فصلنامه پژوهش حقوق کیفری
پیاپی 43 (تابستان 1402)

By reflecting on social relations, the footprints of power will be revealed, and in other words, power has a fluid presence in all matters of human life. Human societies have accepted the power of Mehr by establishing a political system for the order of affairs, and by establishing various institutions, they have tried to manage their affairs. By accepting the principle of separation of powers in a society or sovereign territory, the legislative, executive and judicial institutions will work together in harmony, and it is obvious that these institutions will also be affected by the ruling political context. The institution of criminal legislation in every society will explain the legislative policies and determine the normative boundaries and protect the value models of the citizens, and without a doubt, the determination of this value territory is also a function of power considerations, the foundations of which are established in the general policy of the country. The fluid power in the public policy of a country will determine the direction of the criminalization and punishment processes in the context of legislative criminal policy and with this description, the influence of power on the criminalization and punishment processes will be revealed. Power has manifested itself in different forms and on this basis, the degree of influence on various categories in the administration of a society will also be different. Political power, military power, royal power or religious power, media power and other examples, depending on the type and nature of the ruling regime of a society, can affect the legislative framework and the regime of crimes and punishments against illegal behaviors. Therefore, it is reasonable to maintin that the legislative system will be affected by the context of the ruling power. Realizing that power, whether obtained through legitimate means or through force and domination over subordinates, ultimately affects the legislative system and the processes of criminalization and determining punishments, and this issue will be the beginning of a way to another research: how this affects the institutions responsible for determining crimes and punishments will be determined. On this basis, in terms of revealing the new discourse of influence of power in the hidden layers of the legislative policy of the countries, which in the future and in the hands of the governments, will become a power in the direction of controlling and restraining the subjects that make up the discourse of power, the present article has been written in order to present an answer to the important question of "How does power influence the processes of criminalization and punishment?"  Undoubtedly, today, with the ever-increasing development of the "government" institution in its many forms, it has made people see more clearly the influence of economic, military powers at the national and international levels. In some cases, the influence of political power in the approval or non-approval of punitive laws is so obvious that the role of expediency can be clearly seen. Expediency in supporting and protecting the interests of a limited number of people or belonging to a specific group causes the approval of laws that are completely contrary to the criterion of "public interest" and makes the color and shape of some laws so clear that other than protection. It does not serve any purpose of special group interests. It should not be forgotten that in such cases, the law is passed in the name of protecting the interests of the general public of a society. In many cases, it can be seen that in authoritarian government systems, the people are not at all aware of the mass of approved laws, and the people's representatives are also under the direct influence of economic, military, and media power, etc.The question of "How does power affect the processes of criminalization and punishment?" is a question that needs to be analyzed due to the lack of research writings in the scientific bases of the country, and we have tried to understand its hidden layers with an analytical-descriptive method and using theoretical sources. In this regard, uncovering the role of power in the process of criminalization and that the system of crimes and punishments determined for them is itself a function of the foundations of the ruling power, is considered the achievement of the article, because it puts a seal of approval on the fact that; the type and even the amount of crimes are based on the ruling powers and their beliefs, and therefore, it is not always the case that the interest of the individual is the basis of criminalization, and the appeal to the concept of protection of the "public good" is itself a sign of the superiority of political power and its obvious influence in determining the system of crimes and punishments. In other words, in many cases, the political governments of countries act through the system of criminalization-punishment to maintain their power and in this way keep the citizens in the center of power.

