Jurisprudential Principle of Ḥamā (Prohibitory Decree) in Criminal Law; from Narrative Theoretical to Challenges

The pattern of criminalization and punishment in jurisprudence follows basic rules, principles and ideas, some of which are specific to some crimes and others are executable in all divisions of criminal jurisprudence. The principle of ḥamā - with the concept of applying the prohibition decree from the center to the surrounding environment - is considered as the most important principle in the field of preventing major crimes and supporting value patterns in Islamic society. So far, the jurisprudential and legal analysis and pathology and the challenge-seeking of this principle have not been dealt with. The main issue of this article is the basic challenges of the jurist and legislator in sanctioning and penalizing (criminalizing) permissible acts based on this rule. If utilizing this rule as the basis of criminalization, despite its narrative theoretical nature, is documented without considering some paralegal and extralegal suppositions, it will pose serious challenges for the philosophy of Islamic and conventional criminal law and some of their doctrines; challenges such as the confrontation of the principle of ḥamā with rights and freedoms, the theoretical contraction and expansion, the fundamentals of the principle of ḥamā, the principle's incompatibility with the principle of minimalism in criminal law, and the principle's resulting (intāj) in the inflation of criminal laws. In other words, although the exigency of implementing the principle is available, in some cases its obstacle is not missing. Therefore, the necessity of discipline in adhering to and citing this principle is fully confirmed.