A Study into Theoretical Basics of Self-Ownership in Cosmetic Surgery in the Light of Iranian Criminal Law

The response to the complicated issue of the scope of self-ownership has shed light on the issues like unnecessary cosmetic surgery, gender reassignment surgery, and organ transplant in the convicts of execution. From the viewpoint of Islamic jurisprudential doctrines, there are a myriad of disagreements over the subject of whether men are the owners of their organs or not. The resulted approach is that Islamic viewpoint, contrary to western ideologies which are humanistic, does not completely accept self-ownership. From the viewpoint of Islamic jurisprudence, freedom of men and their dominance on their body is an axiom but cannot expose them to unreasonable harm. From the standpoint of western legal theory, the proponents of self-ownership believe men are the owners of their organs and thus maintain that this law faces some limitations in the framework of natural law. Moreover, they hold that criminalization of unreasonable harm to self is not to be justified. In contrast, those who believe in the moral patriarchal theory object to self-ownership and justify the criminalization of such conducts. The present article analyzes the afore-mentioned standpoints through a descriptive method and then compares unreasonable cosmetic surgery in the criminal law of Iran with those of England and

A criminological analysis of preventive ways of the crimes against humanity

The crimes against humanity , a distaster of the 20th century and present times, have lead to the terrible human tragedies in the human societies. To find some vital strategies to prevent such crimes is a must since the high number of the victims and the casualties of these crimes is considered as a great threat to the international peace and security. To prevent these highly complex nature crimes requires a comprehensive plan, which seems to be impossible. However, this fact should not stop us from attempting to reach the necessary strategies to prevent such crimes. These strategies are studied from two perspectives: penal and non-penal ones. In the non- penal approach, according to the common and classical criminological classification, social and situational issues will be analysed here in. so as to materialize the ways to prevent these crimes

Punishment of Third party Duressor in crimes punishable by Hadd

Transparency and comprehensiveness are obvious features of an efficient law. The legislators under Article 151 of the Islamic Penal Code of 2013, explicitly mentioned the punishment for Duressor in the crimes punishable by Ta'zir, while explaining the punishment for direct offenders in crimes. The concluding part of the above mentioned provision stipulates: "In crimes punishable with Hadd and retaliation (Qisas) matters shall be handled in accordance with the relevant provisions of law." Duress in felony under the subject matters in Articles 375-380 of the Act is described in more exhaustive detail than the previous law. However, punishment of Duressor for crimes of Hadd is only referred to in offenses of pederasty, gay, and lesbian, in the assumption of duress by one of the parties to the crime. The legislators just like in the previous legislations on punishment of Duressor in other offenses of Hadd and Bilateral offenses of Hadd, is silent. The vast majority of Islamic jurisprudents believe that punishment of Hadd is inapplicable to Duressor in the above hypothesis. In contrast to the common view, the writers believe that imposing sentences of Hadd on the Duressor is feasible in crimes that can be attributed to the Duressor