Under Article 136 of the Islamic Penal Code (approved in 2012), the legislator has outlined the sentence of repetition in Hadd crimes. In accordance with this article, the punishment for committing a Hadd offense for the fourth time is death. However, neither the text of the law nor the legal doctrine addresses the case in which there is a mistake in counting the number of times the Hadd is applied. As an example, in the event that the perpetrator is punished four times with the same Hadd punishment, the death sentence can be imposed on them the fifth time, in accordance with Article 136.The present study is intended to answer the following question: "What is the effect of making a mistake in counting the repetitions of the Hadd punishment?" There are many examples of making a mistake in counting the number of times the Hadd punishment has been enforced, and it is possible to approximate more or less the number of repetitions, even though a number of examples are provided in the jurisprudence in this case.It is possible to consider three hypotheses in relation to the impact of the mistake on the punishment for repeating the Hadd: 1) The absolute absence of the consequence of the mistake in counting how many times the Hadd is executed, and the allowance of executing the death sentence in subsequent rounds. 2) The relative impact of the mistake, in such a way that if the perpetrator is responsible for the mistake, the mistake is not effective in counting the number of times the sentence is executed, and if the perpetrator is not the person responsible for the mistake, the fulfillment of the mistake will result in the exemption from the death sentence. 3) The absolute effect of the mistake and the prohibition of executing the death sentence in future rounds.In the present research, firstly, various cases in which a mistake was found in counting the number of repetitions were examined, then the three hypotheses mentioned were assessed based on the examples mentioned, and finally, the hypothesis of the absolute effect of the mistake in the number of repetitions, which caused the punishment prescribed in Article 136 to be extinguished is favored.

The criminal procedural may be exposed to the state of collapse by security-oriented policies resulting in suspense of the usual formalities of criminal proceedings and replacing them with emergency-oriented mechanisms. The collapse is due to the emergency of the country's political situation and social chaos, which is caused by the protests of a number of citizens against some policies. One of the most important factors of inception of such movement is the expansion of criminal law and maximum interference in people's freedoms and maintenance of political ideology. The Gap between the official norms and accepted values by citizens and insistence of the government to retain the norms via criminal protection of them gradually leads to social crises and civil disobedience. Conservatism, retrogression, standing against social and cultural changes, maintaining the status quo, refraining from fundamental reforms in political and social structures, have no result other than "crisis" and inevitably puts the citizens or a large part of them against the government. One simple solution to quell crisis is to declare the state of emergency and expand powers of the security forces and judicial authorities to arrest, prosecute and adjudicate the cases of protestors rapidly and secretly. The networks of control and supervision on citizens and the power and freedom of action of the police in this situation will be expanded and the logic of confrontation and repression are applied at high level. Due to the crowding of criminal cases in the judicial system as a result of these policies the rules of proceedings and some defense rights are ignored, including the right to have lawyer or the right to public trial, and prompt measures are taken into account due to the government's need to deal quickly and decisively. In such circumstances the guiding principles, especially the presumption and the principle of neutrality, and the government justifies its actions by claiming to maintain order and security of citizens. Summoning and arresting political dissidents without complying with legal frameworks and creating restrictions in cyberspace through filtering social networks and preventing the free flow of information are part of the strategies to deal with the crisis. When the political and social conditions are in an emergency, the fair criminal procedure inevitably collapses, and "extraordinary criminal procedure" prevails, which does not pay attention to the conventional and well-known rules of procedure and is often the product of the will of the political authorities and are dictated in the form of "judicial circulars". Thus, circulars have priority over the law. In this approach, the presumption of guilt is used instead of the principle of innocence, and the accused is treated as a criminal or a convict.The collapse of fair procedures is caused by factors that are mainly related to public strategies and macro policies. Incorrect policies or making wrong decisions regarding some social events and phenomena, legislation without paying attention to the basic needs of the people and ignorance of the political dissidents inevitably aggregate protests and social uprisings. Criminal policies based on arbitrary and baseless criminalization and merely based upon defending and protecting ideology, expanding criminal laws and maximum interference in people's freedoms, as well as the lack of transparency in statutes have unpleasant consequences in long term, and provide confrontation between citizens and policy makers.The substantive and procedural rules on security in the Iranian criminal law indicate that criminal policy makers have ignored some fundamental rights such as the right to choose a lawyer. In addition, following the expansion of the jurisdiction of special courts, which sometimes originates from circular, as well as the increase of the powers of judicial authorities and military forces, they have provided a legal basis for threatening the rights of individuals and the collapse of fair procedures. Holding secret and non-public trails and preventing the communication of court’s decisions are part of these challenges. Adjusting the criminalization and decriminalization of acts that are contrary to the values of citizens or a significant part of them, reforming public policies and avoiding criminal actions that create tension, and saving the criminal justice system from criminal inflation, and most importantly, paying attention to the phenomenon of "generational change" and normative gaps and ideology might be some solutions to prevent the collapse of fair criminal procedure. The Recognition of protests, changing policies and decriminalizing behaviors that have only an ideological aspect, removal of rights-threatening processes, accountability and prescribing discourse instead of criminal threats can prevent the criminal process from collapse.

