نوع مقاله : علمی و پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشجوی دکتری حقوق کیفری و جرم شناسی، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مشهد و مدرس دانشگاه بین المللی امام رضا(ع)
2 کارشناسی ارشد حقوق کیفری و جرم شناسی، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد
3 . دانشیار گروه حقوق کیفری و جرم شناسی دانشگاه علوم قضایی و خدمات اداری، تهران
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
"The principle of equality in access to public services" and "observance of administrative justice" are fundamental pillars of legal systems. The emergence of the phenomenon of "illegal influence" as one of the structural damages in the administrative system is considered a serious threat to the health of the administrative system and the rule of law. This research aims to analyze the criminal aspects of the crime of influence peddling and the legislative mechanisms to combat it, and conducts a comparative study between the legal systems of Iran and France. The main question of the research is what positions the legislative approach of the two countries has taken towards this crime? The research findings show that although the legal systems of both countries have criminalized behaviors such as influence peddling, influence peddling, and accepting it, there are fundamental differences in the substantive components and the method of criminalization; In Iranian law, the aforementioned crimes are mainly defined with a "restrictive" approach, while in French law, they are criminalized with an "absolute" approach and with a wider scope. This research, using a descriptive-analytical method and based on library studies, has conducted a comparative analysis of this criminal phenomenon, while explaining the gaps and strengths of the laws of the parties. The findings from the studies conducted indicate that the restrictive criminalization approach can, in some respects, be a way out for gray administrative behaviors,in addition to identifying new criminal instances, will deal more decisively with this category of behaviors.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
)
ارسال نظر در مورد این مقاله