نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسنده
دانشیار، دانشکدة حقوق، دانشگاه تهران، پردیس فارابی، قم، ایران
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسنده [English]
One of the most significant changes in the Islamic Penal Code of 1392 is Article 526. Previous rules stipulated that in the contribution of direct and indirect perpetrators, the direct perpetrators are typically criminally liable unless the indirect perpetrator uses the direct and physical perpetrator as a mere ‘instrument’ to achieve his goal and when the “cause i.e., the indirect perpetrator, has a more eminent effect than the actual crime participant. Successively, Article 526 has made three major changes to this rule: elimination of principle of criminality principle of direct perpetrator; the possibility to find both direct and indirect perpetrators jointly criminally responsible, and proportionate liability and the apportionment of liability in accordance with the contribution to the criminal conduct. These three innovations have a profound impact not only on Diyat section but on the whole issue of civil liability, and in some cases, on Qisas. In This paper, these three innovations will be clarified. As well as some other points regarding the aforementioned Article. Consequently, the paper concludes that firstly, in cases in which the interference of an indirect perpetrator is certain, nonetheless the attribution of the act is uncertain and skeptic. There is no principle which states that the criminal act or the losses are to be attributed to the direct perpetrator only. Secondly, there are cases in Fiqh and law in which the loss and criminal act is attributed to both direct and indirect perpetrator. And thirdly proportionate liability is not impartially allocated to the contribution of direct and indirect perpetrator but also it needs to be taken into consideration in other matters as well, substances such as contribution of direct perpetrators, equal involvement of indirect perpetrators and loss of property.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
10.خمینی، سید روح‌الله (بی‌تا). تحریر الوسیلة، چ 2، قم، دارالعلم، ج 2.
11.خوانساری، سید احمد (1405). جامع المدارک، چ 2، قم، اسماعیلیان.
12.خویی، سید ابوالقاسم (1422). مبانیتکملة المنهاج (موسوعة الإمام الخویی)، قم، مؤسسة احیاء آثار الإمام الخویی، ج 41 و 42.
13.شافعی، محمد بن ادریس (1403). کتاب الام، چ 2، بیروتف دار الفکر، ج 6.
14.صادقی، محمدهادی (1393). «اجتماع سبب و مباشر در قانون مجازات اسلامی 1392»، مطالعات حقوقی شیراز، 2(6)، 97-123.
15.صادقی، محمدهادی (1394). جرایم علیه اشخاص، چ 21، تهران، میزان.
16. کلانتری، حمیدرضا (1397). نظریۀ مسئولیت در اکراه کیفری. پردیس فارابی دانشگاه تهران. رسالۀ دکتری. حقوق جزا و جرم‌شناسی.
17.نجفی، محمدحسن (1404). جواهر الکلام، چ 7، بیروت، دار احیاء التراث العربی.
18.نوربها، رضا (1379). زمینة حقوق جزای عمومی، چ 4، تهران، نشر دادآفرین و کتابخانة گنج دانش.