The main question is whether the agreement to change the organ subjects to qisas to a similar organ is legitimate and causes the right of qisas to be forfeited concerning the original organ? There has not been a comprehensive research research in this regard with an exception of a brief outline of some examples in the codified criminal law and jurisprudence texts. This article attempts to re-examine the issue by presenting new analysis while critically studying the existing views. According to the famous Imami view, this agreement is not permissible and the right of qisas remains with the termination of the agreed organ. Therefore, it is necessary to pay the dues of the similar organs that have been cut off.The reasons of the famous view are as follows: the non-realization of the originality, the irreconcilability of the blood issue, the principle of non-substitution, the non-inclusion of the rule of body integrity, and the inclusion of the obligation of qisas in the original place. Indeed, due to the invalidity of the said agreement, according to the famous view, the left hand exchange (i.e. the fall of revenge from the right hand) has not been realized and on the other hand, the same exchange (left hand) has also been cut off.According to the second view, agreeing to amputate a similar limb instead of the main limb causes the right of qisas to fall and turn it into ransom. In such cases, on the one hand, the victim is entitled to receive diya for his right hand, and on the other, due to the amputation of  criminal's left hand, he is required to pay diya. In fact, agreeing on left-handed qisas instead of right-handed qisas is like forgiving the victim of right-handed qisas in exchange for left-handed qisas. Of course, it should be maintained that victim with left-handed who agreed on qisas has abandoned right-handed qisas, not that he has turned it into diya since if his goal was to receive the diya for his right hand, he could demand it from the criminal, and there was no need for the agreed qisas of the left hand.According to the third point of view, in practice, there is an exchange between the place of qisas and its similar organ, and the similar organ replaces the retaliated organ, which will result in the fall of the victim's right of qisas. The evidence of the third view are the implied amnesty of the agreement, the possibility of a change in the organ's qisas and reference to the rules of harmlessness and exclusion.The present article, with a descriptive and analytical method, while critically examining the jurisprudential foundations of the mentioned viewpoints and giving a reasoned preference to the promise of deserving punishment as a result of the agreed qisas of the similar organ, believes that such agreements and compromises can be based on. He considered it to be correct and legitimate and considered its provisions to be enforceable. In this regard, while studying the sayings and proofs of the jurists, by presenting proofs beyond the documents that have been presented for the third point of view, this opinion has been strengthened, the proofs of the illegitimacy of the agreement on the same organ's reparations are also disputed.The pieces evidence of the selected point of view are as follows:Analyzing the issue based on the aspect of the right of qisasThe basic rule in law is that the authority is in the hands of the right holder, and transferability, revocation, compromise, pardon, and forgiveness are among its accessories. So, first of all, since revenge is a special right of the victim, then it must be possible to judge the legitimacy of such an agreement. Secondly, considering the fact that the tortfeasor, even for free, can waive his right, then as a priority, he will be able to waive his right of qisas by agreeing to the qisas of the similar organ. Thirdly, due to the personal nature of the right to qisas in crimes against the soul, it is not possible to execute qisas without demanding compensation from the victim. Therefore, ruling to invalidate the agreement and re-implementation of qisas is contrary to this Muslim rule.Analyzing the problem in terms of substantive similarityBased on numerous pieces of evidence, there is a balance between the interests and functions of similar organs; which can be cited in order to prove the legitimacy of the aforementioned agreement.Applying the verse of qisas; From the honorable verse "Write down against them, that the soul is in the soul and the eye is in the eye and..." (Ma'idah/45), which explains the law of execution of qisas due to the necessity of similarity, it can be used that the paired body parts that are opposite each other and the ruling of qisas. They are exported, regardless of the right and left, they are considered similar to each other.Habib Sajestani's narration from Imam Baqir (a.s.): "Regarding the rights of Muslims, where a person has a hand, the hand should be placed against the hand..."Homogenization of similar organs in the verse; The chapters on limb amputation are used in the works of jurists, whose view of similar limbs is almost likeness and ruling on punishment of left hand in case of lack of right hand, based on this basis.From the point of view of custom, the organs of the pair are considered similar, and characteristics such as right and