National security and criminal justice are conflictual concepts. So their connection is discussed based on their functions. Although criminal justice is derived from morality and natural law, but after emergence of state its concept has been changed. In its essence criminal justice was based on recompense, but in today’s criminal law it is based on interest seeking. From this view it can be argued that criminal justice has approached to national security. Changes like spreading delinquencies in national security arena, which in turn intensifies criminal actions and consequently security measures, makes criminal justice an unbalanced standard for state and individuals. Author argues that national security concerns have formed this unbalanced position. While National security concerns cause it to be dynamic in its function, in turn make in past-faced in its goals

Justice is one of the oldest concepts that mankind has known since the beginning of its civilization and has tried to establish it. Justice has different forms, which can be referred to as social, political, economic, etc. In this, criminal justice is of special importance. Scientists and experts in social sciences have considered several factors effective on criminal justice, among which principles such as the principle of acquittal and the principle of legality of crimes and punishments, as well as the personal nature of criminal responsibility, are important, but criminal responsibility is of particular importance among them. It is necessary to carry out serious scrutiny in this regard and conduct ethical attitudes towards criminal justice, especially collaborative criminal justice, in a scientific manner. Ignoring the areas of moral responsibility in the field of criminal justice violates the right of those referring to the judicial system and causes injustice. Therefore, paying attention to the character and human dignity of people is a necessity of collaborative criminal justice. The present article deals with the ethical attitudes in the field of collaborative criminal justice with a library method and has answered many unknowns in this regard.

The selection of one or more models from the models in the field of criminal justice is based on culture, economics, education and similar factors and includes the welfare model, risk or risk management model, restorative justice model and minimum intervention model. In the General Penal Code of 1304, the minimum age of criminal responsibility was 12 years, and the model of minimum intervention of criminal law was the model of restorative justice, and in the case of important crimes, the model of criminal justice was considered by the legislator. In the laws of 1338 and 1352, the minimum age of criminal responsibility was reduced to 6 years and the model of criminal justice was the first priority. It is also in the laws of 1982 and 1996. The Islamic Penal Code of 1392, according to the importance of the crime and the age of the accused, chose the model of minimum intervention of criminal law, restorative justice and criminal justice in the field of ta'zir crimes. For other crimes, the model of criminal justice was chosen. However, Article 91 stipulates that the court can consider leather in certain cases or, in fact, punishment as ta'zir, and finally the juvenile delinquent can enjoy legal discounts under certain conditions.

Accusation, as the main stage of the criminal process, which can be considered as the gateway to criminal justice, is affected by criminal justice systems in such a way that, contrary to most beliefs, that the indicators of accusation are the same in all legal systems, its indicators according to the systems and processes Criminal justice is different, and as a result, this influence plays an important role in the beginning and subsequent stages of the criminal process. The current research, which was compiled with descriptive-analytical method after examining the criminal justice systems and processes, has concluded: the indicators of objection to the accusation are different according to the system and the governing process of the proceedings, so that in the Roman-Germanic system, the prosecutor has no role in the objection stage. There is no charge and he must proceed with it, while in the common law system, the prosecutor can refuse to charge in some cases. In the control-oriented criminal justice process, any reaction against order and security is faced with an accusation, while in the dignity-oriented process, the accusation is based on the sufficiency of evidence system and is introduced with caution and considering the prevailing suspicion of committing a crime. Finally, in the combined process, in crimes with private status, accusations are presented with the same indicators as in the dignity-oriented process, and in crimes with public status, including crimes against sovereignty, the indicators of accusations are similar to the control-oriented process. The approach of Iran's criminal justice system in this regard is such that the prosecutor has no authority in the accusation stage and must initiate the criminal process, and in the end, the accusation in Iranian law is considered to be in line with the indicators of the control system to a large extent.

One of the crucial issues propounded in the field of jurisprudence and law problems concerns children. The age of criminal liability is one of the important issues set forth for discussion. Many of the children reaching the age of religious obligation (puberty) have not reached the required thought and wisdom growth in the field of penal issues. Now, the problem is raised whether the age determined by the Islamic Jurisprudence (Shariah) for the religious obligation can correspond with the same age of criminal liability or it has to be the age of 18 as propounded in international conventions including the Bill of Child Right, and at any case the question is that which age corresponds with legal equity specially the criminal equity. In the penal law, there are important principles which could be considered as constructive of the penal equity. It can be said that executing such principles will realize the legal justice specially the penal equity as the principle of ethical liability based on which, one is liable when being adult, wise and having free agency and being at liberty for his/her actions. Therefore, the child’s criminal liability age is different form his/her religious obligation (puberty) age, and that, in penal liability, in addition to puberty, mental and thought development, i.e. a state of development in which one can fully appreciate penal liability should be considered as well.

Criminal justice management by abandoning traditional methods and eliminating retaliation aspects while preserving the effects of restoration aims at reducing the criminal record, the aggravation of cases and the costs of criminal justice. In economic analysis and that of the cost of criminal prosecution, when prosecution, sentencing or execution is not necessary, granting a victim an opportunity to rehabilitate is appropriate, and the crime committed is not an important one, criminal regressive policy proceeds. Our country also in line with the globalization of criminal law and the observance of the UN recommendations has established new institutions such as postponement of prosecution, file archiving, etc., and has expanded the scope of the institutions by adopting the Islamic Penal Code and the Penal Procedure Code 2013 as well as utilizing the capacity of the legal system and the public institutions along with the “criminal validation” approach, while validating the arbitrary institutions that are sometimes neglected. Legislative, judicial and executive Criminal policies changes are in connection with the development of a genuine human rights system, the individualization of criminal justice, prosecution alternatives, deprosecution, and so forth. In this paper, the individualization of criminal justice in the pre-trial phase is examined.

Public choice theory could be defined as the study of Politics based on economic principles. This theory generalizes the assumptions of market behavior of individual agents such as rationality and self-interest maximization to the behavior of public enforcement agents like criminal justice officials. According to this theory, these authorities would not always behave in line with the interests of the society and might be tempted to pursue their own self-interest. This could lead to the breach of the defendant's fundamental rights, an increase in the number of false convictions and would impose irreparable costs on the criminal justice system. In this paper, we seek to answer this question of why it might be desirable for the criminal procedure to be strongly biased in favor of the defendant. Based on public choice theory, pro- defendant procedure would make it more costly for the self-interested officials to use the criminal process to obtain their own ends. It would also provide a mechanism for preventing the rent-seeking behavior of such officials. Constraining this sort of behaviors is likely to direct the criminal justice system to promote social welfare.

International criminal court as international tribunal is under concentreat of international law as a active in international society and with growth of information and communicationatom technologies we saw many developments in scope of internet.international criminal court has close and direct relation with internet.that is effective and useful tool for communication of victims of international crimes with international criminal court.court can collect evidence of crimes through of internet and that is very effective for prepare evidence of crimes against international offender.internet can provide accessibility to judicial information of court.internet is great tool for respect of universal criminal justice and protection of human rights .