the subject and related subjects. In the criminal justice system of Iran, many legal changes have been made in the field of determining the age of criminal responsibility, and different standards of juvenile crimes and different accountability systems have been adopted, which are more or less observed in international documents and regulations. The Iranian legislator has placed the index of criminal responsibility on another criterion, which is the age of sexual maturity. However, there are shortcomings and loopholes in the legal articles, due to which the Islamic Penal Code approved in 2012 faced issues related to the criminal responsibility of children. Among these, is there a logical connection between maturity and the age of criminal responsibility? Why does the legislator consider committing a crime that requires punishment or compensation to be relatively criminally responsible, and according to Article 146 of the Islamic Penal Code, minors are not responsible? In this article, by answering these questions, criticizing the rules of the maturity of criminal responsibility of children and explaining their shortcomings and problems, while examining the relevant international documents, they suggest solutions related to eliminating or reducing the criminal responsibility of children.

The minimum age of criminal responsibility of a child is one of the important issues and the subject of controversy. This has made the examination of the minimum age of criminal responsibility of a child a necessity from the point of view of international documents. Based on this, the aim of this article is to examine the requirements of governments regarding the minimum age of criminal responsibility for children. This is a descriptive analytical article and a library method has been used to investigate the mentioned topic. The findings indicate that over several decades, a series of international law documents have examined the discussion of the minimum age of criminal responsibility and its consequences in regional and international contexts. In documents related binding and consultative texts, legal requirements for the minimum age of criminal responsibility have been emphasized. Minimum age of criminal responsibility The details of the minimum age of criminal responsibility and its implementation clearly stem from the work of the Committee on the Rights of the Child. In fact, the Committee elaborated on the minimum age of criminal responsibility and gained more authority as the body overseeing the most extensive binding legal instrument related to children. As a result, the recommendations of the Committee on the Rights of the Child have been approved to a large extent and over time by other documents and institutions and suggest a general convergence in international standards for determining the minimum age of criminal responsibility in different countries and their implementation.

This research analyzes the concept and ontology of fault and its role in the formation of crime with a rational method and by referring to legal and ethical standards, with the aim of analyzing and expressing the status of fault in the occurrence of crime in a descriptive-analytical method. The findings show that fault is a conceptual structure with a mental existence that is implied from person’s behavior. This existence is the generator of agent obscenity and action obscenity that can be defined as a crime by the will of legislator. Also, fault is the quintessence and one of the causes of the formation of crime in criminal law (not criminology). All discussions related to the barriers to the formation of criminal responsibility, are returned to the cause of the formation of crime in the field of substantive criminal law. Thus, the factors of formation of the crime have been replaced by the barriers of the formation of criminal responsibility and created new issues. Obviously, according to what has been said, there can be no criminal responsibility without fault, except to the will of legislator.

Judicial and subjective ignorance are considered as the key concepts in the field of criminal responsibility in the Islamic legal system. Ignorance of a ruling means ignorance of a person's Shariah or legal ruling of his action, which is divided into two categories: negligent ignorance and culpable ignorance. Culpable ignorance that is caused by failure to learn science and knowledge does not eliminate criminal responsibility, but culpable ignorance that is not based on negligence and inattention can eliminate criminal responsibility. This is known as forced error. On the other hand, ignorance of the subject means ignorance of the characteristics and features of the subject of the crime or not understanding the nature and truth of the act that a person commits. In intentional crimes, if a person commits a crime by mistake, such as a mistake in the identity of the victim, his criminal responsibility is dismissed. But in non-intentional crimes, the mere mistake in the nature of the act generally does not remove the criminal responsibility, except in cases where the law has made an exception. Therefore, the main difference between judicial and objective ignorance is that in judicial ignorance, a person does not have the knowledge of the sanctity and the legal prohibition of the action, while in the subject ignorance, the person is unaware of the nature and truth of the action he is doing. This substantive difference will have different effects on the individual's criminal responsibility, which is emphasized in this article.

