Civil Penalties in the Shadow of Criminal Offence: A Critical Reassessment of Fraudulent Alienation

The concept of fraudulent alienation in Iranian law possesses a complex nature, particularly in relation to criminal and civil law. Although the law acknowledges the term "alienation", legal professionals and judicial precedents have often referred to it as a transaction. Consequently, when analyzing this criminal act, it becomes necessary to delve into the exact meaning of the term and determine whether it encompasses unilateral legal actions. Additionally, the interpretation of "motive" within the realm of criminal law requires further scrutiny. From a civil standpoint, legal practitioners have proposed various possibilities, such as "nullity," "invalidity," and "non-enforceability of the contract towards the creditor," to address the legal consequences of such criminalized transactions. This article critically examines how well each of these conventional legal solutions aligns with the true intentions of the legislator and explores the potential for alternative legal scenarios. Our hypothesis posits the "absolute validity" of fraudulent alienation concerning both the parties involved in the transaction and the creditors.