دانشگاه مازندران

 آمار

تعداد نشریات31
تعداد شماره‌ها512
تعداد مقالات4,960
تعداد مشاهده مقاله7,602,065
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله5,651,500
آقابابائی طاقانکی, عظیم, امینی, مهدی, قدیری بهرام آبادی, رشید. (1404). دستورات پیشگیرنده‌ی مدنی در سیاست جنایی کامن‌لا؛ تأملی در حقوق ایران. پژوهشنامه مدیریت اجرایی, 9(2), 7-27. doi: 10.22080/lps.2024.27485.1646
عظیم آقابابائی طاقانکی; مهدی امینی; رشید قدیری بهرام آبادی. "دستورات پیشگیرنده‌ی مدنی در سیاست جنایی کامن‌لا؛ تأملی در حقوق ایران". پژوهشنامه مدیریت اجرایی, 9, 2, 1404, 7-27. doi: 10.22080/lps.2024.27485.1646
آقابابائی طاقانکی, عظیم, امینی, مهدی, قدیری بهرام آبادی, رشید. (1404). 'دستورات پیشگیرنده‌ی مدنی در سیاست جنایی کامن‌لا؛ تأملی در حقوق ایران', پژوهشنامه مدیریت اجرایی, 9(2), pp. 7-27. doi: 10.22080/lps.2024.27485.1646
آقابابائی طاقانکی, عظیم, امینی, مهدی, قدیری بهرام آبادی, رشید. دستورات پیشگیرنده‌ی مدنی در سیاست جنایی کامن‌لا؛ تأملی در حقوق ایران. پژوهشنامه مدیریت اجرایی, 1404; 9(2): 7-27. doi: 10.22080/lps.2024.27485.1646

دستورات پیشگیرنده‌ی مدنی در سیاست جنایی کامن‌لا؛ تأملی در حقوق ایران

پژوهشنامه حقوق تطبیقی
مقاله 1، دوره 9، شماره 2 - شماره پیاپی 18، تیر 1404، صفحه 7-27    اصل مقاله (690.65 K)
نوع مقاله: علمی پژوهشی
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22080/lps.2024.27485.1646
نویسندگان
عظیم آقابابائی طاقانکی* 1؛ مهدی امینی2؛ رشید قدیری بهرام آبادی3
1دانشجوی دکتری حقوق کیفری و جرم‌شناسی، دانشکده حقوق، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران
2استادیار گروه حقوق، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه شهرکرد، شهرکرد، ایران.
3استادیار گروه حقوق، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه شهرکرد، شهرکرد، ایران
تاریخ دریافت: 04 مرداد 1403،  تاریخ بازنگری: 23 مرداد 1403،  تاریخ پذیرش: 27 مرداد 1403 
چکیده
امروزه تمایل دولت‌ها به کنترل جرم از طریق پیشگیری و مداخلات قبل از ارتکاب جرم افزایش یافته است. برخی دولت‌ها در پرتو برخی مفاهیم از جمله عدالت پیشگیرنده، در صدد توسعه‌ی اقدامات تنبیهی در پیشگیری از جرم از طریق کاربست دستورات پیشگیرنده‌ی مدنی در سیاست جنایی برآمدند. در این پژوهش به روش توصیفی-تحلیلی و با استفاده از منابع کتابخانه‌ای به بررسی مفهوم، مصادیق، مبانی و پیامدهای دستورات پیشگیرنده‌ی مدنی در کشورهای کامن‌لا و تطبیق آن‌ها با نهادهای مشابه در کشور ایران می‌پردازیم. یافته‌های پژوهش حاکی از آن است که دستورات پیشگیرنده‌ی قسمی از تدابیر پیشگیرنده‌ی تنبیهی و دو مرحله‌ای هستند. در مرحله‌ی اول، با رعایت مقررات آیین دادرسی مدنی صرفاً‌ یک دستور خطاب به شهروندان صادر و در صورت عدم رعایت دستور در مرحله‌ی دوم کیفر بر شخص اعمال خواهد شد. موافقان، مبنای کاربست آن‌ها در سیاست جنایی را در دفاع پیش‌دستانه از جامعه، حفاظت عمومی بیشتر از شهروندان، گسترش شبکه‌های کنترل اجتماعی، سرعت در پاسخ‌دهی به رفتارهای هنجارشکن و پیشگیری بهتر و سریع‌تر می‌پندارند. از زمره پیامدهای کاربست آن‌ها می‌توان به نقض آزادی‌های اساسی، حاکمیت قانون، اصل تناسب بزه و پاسخ‌ها، اصل تفکیک قوا، اصل برائت و تضمینات دادرسی عادلانه اشاره کرد. نظر به اینکه این دستورات منجر به تمامیت‌خواهی دولت‌ها شده و از طریق ایجاد حس ناکامی و به عنوان یک محرک بیرونی عامل پرخاشگری‌های بعدی شهروندان می‌شوند، کاربست آن‌ها در سیاست جنایی ایران پیشنهاد نمی‌شود.