With the expansion of the use of computers and the Internet in everyday life, crimes related to cyber space have also increased. This shows the importance of adapting legal rules and regulations to new technologies and realities. This may cause legal challenges. Accordingly, the purpose of this article is to examine the question of what is the approach of the criminal law of Iran and the European Union to the criminal liability of artificial intelligence? This article is descriptive and analytical and it has investigated the mentioned subject by using the library method. The findings indicate that there is no criminal liability for artificial intelligence in European Union law and the requirement for criminal liability of artificial intelligence is that it has a legal personality. Criminal liability is not defined for artificial intelligence in Iran's criminal law. The impossibility of achieving the goals of punishment, the unenforceability of corporal and deprivation of liberty punishments and financial punishments are the most important challenges of assigning criminal responsibility to artificial intelligence.

Sub-prescription is the recommendation of a drug for a disease which is not approved by supervising organizations for treating that disease. Such prescription is taken into consideration in recent events of Covid-19. One of the most effective methods in this field is the requirement of drug prescription based on the approved method. This method deals with the issue of sub-prescription of drugs and the necessary plans to deal with it, including criminal protections. It has become an executive law in countries such as the United States and the European Union because the large profits from selling drugs to patients and medical centers by pharmacies and encouraging doctors to receive cash and non-cash gifts as a result of the sale of these products will always result in the risk of prescribing drugs unrelated to the patient's illness. In this article, an attempt has been made to measure the place of sub-prescription of drugs in the criminal policy, clarify their commonalities and differences, and provide suggestions to eliminate possible gaps and attract the legislator's attention to the lack of an explicit law in this regard in the Iranian criminal policy. Studying the legal system of other countries and their criminal policy in facing this issue is the main method of this article. This research is a fundamental-applied study and is carried on based on descriptive and analytical methods with library tools, and its interdisciplinary analyzes lead to suggestions for enriching Iran's legal system and clarifying criminal liability in cases of health crises.

Responsibility always comes with commitment. In the realm of criminal law, the content of this obligation is to accept the effects and consequences of criminal acts, that is, to bear the punishment that is considered as responds for the reprehensible acts of the criminal; But simply by committing a crime, the burden of responsibility cannot be placed on the culprit's shoulders at once, but before that, one should be considered worthy of bearing this heavy burden. Jurists call the ability to accept the burden of guilt as "imputability" and have defined it as the subject's having the power of intelligence and discretion. Therefore, if the criminal does not have intelligence and free will, one will not be responsible for his actions. In accordance with this approach, in the Belgian legal system, the lack of criminal responsibility of children is accepted.Accordingly, in this system, criminal maturity is set at 18 years. Under this age, children cannot be sentenced based on general rules. Legal developments in this country show that although the laws have had a protective tendency towards children, in recent years due to security considerations and more protection. From society, the punitive approach has been proposed in the field of responding to the behavior of children against the law. The trend towards restorative justice in response to the behavior of children violating the law and emphasizing more parental responsibilities is also among the emerging approaches that can be seen in the Belgian legal system.

"Necessity" is a well-known principle in both jurisprudence and law, categorized as a secondary rule and applied across various legal and jurisprudential domains. When its conditions are met, this principle inevitably influences legislation, interpretation, and adjudication. Its impact is particularly significant in criminal law, where, due to public order concerns, sensitivity, and vulnerability, as well as its unique methodology, it occupies a critical role within the broader legal framework. Since criminal law typically embraces minimalism due to its severe, person-centered sanctions, the occurrence of necessity within the criminal sphere limits the expansion of criminal sanctions and must be interpreted within the framework of the principle of minimization in criminal law. Therefore, given the importance of this issue, the present study adopts a descriptive-analytical approach based on library research to examine the boundaries, criteria, and governing conditions of the necessity principle in the new Islamic Penal Code. This analysis demonstrates that reliance on this principle aligns with the logic and essence of criminal law, facilitating its application in this field far more effectively than in other legal areas, such as civil liability. Accordingly, it is recommended that the impact of necessity on civil liability be approached with greater caution, restricting its application to explicitly defined legal cases, particularly those based on fault-based liability.

