Private sector intervention in prisons in Iran and the United States

Addressing the problems and issues of prisoners is one of the important concerns of political systems in order to establish criminal justice. The present article examines the models of prison privatization and the objections to it, examines the position of Iranian and American law in this field and answers the questions: Is private sector intervention in Iranian and American law possible? And which private sector intervention in law? Which of these two countries is more feasible?

In this article, a descriptive-analytical method and a study of private sector intervention in prisons in Iran and the United States have been compared. Discussion materials have been collected by referring to documentary sources.

In Iranian law, despite the lack of legal provisions regarding private sector intervention in prisons; The private sector entered the prison guard system in 1994. Private sector intervention in the Iranian prison guard system has occurred twice, the first time successfully and the second time unsuccessfully. Research in this area indicates that private sector intervention in the United States is at a higher level than in Iran, both quantitatively and qualitatively, due to the passage of relevant laws.

Ethical considerations:

The various stages of the research have been done with ethical considerations in mind, including the principle of referral, correct and scientific use of relevant resources, and the principle of fiduciary duty.

Due to its long tradition of privatization, the United States has a relatively successful example of private prison management. This approach is applied through two Anglo-American models (privatization of all prison wards) and the French model (administration by the private sector and security by the government). But in Iran, despite the stipulation of privatization in the prison regulations, two failed experiences in Adelabad prison in Shiraz and Vakilabad prison in Mashhad have reduced the tendency of the judiciary to privatize prisons. In addition, problems related to the management of prisons by the private sector and the lack of sufficient security to manage the affairs of prisoners are among the reasons for the suspension of this project.