کلیدواژه‌ها
سیاست جنایی؛ دستور پیشگیرنده‌ی مدنی؛ عدالت پیشگیرنده؛ کنترل جرم؛ مدیریت خطر
عنوان مقاله [English]
Civil preventive orders in common law criminal policy; a reflection on Iranian law
نویسندگان [English]
Azim Aghababaei Taghanaki1؛ Mehdi Amini2؛ Rashid Ghadiri Bahram Abadi3
1PhD student in Criminal Law and Criminology, Faculty of Law, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
2Assistant Professor, Department of Law, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Shahrekord University, Shahrekord, Iran.
3Assistant Professor, Department of Law, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Shahrekord University, Shahrekord, Iran
چکیده [English]
Today, the desire of governments to control crime through prevention and interventions before committing a crime has increased. Some governments, in the light of some concepts including preventive justice, sought to develop punitive measures in crime prevention through the application of civil preventive orders in criminal policy. In this research, using a descriptive-analytical method and using library sources, we will investigate the concept, examples, bases and consequences of civil preventive orders In common law countries and their comparison with similar institutions in Iran. The findings of the research indicate that preventive orders are a part of two-step punitive preventive measures. In the first step, by following the rules of civil procedure, only an order is issued to citizens, and if the order is not followed, in the second step, punishment will be imposed on the person. Advocates of these orders believe that the basis of their application in criminal policy is in preemptive defense of society, more public protection of citizens, expansion of social control networks, speed in responding to norm-breaking behaviors, and better and faster prevention. Among the consequences of their application, we can mention the violates fundamental freedoms, the rule of law, the principle of proportionality of guilt and answers, the principle of separation of powers, the principle of innocence, and the guarantees of a fair trial. Considering that these orders lead to the totalitarianism of the governments and through creating a sense of frustration and as an external provocateur cause the subsequent aggressions of the citizens, their application in the criminal policy of Iran is not suggested.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
criminal policy, preventive civil order, preventive justice, crime control, risk management
مراجع
  1. Angus, C. (2016). Serious crime prevention orders, NSW Parliamentary Research Service.
  2. Amirian, A. (2022). Effect and modeling of criminal policy as a response. Political Sociology of Iran, 5(7), 2006-2025. doi: 10.30510/psi.2023.286255.4295 [In Persian]
  3. Ardabili, M. A. (2014). General criminal law, first volume, Tehran: Mizan, 36th edition. [In Persian]
  4. Ashworth, A., & Horder, J. (2013). Principles of criminal law. Oxford University Press, USA.
  5. Ashworth, A., & Zedner, L. (2008). Defending the criminal law: Reflections on the changing character of crime, procedure, and sanctions. Criminal Law and Philosophy, 2, 21-51.
  6. Ashworth, A., & Zedner, L. (2010). Preventive orders: A problem of under-criminalization. The boundaries of the criminal law, 59-87.
