The History of the Principle of Judiciality of Punishments

Subject Areas : All jurisprudential issues

Sayed Mahmoud Majidi ¹ , Mahdi Zolfaghari ²

1 - استادیار دانشگاه دامغان، گروه حقوق، دامغان، ایران
2 - دانش آموخته دکتری دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، رشته‌‌ی فقه و حقوق اسلامی، تهران، ایران

Received: 2014-08-24 Accepted : 2014-10-19 Published : 2015-01-21

Keywords: Principle of Judiciality of Pu, competent judicial authority, Eqama al- hudud, Fair trial,

Abstract :

Determination and execution of punishment as well as existence of a systematic criminal proceeding have invariably been among most important controversies over punishment. By the principle it means that whole of the criminal proceeding such as investigation, trial and subsequently execution of the punishment should be done by a competent judicial authority. In the religious thoughts the authority called Imam or Governor or Judge. Accordingly people who lack the competence cannot intervene in the affairs and take arbitrary measures. The paper is devoted to development of the principle and determining its position. Although Article 36 of Constitution expressly embodied the principle in itself, it have been experienced an uneven road in its way to Criminal Code (2013). The act devotes a separate Article providing for the principle a long whit principle such as presumption of innocence and legality of crimes and punishments. But the principle is surrounded by exceptions some of which are new.