نشریه تعالی حقوق
سال نهم شماره 3 (پاییز 1396)

Using the innocent agent in committing a crime means that the mastermind of the crime without any interference is carrying out the crime by a person without mental element or criminal responsibility. The relationship between the criminal liability for the others act and the innocent agent is ambiguous, since in both titles, a person is responsible for another person who is committedthe crime.   This articlefor finding the relationship between these titles discuss the examples of innocent agent  and the conditions of the criminal liability of other act, and the result is that innocent agent does not apply to unintentional crimes and therefore there is no close relationship between this term and the criminal responsibility of others act because the issue of article 142 of the Islamic Penal Code is provide for unintentional offenses so the relationship between them is of a different kind.

Although run Superior Orders By officers Applicable of a justified crime, but Regarding Officer's responsibility to obey illegal orders Different perspectives raised. In this article the effect of these views on the legislative approaches in this field is examined. The result is the legislator with adherence to these principles, different approaches at confront the illegal orders of the officers has predicted and inevitably to determine his responsibility In the face of these commands should review relevant laws. In the opposite, Officials are absolutely responsible when issuing an unlawful command, although the nature of their responsibility will sometimes be different. Thus, this research The Field of Understanding the Responsibility of Officials and superiors and the nature of his performance provides.

From the point of view of the traditional rules, especially the national laws, where the legal personality of the shareholders is independent of the company and as a result of the legal obligations of one of them does not affect the other, the association and cooperation of two or more specific companies can not lead to the extension and generalization of the responsibility of one of the members The group is on the other. However, arbitration rights aiming at gaining independence, seeks to exclude a group of companies without requiring the assumption of an independent legal personality as a set that affects one member's commitment to other members of the group. This can be achieved in two ways: first, by trying to extract tacit consent from non-arbitrators to the arbitration agreement; secondly, by relying on their effective role in concluding, implementing and terminating it. The basis of the first is nothing but the retelling of the old rule of contract law and the principle of its relative nature, while the second basis is the same as the contractual right to pursue.

Based on the traditional approach derived from Article 38 (1) (b) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, a customary rule consists of two procedural elements of the state practice and a opinio juris. The subject of this article is whether the current approach is equally applicable in international law, including trade, air and space, human rights and humanitarian law. We also answer the question whether its customary rule is based on the requirements of international law, including the lack of a single legislative power. The result of the paper is that the traditional two-element approach does not respond to human rights and humanitarian law, and the international criminal justice system has also taken other approaches to discovering the rule of law in this area. This does not mean the absolute negation of the application of the two-element approach, and in some cases it is also cited in a traditional way.

The Rule of  Dar' is in the direction of the presumption of innocence; base which, until the realization of the actus reus and mens rea of the crime is unproven or that each of these pillars is doubtful, the presumption is the innocence of the perpetrator. The question of this article is the domain of the Rule of Dar' which is the matter for the Islamic Jurists. And the conclusion is that, considering the application of the article 120 of the Islamic Penal Code (1392), the Rule of  Dar' applies to crimes requiring the punishment of "Had", "Ta'zir" and "Qesaas"; and the exception of this general principle is the execution of Qassamah in implementation of the article 314 of the Islamic Penal Code. The misgiving by which the punishment is abolished means whether Ignorance, Hallucination, Doubt and Suspicion. Doubts about the realization of each elements of actus Reus of the crime, provided that there are the other essential conditions, is the realm of the Rule of Dar'. The reason that eliminates the misgiving in Article 120 of the Islamic Penal Code is a cause which is more solid rather than the misgiving.

The first generation of depenalizers in Iranian penal policy includes those institutions that gradually have appeared in the system of Iranian criminal sanctions and are dynamically persistent in the various periods of depenalization policy. In this article, the range of three main depenalizers of this generation includes commutation, suspension of punishment and parole, has been studied and the pillars of each of them are explained in different periods. As well as, by comparing the rules of governing each of them, the decreasing and increasing in range of depenalization by theme are identified. The results of this assessment shows that in the Islamic Penal Code 2013, although in some of the pillars of above depenalizers have been applied new hurdles, but in general, in new Iranian penal policy from the perspective of depenalization, these items are in the best position.

There are several challenges in optional fulfillment of obligation such az the elements of optional filfillment of obligation in comparison with similar titles, the types of optional fulfillment of obligation and reviewing that in gradable and nondegradable commitments. This article is to clarify the aspects  of optional fulfillment of obligation by comparative study on the legal systems of Iran and England and The result is that the voluntary execution of the commitment is that the promisor undertakes to carry out his obligation, whether to act or to leave, to deliver the goods to the will, without requiring a committed obligation through legal authorities. This implementation has elements that include knowledge of the act, independence in commitment and fulfilling the obligation in accordance with the contract. The titles used in English law in this area are capable of conforming to Iranian law.