  7. Ashworth, A., & Zedner, L. (2012). Prevention and criminalization: Justifications and limits. New Criminal Law Review: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal, 15(4), 542-571.
  8. Ashworth, A., & Zedner, L. (2013). Preventive Orders and the Rule of Law’, in D Baker and J Horder (eds.), The Sanctity of Life and the Criminal Law, (pp. 45-68). Cambridge.
  9. Ashworth, A., & Zedner, L. (2014). Civil Preventive Orders, In Preventive justice (pp. 59-87). Oxford University Press.
  10. Ashworth, A., Zedner, L., & Tomlin, P. (Eds.). (2013). Prevention and the Limits of the Criminal Law. Oxford University Press.
  11. Barajas, F. P. (2007). An invading army: a civil gang injunction in a Southern California Chicana/o community. Latino Studies, 5, 393-417.
  12. Black, D. (1983). Crime as social control. American sociological review, 34-45.
  13. Breuer, J., & Elson, M. (2017). Frustration-aggression theory (pp. 1-12). Wiley Blackwell.
  14. Burney, E. (2002). Talking tough, acting coy: what happened to the anti–social behaviour order?. The Howard journal of criminal justice, 41(5), 469-484.
  15. Burney, E. (2013). Making people behave: Anti-social behaviour, politics and policy. Willan.
  16. Crawford, A. (2009). Governing through anti-social behaviour: Regulatory challenges to criminal justice. The British Journal of Criminology, 49(6), 810-831. doi: 10.1093/bjc/azp041
  17. Campbell, S., & Markesinis, B. S. (2002). A review of anti-social behaviour orders. London: Home Office.
  18. Chermack, S. T., Berman, M., & Taylor, S. P. (1997). Effects of provocation on emotions and aggression in males. Aggressive Behavior: Official Journal of the International Society for Research on Aggression, 23(1), 1-10.
  19. Coffee Jr, J. C. (1991). Paradigms Lost: The Blurring of the Criminal and Civil Law Models--And What Can Be Done About It. Yale LJ, 101, 1875-1893.
  20. Collins, J. (2020). Securing Labour Standards Through Preventive Criminalisation: New Lessons from Civil Preventive Orders. King's Law Journal, 31(3), 373-401.
  21. Cornford, A. (2012). Criminalising anti-social behaviour. Criminal Law and Philosophy, 6, 1-19.
  22. Delmas-Marti, M.R. (2019). The great systems of criminal Policy, translated by Ali Hossein Najafi Abrandabadi, Tehran: Mizan, 4th edition. [In Persian]
  23. Donkin, S. (2014). Preventing Terrorism and Controlling Risk, First Edition, New York: Springer.
  24. Elham, G. & Burhani, M. (2018). An introduction to general criminal law: crime and criminal, first volume, Tehran: Mizan, fourth edition. [In Persian]
  25. Fazeli Nik, F., & Niazpour, A. H. (2023). Contractual Justice Toward Corporate Crimes in Pre Trial Stage in Legal System of Iran and United States. Journal of Legal Research, 22(55), 337-366. doi: 10.48300/jlr.2022.345268.2070 [In Persian]
  26. Ferzan, K. K. (2014). Preventive justice and the presumption of innocence. Criminal Law and Philosophy, 8(2), 505-525. doi: 10.1007/s11572-013-9275-0
  27. Fenwick, H. (2013). Preventive anti-terrorist strategies in the UK and ECHR: control orders, TPIMs and the role of technology. In Developments in counter-terrorist measures and uses of technology (pp. 23-35). Routledge.
  28. Flint, J., & Nixon, J. (2006). Governing neighbours: Anti-social behaviour orders and new forms of regulating conduct in the UK. Urban studies, 43(5-6), 939-955.
