نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشجوی دکتری حقوق کیفری و جرم شناسی، واحد قم،دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، قم، ایران.
2 گروه حقوق دانشگاه تهران (پردیس فارابی)، قم، ایران(نویسنده مسؤول)
3 گروه حقوق، دانشگاه تهران (پردیس فارابی)، قم، ایران
4 گروه حقوق، واحد قم، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، قم، ایران
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
According to the principle of necessity of criminal prosecution, the prosecutor can assess the prosecution and refuse to prosecute the accused; In this case, it will use alternatives to criminal prosecution. Alternatives to criminal prosecution are measures in which the prosecutor, while refraining from criminal prosecution, uses them to correct the accused and respect the rights of the victim. In 1392, the Code of Criminal Procedure of Iran provided only examples of alternatives to criminal prosecution, such as suspension and adjournment of prosecution, case filing and mediation. In the English legal system, the Royal Prosecutor's Office will not initiate prosecution unless there are two criteria of sufficient evidence and public interest. In this system, assuming no prosecution, several alternatives to criminal prosecution are envisaged.
In this article, we seek to examine the alternatives to criminal prosecution in both legal systems and what are the differences and commonalities between them? Is it possible to use alternatives to prosecute the British penal system in the Iranian penal system? The findings of this study, which are written in a descriptive-analytical method, indicate that due to the capacity of the Iranian penal system and the existence of the necessary infrastructure, it is possible to use alternatives to the British pursuit in Iran. In alternatives such as mediation, withdrawal and suspension of prosecution, similarity; And there are differences between the two systems in the simple and conditional warning of adults and young people, the final reprimand and admission, the admission of delinquency and the accusation.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
)