left are not considered by custom.Problem analysis based on the philosophy of qisas; The main purpose of the law is to legislate qisas punishment, deterrence, providing security and life of the society and healing the wounded feelings of the victim and the society. It seems that both of the aforementioned goals can be achieved with the agreement of similar organs.Arrange rational purpose for agreement.First: It is possible that rational and valuable effects and benefits will be obtained from the said agreement. Secondly: It is possible that the motive of benevolence is also desired in the qisas of the similar organ.Requirement of No Harm and The Dar'e RulesThe verdict of non- qisas ultimately leads to the qisas of two life organs for one victim. Therefore, referring to the harmless rule, the fall of the right of qisas against the victim is explained.Also, the rule of Dar'e, also includes qisas, and with the qisas of a similar organ, the legitimacy of re-implementation of qisas is questioned, the fall of the right of qisas seems more appropriate.Legal evidencesAlthough the legislature of Iran has not explicitly commented on this matter, according to the articles 347, 361, 363 and 365 of the Islamic Penal Code, conciliation and agreeability of the right of qisas, in each of the stages of prosecution, proceedings and execution, has clearly accepted and considered the right of qisas to fall and the hypothesis of this article is confirmed.

Qisas, as one of the most important punishments that has entered Iran's criminal laws from Sharia sources, has causes and obstacles that distinguish it from other punishments. The present article, which is written with a descriptive analytical method, is in the position of explaining the obstacles to the implementation of qisas and their practical application, as well as the separation of these obstacles from the obstacles to proving qisas and the causes of its downfall, which will also have important practical effects. According to this research, the obstacles to the implementation of qisas in the Iranian law are the obstacles that hinder its implementation despite the existence of qisas, and despite them, the perpetrator's qisas is canceled forever or for a period of time. Known or unknown will be delayed. These obstacles are of two categories. Some categories, such as the pregnancy of a woman and the need to pay the ransom to the perpetrator by the the victim’s heirs, only temporarily stop the execution of qisas, in which case the owner of the right to qisas has no choice but to either forgive and or to wait until the obstacle is removed and then executes qisas. Therefore, he cannot demand ransom from him without perpetrator's consent. But another group of obstacles to execution of qisas are obstacles that permanently or for an indefinite period exclude the possibility of execution of qisas, which include the death of a person or escape and lack of access to him. In this assumption, the legislator, following the opinion of some jurists, has considered the owner of the right of qisas to demand ransom even without the consent of the perpetrator; without considering the right of qisas to be void in the cases where the possibility of qisas is provided later, in the latter case, if the owner of the right has not waived his right, he can demand the execution of qisas by returning the payment. Similar to the situation where the perpetrator is arrested after the escape of a person and taking the ransom from his property. The only exception to this among the obstacles with an indefinite period is the situation in which, despite issuing a sentence for qisas, its execution requires the payment of ransom to "some of victim’s heirs", such as when some of heirs forgive the perpetrator and others demand ransom. Therefore, heirs demanding qisas will first give the share of the pardoners to perpetrator and give the share of the rest to them and then execute the qisas.Hence, in line with the articles 450 and 558 of the Islamic Penal Code, differentiation between the impermissibility of qisas and its impossibility, in any case where execution of qisas is not possible for an indefinite period, the owner of the right, while maintaining his right, is allowed it will be on demand. Therefore, if one of the conjoined twins commits an murder, even though qisas is not applicable in order to avoid harm to the other person, and the owner of the right can demand ransom, but if some time after that, If the said twins are separated, the right of qisas will still be applicable; Such a thing clearly shows the difference between the obstacles to execution and the causes of its downfall. It is not permissible to carry out qisas in the causes of qisas, and if the owner of the right harms a person after it has fallen, he has committed a crime that will be subject to qisas. Contrary to the obstacles of execution of qisas, which, despite the permissibility of execution of qisas, it is not possible to apply it, and therefore, whenever such a possibility is provided, its permissibility will remain in force. On this basis, the death of a person is one of the permanent obstacles to the implementation of qisas. In other words, only credit matters cause qisas to fall, and death is one of the real things that make qisas execution impossible.