  29. Gholami, H. (2012). C."iminal law as the last and the least resort. Journal of Criminal Law Research, 1(2), 41-65. [In Persian]
  30. Harcourt, B. E. (2012). Punitive preventive justice: A critique. Forthcoming in Andrew Ashworth and Lucia Zedner, eds., PREVENTIVE JUSTICE, Oxford University Press, University of Chicago Institute for Law & Economics Olin Research Paper, (599)
  31. Hart, H. M. (1958). The Aims of the Criminal Law. Law and Contemporary Problems, 23(3), 401-441.
  32. Hoffman, S., & MacDonald, S. (2010). Should ASBOs be civilised. Criminal Law Review, 6, 457-473.
  33. Husak, D. (2004). The criminal law as last resort. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 24(2), 207-235.
  34. Husak, D. (2005). Criminal law theory. The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Law and Legal Theory, 107-121.
  35. Johnson, E.H.: The "what", "how", and "where" of prevention. In: Johnson, E.H. (Ed.): Handbook on crime and delinquency prevention. New York 1987,1-44.
  36. James, M., & Pearson, G. (2006). Football banning orders: analysing their use in court. The Journal of Criminal Law, 70(6), 509-530.
  37. Katz, E. D. (2019). Criminal Law in a Civil Guise. The University of Chicago Law Review, 86(5), 1241-1310.
  38. Khodabakhshi, A. (2013). The fundamental distinction between civil law and criminal law. Tehran: S. D. I. L., second edition. [In Persian]
  39. Koohi Esfahani, K., Nadjafi Abrandabadi, A. H., & Farajiha, M. (2021). Transfer of Crime Control Policy; Is It Voluntary or Coercive?. The Journal of Islamic Law Research, 22(2), 605-636. doi: 10.30497/law.2022.242161.3147 [In Persian]
  40. Lamb, H. R., & Weinberger, L. E. (2013). Some perspectives on criminalization. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online, 41(2), 287-293.
  41. Lacey, N. (2001). Social policy, civil society and the institutions of criminal justice. Australian Journal of Legal Philosophy, 26, 7-25.
  42. Lazerges, Ch. (2021). An introduction to criminal politics, translated by Ali Hossein Najafi Abrandabadi, Tehran: Mizan, 9th edition. [In Persian]
  43. Maxson, C. L., Hennigan, K. M., & Sloane, D. C. (2005). “It's getting crazy out there”: Can a civil gang injunction change a community?. Criminology & public policy, 4(3), 577-605.
  44. Matravers, M. (2013). On preventive justice. In Prevention and the Limits of the Criminal Law (pp. 235-251). Oxford University Press.
  45. Methven, E., & Carter, D. (2016). Serious crime prevention orders. Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 28(2), 227-238.
  46. Moss, D. A. (2004). When all else fails: Government as the ultimate risk manager. Harvard University Press.
  47. Mulák, J. (2021). Principle of the Speed of Proceedings and Right to an Adequate Length of the Criminal Proceedings: European Context and Czech Reflection. Charles University in Prague Faculty of Law Research Paper No. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3849244 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3849244
  48. Muthaphuli, P. (2012). Crime prevention and sentencing: a practical penological perspective (Doctoral dissertation, University of South Africa).
  49. Nadzir, M. S. M., Ooi, M. C. G., Alhasa, K. M., Bakar, M. A. A., Mohtar, A. A. A., Nor, M. F. F. M., ... & Nor, M. Z. M. (2020). The impact of movement control order (MCO) during pandemic COVID-19 on local air quality in an urban area of Klang valley, Malaysia. Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 20(6), 1237-1248.
  50. Niazpour, A. H. (2010). Agreementualization on criminal procedure, Doctoral dissertation, Shahid Beheshti University, Faculty of Law, Department of Criminal Law and Criminology. [In Persian]
  51. Niazpour, A. H. (2011). From criminal law to contractual criminal law, Criminal law doctorines, 6(1), 49-66. [In Persian]
  52. Nickel, J. W. (2013). Restraining Orders, Liberty, and Due Process. Prevention and the Limits of the Criminal Law, 156-77.
