Reanalyzing of the "criterion" of doubt destroying the responsibility and punishment in the thought of Imamie jurisprudents
Despite the controversy about the effect of doubt on the abandonment of punishment and the overwhelming acceptance of this issue in Articles 120 and 121 of the Islamic penal code, it has been argued that there is a controversial issue in the elimination of liability and punishment.The Islamic Penal...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | fas |
| Published: |
Allameh Tabataba'i University Press
2019-04-01
|
| Series: | Faṣlnāmah-i Pizhūhish-i Huqūq-i Kiyfarī |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://jclr.atu.ac.ir/article_9621_a8c70e4af69717222c352ebbd0395ff0.pdf |
| Summary: | Despite the controversy about the effect of doubt on the abandonment of punishment and the overwhelming acceptance of this issue in Articles 120 and 121 of the Islamic penal code, it has been argued that there is a controversial issue in the elimination of liability and punishment.The Islamic Penal Code also did not mention to this. A number of jurisprudents say: Only in a state can the perpetrator be doubted that at the time of the work he has the certainty or reasonable suspicion of having the license. On the other hand, some other jurisprudents consider absolute suspicion as a criterion of doubt, and some of the other delusions of the legitimacy of criminal action are also considered to be criterion of doubt. What attracts attention in this regard is that the owners of these three theories have all come to the common cause to prove their promise, and the secret of their differences is different perceptions of this argument. The authors of this paper believe that all this evidence is incapable of expressing a criterion of doubt, but it is not permissible to refer to the basic principles and rules. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2345-3575 2476-6224 |