This study places itself within the scope of cultural criminology approach, a multidisciplinary research field that explores crime and reactions to its control from an anarchist view. Cultural criminology places the issues of meaning in the hearts of its studies. Cultural criminologists propose that both crime and its control operate as cultural processes. In this theoretical approach, crime and its control are conceptualized as creative cultural products which are changing in the dynamics of social interactions. It examines how the meaning of crime and its control is continuously constructed in the nonlinear cultural, criminal, and crime control processes. It focuses on the convergence of criminal subcultures, control agents and media processes. For cultural criminologists, the media-based images of crime are one of the main sources of mediated constructions of meaning. They emphasize the centrality of media representations in the construction of crime. In this regard, it chooses an interdisciplinary approach with sociological criminology, cultural studies and media Criminology.This study sought to analyze the media-constructed lived experience of Iranian hackers by using the theoretical approach of cultural criminology. Cultural criminologists draw attention, particularly mainstream variants of criminology, to the fact that the crime control agencies are not the only creators of the meaning of crime and its control. Proposing the idea of commodification and hall of mirrors, they argue that the media representations of criminals and criminal events become a tool for creating the meaning of crime. These images create and consume by criminals, criminal subcultures and control agents. In today's highly controlled world which subcultures become marginalized, media representations become significant, exceptional sources for creating deviant subcultural reality. These images are continuously recycling and reproducing by control agents and subcultures and even other media images. Hence, we are being surrounded in a world in which saturated by different, nonhomogeneous images of crime and its control.This research is accomplished via anarchist methodology of cultural criminology. To this end, we have used the ethnographic content analysis ( ECA ) developed by David Altheide (1980s) and virtual ethnography of hacker subculture. Due to the qualitative nature of the research, the Blue Whale television series were analyzed by using the purposive sampling method. Researches conducted in this area must focus not only on the everyday media images, but also on the complex set of reciprocal and interdependent subcultural relationships which together constitute the dynamic meaning of crime. In this regard, in the subcultural studies section, fifty-four in-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with hackers during the six months, and their behaviors were simply observed. All data were coded and analyzed using MAXQDA software.Our findings indicated that the meaning of the hacking is also created through the consumption of media products. Entertainment media can represent the real dimensions of criminal subcultures in the form of attractive media products. In many ways, Blue Whale blend the real-life and movie created footage and blurs the lines between reality and fantasy. The hacker represents a personality similar to many young people, which can evoke audience emotion. According to our virtual ethnography research, some hackers are students or graduates of various fields, especially computers, who suffer from economic problems like the character of the hacker shown in this series. They are humiliated by powerful adults and at the same time, have a creative mind. The fictional hacker of this film, like many hackers in the real world, feels prosperous and empowered by taking risks as part of edgework activities. The combination of skill, creative impulsive behavior, and economic problems lead the hacker to greater ambitions in the criminal profession, and finally, the metaphorical incident of the death of the whale occurs. Moreover, the Blue Whale provides information about the lesser-known dimensions of criminal edge workers that the criminal justice system seeks to distort to prevent delinquency. It also found that by representing parts of the realities of hackers' lived experiences and looping back to the content and form of previous media loops, the series screening a dystopia that provides the possibility of transcending established norms and rules of the life for the offender and the audience.