  53. Ogg, J. (2015). Preventive justice and the power of policy transfer. Berlin: Springer.
  54. Ramsay, P. (2008). The Theory of Vulnerable Autonomy and the Legitimacy of the Civil Preventative Order. LSE Legal Studies Working Paper No. 1/2008, Available at SSRN:  https://ssrn.com/abstract=1091782
  55. Ramsay, P. (2012). The insecurity state: vulnerable autonomy and the right to security in the criminal law. Oxford University Press, USA.
  56. Regoli, R. M., & Hewitt, J. D. (2008). Exploring criminal justice. Jones & Bartlett Learning.
  57. Rodgers, Z. (2023). Examining victims’ experiences of Community Protection Notices in managing anti-social behaviour. International Review of Victimology, 29(3), 487-506. doi: 10.1177/02697580221081860 [A]
  58. Rodgers, Z. (2023). Understanding the policing practices associated with civil preventive orders and notices in England and Wales to regulate the conduct of society’s perceived deviant others: A systematic review. Policing, 17, 1-23. [B]
  59. Roustaie, M., & Rahmanian, H. (2021). Privatization of Criminal Law in Consideration of Law on reducing the punishment of imprisonment. The Judiciarys Law Journal, 85(113), 161-184. doi: 10.22106/jlj.2021.137745.3724 [In Persian]
  60. Sabzevarinejad, H. (2023). Place of Proportionality principle between Punishment and offence in Criminal Law of Iran and England. The Quarterly Journal of Judicial Law Views, 22(77), 133-164. [In Persian]
  61. Sanders, A., Young, R., & Burton, M. (2010). Criminal justice. Oxford University Press, USA.
  62. Sears, C. (2010). Introduction: Sexuality, criminalization, and social control. Social Justice, 37(1 (119), 1-6.
  63. Shiri, A. (2018). Crime Policy-making in Control of Criminality. Iranian Journal of Public Policy, 4(3), 103-121. doi: 10.22059/ppolicy.2018.68429 [In Persian]
  64. Simester, A. P., & Von Hirsch, A. (2006). Regulating offensive conduct through two-step prohibitions. Incivilities: Regulating offensive behaviour, 173-94.
  65. Taheri, M., Ghaderynamin, M., & Salehifaresani, A. (2023). The principle of separation of powers and the theories contained in it. Political Sociology of Iran, 5(11), 2141-2155. doi: 10.30510/psi.2022.346589.3566
  66. Tahmasabi, J. (2017). Précis of the criminal procedure (basic and general concepts), Tehran: Mizan, 1st [In Persian]
  67. Thomas, T., & Thompson, D. (2014). New civil orders to contain sexually harmful behaviour in the community. British Journal of Community Justice, 12(3), 19-33.
  68. Tulich, T., Murray, S., & Skead, N. (2021). Antipodean perspectives on preventive justice: The high court and serious crime prevention orders. Griffith Law Review, 30(2), 211-239. doi: 10.1080/10383441.2021.1925411
  69. Van der Aa, S. (2012). Protection Orders in the European Member States: Where do we Stand and Where do we Go from here?. European journal on criminal policy and research, 18(2), 183-204.
  70. Van Dijk, J. (1990). Crime Prevention Policy: current state and prospects. Crime and criminal policy in Europe, Criminological research report, 43, 205-220.
  71. Waldron, J. (2003). Security and liberty: The image of balance. Journal of Political Philosophy, 11(2), 191-210.
  72. Yazdian Jafary, J. (2008). The Principle of Proportionality between Crime and Punishment. Journal of Comparative Law, 0(14), 139-156. [In Persian]
  73. Zedner, L. (2007). Preventive Justice or Pre-Punishment? The Case of Control Orders. Current Legal Problems, 60(1), 174-203.
  74. Zedner, L. (2010). Pre-crime and pre-punishment: a health warning: Lucia Zedner calls for restraint. Criminal Justice Matters, 81(1), 24-25
آمار
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 139
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 31


سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی. قدرت گرفته از سیناوب