Articles
Publication Date: 2025/07/22
آموزه های حقوق کیفری (22519351)
Justice stands as a foundational objective of the International Criminal Court (ICC), with its Statute and procedural frameworks crafted to embody and operationalize the ideals of justice. This study centers on the conceptualization of justice and interrogates the structural and normative limitations impeding the Court's ability to render it effectively. A central ambiguity arises: in response to grave international crimes—genocide, war crimes, and other acts of mass atrocity that submerge the global order in injustice—what mechanism or process can credibly claim to restore and realize justice? Findings indicate that the ICC confronts multiple challenges in fulfilling its mandate: jurisdictional constraints, procedural hurdles in case referral, limited scope of prosecutable crimes, and difficulties in sentencing, reparative mechanisms, restorative justice, and reconciliation. These systemic complexities often culminate in a form of justice that is largely symbolic or partial. Consequently, the pursuit of transcendent justice becomes imperative—an evolved approach requiring statutory reform and the incorporation of peace-centric mechanisms such as apology and forgiveness, thereby compensating for the Court’s inherent limitations in delivering holistic justice.
Publication Date: 2021/01/20
آموزه های حقوق کیفری (22519351)(20)pp. 59-80
The overriding criticism directed to the law of prevention and fighting fraud in producing scientific works enacted 1392 is focusing on combating the producer of the scientific works and has not criminalized the conduct of the consumer. With considering this point that in this offence, there are two parties means client (consumer) and agent (producer) and perhaps the role of client is more noticeable in committing the offense. This legislature’s action is not true (rightful) that it confronts the agent but has neglected to criminalize precisely the behavior of the client clearly. It is possible to think that the client’s behavior can be introduced in the form of an incitement or allurement and this thought is also in most cases is not true because the agent before and without an incitement of his client is ready to accept the consumers’ orders. From the point of actus reus, the fraud offense in ordering the scientific works is a strict liability crime. Just with ordering, supplying and delivering these works as job or profession, the offense is occurred and there is no need to any result such as the usage of the client or granting privilege and etc. but from mens rea point for its occurrence, specific intent (crime) to make profit is necessary. Actually, it is a strict liability crime that it needs a specific intent for its occurrence.