Considering the collective nature of international crimes, incitement to commit crimes plays an important role in encouraging people to align and accompany committing international crimes. For this reason, in international criminal law, incitement to commit an international crime has been specified under different titles, without providing a definition in the statutes of international criminal courts. In the statutes of international criminal courts, in addition to instigation to commit a crime, public and direct incitement to commit genocide in Article (p)(3) 4 of the Statute of the ICTY and Article (p)(3) 2 of the statute of the ICTR, Article 25(3) of the Statute of the ICC is specified in the same way as paragraph 3 of Article 3 of the Convention on the Prohibition and Punishment of Genocide in 1948. While in the incitement to genocide, it is mentioned that it must be public and direct, but in the instigation to commit the crime, there is no further description. Therefore, the distinction that can be seen in the statutes of international criminal courts is the distinction between instigation to commit an international crime and public and direct incitement to genocide. The question is, why have the statutes of international criminal courts criminalized direct and public incitement to genocide separately from instigation to commit international crimes? What is the difference between the elements of instigation to commit an international crime and incitement to genocide?MethodologyIn order to answer the above questions, this article with a descriptive analytical method and by examining international documents and international judicial procedure, firstly, scrutinizes the nature of public and direct incitement to genocide and its relationship with incitement to commit a crime, and then examines the necessary elements to prove the responsibility of public and direct incitement to genocide.Results and DiscussionAccording to Article 6 of the Charter of the Nuremberg International Military Court, which Article 5 of the Tokyo Court Charter is exactly similar to it: “…The following acts, or any of them, are crimes coming within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal for which there shall be individual responsibility: (a) ' Crimes against peace: … (b) ' War crimes: … (c) ' Crimes against humanity… Leaders, organizers, instigators and accomplices participating in the formulation or execution of a common plan or conspiracy to commit any of the foregoing crimes are responsible for all acts performed by any persons in execution of such plan”. Instigation to an international crime entered the international procedure as an international crime for the first time when the Nuremberg Court sentenced Julius Streicher in 1946. Although the term "incitement to genocide" was not yet recognized as such, and the defendant was charged with crimes against humanity, the charge was based on actions that would today be defined as incitement to genocide. In general, instigation is defined as one of the behaviors that lead to individual criminal responsibility in the Charter of the Nuremberg Military Court. This charter does not distinguish between different forms of incitement in different clauses, but in general, it states that the instigators in the formulation or implementation of a joint plan or conspiracy to commit any of the mentioned crimes for all acts committed by persons in the implementation of such a plan will be held responsible.According to ICTY Statute, Article 7(1): “A person who planned, instigated, ordered, committed or otherwise aided and abetted in the planning, preparation or execution of a crime referred to in articles 2 to 5 of the present Statute, shall be individually responsible for the crime.” However, public and direct incitement to genocide is criminalized in Article (p)(3) 4 of the Statute of the ICTY and Article (p)(3) 2 of the Statute of the ICTR.Article (1) 6 of the Statute of the Special Court of Sierra Leone, which is similar to Articles 7 and 6 of the Statute of the ICTY and ICTR, prompted SCSL to declare in the case of Brima, Kamara and Kanu that the relationship between instigation and the crime committed must be proven, but it is not necessary to prove that the crime would not have occurred without the involvement of the accused to instigation. From the interpretation of the sentence "the relationship between instigation and the crime committed must be proved" it can be concluded that instigation is considered as one of the forms of secondary responsibility in the SCSL, which considers the occurrence of the result as one of the basic elements of the realization of the crime of instigation.On the other hand, referring to Article 3 of the Convention on the Prohibition and Punishment of Genocide and Paragraph 3 of Article 4 of the Statute of the ICTY and Paragraph 3 of Article 2 of the Statute of the ICTR, in international criminal law, incitement to commit genocide regardless of whether it leads to a criminal outcome as an independent crime must be considered. There is also a difference between clauses B and E of Article 25(3) of the Statute of the ICC regarding inducement to commit an international crime and direct and public incitement to genocide.​ConclusionInstigation to commit international crimes and public and direct incitement to genocide have many similarities and are often disputed. However, they have distinct characteristics and should be distinguished accordingly. Instigation to commit international crimes is a form of participation in the crime of another person. Instigation to commit international crimes is not a crime in itself. While incitement to genocide is punishable even if genocide did not take place, direct and public incitement to genocide is addressed to the general society, which can ultimately cause an atmosphere of hatred and bipolarity in the society, and it is possible that anyone commits a crime following these public incitements. On the other hand, instigation to commit international crimes is an incitement addressed to a specific person. In order to prove the responsibility of the accused for this international crime of hate crimes (Public and Direct Incitement to Genocide), it is necessary that in addition to being public and direct, and the specific seriousness and specific mens rea required for genocide, the words of the speaker have the potential to lead to a genocide in the society. A capability that can be proven according to the time and place of the speech and the characteristics of the speaker and the audience.