: Comparative study of the status of the institution of the execution of sentences in the penal system of Iran, France and England

One of the most important stages in the criminal process is the implementation of the sentences, and the result of a high and progressive prosecution of crimes is highlighted. Because, on the one hand, the efforts of all the activists of the criminal justice system were fulfilled and they did not survive, and on the other hand, through the implementation of the guarantees of criminal proceedings, the basic objectives of punishment, namely, the deterrence, reformation and rehabilitation of the prisoners, and thus the right to benefit the community and the victim of the investigator It turns out. In French law, the execution of a criminal conviction is also considered a judicial phase in which the judge and the enforcement court can modify the sentences imposed on the sentenced person by changing the behavior of the sentenced person without referral to the court issuing the sentence. In the English Penal System, the judiciary institution is not individually predicted to execute sentences, but is differentiated by different institutions outside the judicial system, under the supervision of the Interior Ministry, to enforce the sentences and to adapt them to the convicted person; however, in some cases, the issuing court It can make a modification or reduction in the initial order. This is despite the fact that in Iran's criminal justice system, the judge has more executive and supervisory functions and prosecutors are employed in an administrative capacity. However, it seems that judicializing the institution of execution of judgments and creating indigenous changes in proportion to the size of the cases can lead to ensuring that the execution of sentences is proportionate and individualized with the convicted person.