پژوهشنامه حقوق کیفری
سال سوم شماره 1 (پیاپی 5، بهار و تابستان 1391)

Plurality of judges is based on the rationality which is seen in some different systems in a way that a group of judges in the same way and for a single case decide on sentence. Although speaking about plurality of judges or joint judging is not considered explicitly by all Imami jurisprudents but by a survey on reasons of that, it can be understood that jurisprudences have not presented unity or plurality of judges in general. So by bringing these reasons, we can go toward this way of judging. Also by having a survey on the different concepts of sentence and verdicts and also the definition of sentence from the view point of jurisprudents, it can be found out that sentence in spite of its compulsive advisability, does not have generality and it is a way to get to the canonical augment, in this way, there is no difference between unity or plurality of judges in sentencing and even maybe having a joint judging which is the result of the consulting of judges could be more assured.

Compound crime is a crime of which actus reus have been composed of varied action. Therefore, compound crime should have more than one physical conducts because the only component of actus reus which emerges as action is physical conduct while in Fraud, physical conduct has been composed by resorting to fraudulently means which is not varied action (though numerous) and stealing of property belonging to another is only result of crime not physical conduct. The condition of Fraud for being composed should not be considered. On the other hand, Fraud cannot be called Simple crime because in this case, we will state that it is the result of simple crime in which criminal title relates to the result while in Fraud, it relates to physical conduct in addition to result. In the contrary to simple crimes, a case or condition of Fraud doesn’t occur as result of physical conduct but it is an action independent of the committed physical conduct and has special nature and with regard to classification and definition of simple and compound crimes, we classified them into absolute simple crimes, result simple, absolute compound and result compound crimes. Fraud is regarded as result compound crime.

The aim of this paper is to consider the existent challenges in order to achieve justice in international community. This study is done with documentary method and analysis of some international documents such as, Rome Statute, UN Charter and some Security Council’s resolutions. This Article, at first, states the place of international peace and security concepts and tries to determine their sources in international level. Then, it introduces some of the most important of their representatives - Security Council and International Criminal Court – in international community, by explaining the relationship between international politics and law and describing their priority or recency in international issues. In this context, their relation, particularly the effect of Security Council’s measures in the framework of resolutions based upon chapter VII of UN Charter, is considered. Finally, criticizing to some of the SC’s decisions by resolution, it explains how permanently peace is accomplished with establishing justice

Theory of retributivism is equal to the old with moral life. Retributivists in their criminal logics adher to their moral and natural illumination more than relying on a rational recieving of philoaophy of punishment. In their point of view, moral order is superior than any other concept and the society uses the criminal tools whenever its moral order is in danger.Retributivists reject utilitarian approche of philosophy of punishment. They also assume that punishment has natural profits.Retributivists unabilities in rational explanation of their criminal policy has caused lots of criticisms about their idea.

According to the "Responsibility to Protect" doctrine, any state has responsibility to protect its population against genocide, war crime, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. The International community is responsible through using diplomatic, humanitarian and other peaceful means. If national authorities obviously fail to protect their population against such crimes, the responsibility will be transferred to the international community. Due to the extensive violation of human rights in Libya crisis, international community based on this principle, found itself responsible and decided to intervene. This paper is a short review of the concept of responsibility to protect and assesses the applying of this principle in Libya crisis. The assessment showed that the measures taken by international community were fast, coherent and decisive. The measures were within the framework of three main principles which are prevention, react and rebuilding.

Special geographic and strategic situation of Iran in the Middle East, being adjacent to warm waters of Persian Gulf and Oman Sea, having long borders with critical districts of the region, i.e. Afghanistan and Iraq, are among factors which have made possible illegal entry and residence of illegal aliens, thus have caused social and security problems for Iran. Ratification of the law related to illegal entry and residence of aliens in 10 May 1931 was the first serious step for legalization of this issue as well as security and preservation of the society. However some modifications have been made to this law, it still has many deficiencies. This article aims to investigate and analyze different components and elements of illegal entry and residence in addition to its executive guarantee. Some recommendations have been also made to solve deficiencies of the law in this study. It has been suggested to reinforce boundaries and boundary control system as a preventive solution. Meanwhile, changing to legal status from illegal, increasing the cost of residence and providing the aliens with social services have been proposed to be attended by criminal policy actors of Iran.

In the modern legal systems there are a variety of sources of law. Judicial precedent is one of the legal sources; thus, precedents of Supreme Court, like enactments of parliament, are enforceable in courts. Them similarity between precedents and acts impose many problems such as rules, different, relationship of them and role of Supreme Court in interpretation of laws. But the most important problem is the possibility of changing previous precedent by posterior one. In our legal system the legislator has provided Supreme Court from such changes. Whereas, such act seemed to be conflicting with legal principles and constitutional law. Supreme Court cannot change enactments but it can change its precedents.