نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشجوی دکتری گروه حقوق کیفری و جرم شناسی، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران.
2 استاد حقوق کیفری و جرمشناسی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران (نویسنده مسئول)
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
Expediency may be taken into account either during the drafting of a legal text or at the stage of its interpretation by legislators and interpreters. Such considerations, when aimed at securing public interests and addressing widespread social problems within a proper legal framework, can be deemed acceptable and even commendable. However, the problematic aspect arises when political, security, and administrative concerns overshadow legal principles and interpretative norms. Although the General Assembly of the Supreme Court of Iran generally adopts a principled and legally sound approach in its unification rulings, there are certain criminal judgments where decisions are seemingly influenced by considerations of expediency, including political, security, and managerial factors. This article examines specific rulings to explore the manifestations and consequences of such expediency in criminal jurisprudence. The expansion of the exceptional jurisdiction of the Revolutionary Court and alignment with the Judiciary’s administrative policies are examples of this trend. These forms of expedient reasoning not only represent a failure to fulfill the Court’s supervisory duty over the proper implementation of laws but also undermine the Supreme Court’s distinguished role in the advancement and transformation of the country’s criminal justice system.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)