Today, artificial intelligence has become a cornerstone of modern innovation, infiltrating every sector from healthcare to the creation of literary works and inventions to finance. Artificial intelligence is a new technology that, with its creation, mankind has achieved a new manifestation of life experience and transformation of jobs and services, which, while being its creator, with its ever-increasing development, also has the fear of flooding. Today, with the rapid expansion of artificial intelligence technologies and their increasing use in various industries, intellectual property issues have also faced new challenges. The complex relationship between artificial intelligence and intellectual property has resulted in many legal and regulatory consequences that are challenging and require the transformation of the legal system of countries and the traditional perspective of lawyers and other juristics to look at this innovation and possibly a new member of human society without denial or resistance and specified its legal and duty frameworks. This article examines intellectual property crimes in the age of artificial intelligence and analyzes the legal and ethical challenges these technologies have created. The author of this article tries to provide a solution based on personality identification and independent rules of responsibility for artificial intelligence, while explaining intellectual property crimes with the presence of artificial intelligence and its legal and ethical challenges, with the analytical-adaptive method and relying on the library method. In the future, he should have thought of the necessary measures for the developments of the presence of this new citizen.

Utilitarianism and retributivism, theories have important propositions both regarding criminalization and punishment. Many times, the analyses and the results that are obtained pass by the criminal investigation of criminal liability in the philosophical system of these theories have special importance. Criminal responsibility has components that both their number and their meaning are different in different crimes. One of the components of criminal responsibility is the age requirement. Utilitarianism seeks expediency and prevention of crime by using deterrence, rehabilitation and incapacitation of the criminal. Therefore, educational measures are expected at younger ages. As the age increases, the responsibility gradually becomes complete. Therefore, the age is a component of criminal responsibility for utilitarians. On the other hand, retributivism based on merit considers intellectual development as the age component of criminal responsibility.The Penal Code is consistent with utilitarianism in the crimes that are called ‘Ta'ziri’, and it is consistent with punitiveness in the crimes that are called ‘Had’ and ‘Qesas’. When judging the reactions of articles 88 and 89, the judge should issue appropriate sentences considering the purpose of intimidation, correction and incapacitation. In Had and Qesas, the judge is obliged to obtain the opinion of an expert on intellectual growth. in Article 91 intellectual growth is the age component of criminal responsibility, and it should not be taken into account only in case of doubt and as an exception in determining the criminal responsibility of children.

The use of new technologies such as robots and artificial intelligence is expanding rapidly, and in this era we are witnessing the arrival of independent robots that act independently of the will of their creators and beneficiaries. It is expected that, like any development, this development will have a relevant impact on the law in general and criminal law in particular. This change includes the transformation of the concept of criminal responsibility and new methods of punishment. The purpose of this article, which is written in an analytical-descriptive method, is to study and examine some of the current challenges of robots with complex artificial intelligence that have autonomy, or challenges that may arise in the future; Especially if artificial intelligence technology and robots are developed and used on a large scale. When dealing with the issue of committing criminal acts such as gambling by robots, a question comes to mind that, according to the current criminal laws, is it possible to accept criminal responsibility and impose the punishment of gambling on these human artifacts or not? It seems that according to researchers' opinions and legal theories, robots have criminal responsibility, although the punishment of hadh gavadi cannot be applied based on the current laws regarding robots, but the possibility of penal punishment based on the note of Article 639 of the Islamic Penal Code and Article 167 of the Constitution envisages. Finally, a guilty robot, as fanciful as it seems today, may be neither unrealistic nor unlikely in the future.

The attitude of Roman law towards the slave is that the slave has no rights. In this legal system, slaves were considered as objects that could be owned by another human being. But the fact that they were also human beings distinguished slaves from other objects of ownership. When we examine the status of slaves in Roman law, we will see some similarities to the status of robots, which there is general agreement will soon become a part of our human lives. A slave can be defined as a self-centered, decision-making and emotional possession. The same applies to robots. Therefore, robots can be considered the technological relatives of slaves. All this information leads us to the conclusion that if there were to be legal regulations about robots, the rules could easily be adapted from Roman law. In this article, a comparison has been made between robots and slaves by providing information about them. With the help of this comparison, it will be clear why their legal status is similar. Then, discussions have been studied about how to regulate the regulations related to the civil and criminal liability of robots in a theoretical and descriptive analytical format.