Document Type : Original Article
Authors
1
PhD student of criminal law and criminology, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
2
Professor, of Criminal Law and Criminology, University of Judicial Sciences and Administrative Services, Tehran, Iran.
10.22081/phlq.2024.68287.1051
Abstract
Collateral Legal Consequences (CLC) of criminal convictions is deprivation of social rights that is imposed on the convict automatically and without inclusion in the sentence. These deprivations are not limited to the cases mentioned in Article 26 of the Islamic Penal Code adopted in 2013, but there are several cases in other laws and provisions that have imposed such deprivations on criminal convicts. Despite the great importance and extent of CLC, which sometimes have a greater impact on the life of the offender than the original punishment, there is very little research literature to justifying CLC. In this article, we will try to mention the various justifications for these deprivations and examine them. In this regard, we will first examine the justification of CLC as a punishment through retributivism and will see that CLC cannot be justified in this way. Because, on the one hand, violating a social rule does not mean leaving the social contract, and on the other hand, CLC in the present form is not in accordance with the principle of proportionality of crime and punishment. Then we will examine the utilitarian justifications of punishment, according to the purposes of deterrence, incapacitation and rehabilitation the offender in the case of CLC, and we will see that CLC cannot be justified in this way either. Finally, we will examine the justification of CLC through civil measures. In this section, by presenting three criteria, we will see that CLC can be justified by considering these three criteria as civil measures. As a result, other deprivations that have lack of justification and basis, need to be revised.
Keywords
)