Legal Challenges of Individualized Sentencing in Iran's Legal System
Keywords:
Individualized sentencing, criminal justice, penal policy, human rights, Iranian law, legal reformAbstract
The concept of individualized sentencing, as a core principle of modern criminal justice, aims to impose penalties that are proportionate and humane by considering each offender's psychological, social, and criminal background. Despite the existence of theoretical and Islamic jurisprudential foundations in Iran's legal system, the implementation of individualized sentencing faces significant structural, legal, and procedural challenges. This article explores the legal obstacles and opportunities for individualized sentencing in Iran, providing a multidimensional analysis rooted in theoretical, jurisprudential, and comparative frameworks. It begins by conceptualizing individualized sentencing and outlining its reformative, reintegrative, and justice-driven objectives. The study then examines issues such as the lack of established judicial precedent, inconsistency with general criminal law principles, absence of professional assessment systems, and prevailing sociocultural pressures. The Islamic perspective is also evaluated, highlighting the potential support for individualized sentencing through principles such as repentance, proportionality, and compassion. The comparative section of the paper reviews successful international models, particularly in addressing drug-related offenses. Furthermore, the article assesses the influence of human rights obligations and international criticism on Iran’s penal policies. In conclusion, it proposes legal reforms, structured offender assessment protocols, and professional training initiatives as strategic pathways to harmonize Iran's criminal justice system with the principles of individualized sentencing.
Downloads
References
Ashworth, A. (2015). Sentencing and criminal justice. Cambridge University Press.
Barikloo, M. (2020). The necessity of revising Iran’s legislative criminal policy regarding drug offenses. Journal of Public Policy, 7(3), 35-54.
Bassiouni, M. C. (2010). Substantive criminal law. Oxford University Press.
Cavadino, M., & Dignan, J. (2006). Penal systems: A comparative approach. SAGE Publications.
Duff, R. A. (2001). Punishment, communication, and community. Oxford University Press.
Erfani, H. (2020). Crimes against public order and security. Majd Publication.
Fa’ezi, M. H. (2013). An introduction to Islamic criminal jurisprudence. Institute of Jurisprudential Studies.
Freiberg, A. (2007). Sentencing reform and penal policy. Federation Press.
Ghasemzadeh, F. (2021). Rehabilitating offenders through individualized sentencing in the Iranian judiciary. Criminal Justice Quarterly, 18(2), 61-79.
Horder, J. (2022). Ashworth’s principles of criminal law. Oxford University Press.
Karami, M. (2022). Iranian criminal policy on drug-related crimes. Judiciary Research Institute.
Mahmoudi, G. (2017). Special criminal law: Drug offenses. SAMT Publishing.
Mirzayi, H. (2020). A jurisprudential and legal analysis of narcotic-related offenses. Hawzah and University Research Institute.
Robinson, P. H. (2008). Distributive principles of criminal law: Who should be punished, and how much? Oxford University Press.
Sadeghi, M. (2018). The role of criminal justice in promoting rehabilitation: A normative perspective. Law and Society Journal, 10(1), 23-41.
Salahi, R. (2021). The effectiveness of individualized sentencing in rehabilitating drug offenders. Modern Criminal Law Journal, 5(1), 67-82.
Tonry, M. (1996). Sentencing matters. Oxford University Press.
United Nations Human Rights, C. (1966). International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Zimring, F. E. (2003). The contradictions of American capital punishment. Oxford University Press.
Downloads
Published
Submitted
Revised
Accepted
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 1403 امیرحسین ایلچی قراآن, قاسم قاسمی (نویسنده)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
