|
چکیده
|
The Expediency Council plays a central role in strategizing criminal policy, but the issue that has challenged scientific circles and criminal courts is the extent to which it approves the laws of the Islamic Consultative Assembly, which is the law of punishment. Islamic approved in 2013 is one of the most prominent of these laws. Looking at the principles governing the criminal approvals of this institution in its legal life, the concept of "expediency" emerges, a concept that is inherently temporary and fluid, and its realization is in the first place with the legislature, but in there are two opposing views on how the Assembly's criminal decisions interact with the legislature. A view that is more prevalent, citing the interpretive theory of the Guardian Council and the views of the unity of the procedure of the Supreme Court and administrative justice and guidance sources, believes that these resolutions are superior to the Islamic Penal Code adopted in 2013, while the reasons Impossible and following the developments of criminal justice in the nineties, including: Article 45 of the Anti-Narcotics Law of 2010, the explicit copy of the resolutions of the Assembly in the Criminal Procedure Code adopted in 2013 with the amendments of 2015 and the Law on Combating Commodity and Currency Smuggling Finally, the theory of the representative of the Attorney General in the unanimous vote on the multiplicity of crimes and the communication of general legislative policies has little legal validity and emphasis on it prevents the implementation of criminal policy governing the Islamic Penal Code adopted in 2013 in the Assembly. It turns.
|