نوع مقاله : علمی و پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 گروه حقوق، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه لرستان، خرم آباد، ایران
2 گروه حقوق، دانشکده حقوق، دانشگاه تهران(دانشکدگان فارابی)، تهران، ایران
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
The European Court of Human Rights, as one of the judicial bodies overseeing the legal actions of member states, has over the years endeavored to guarantee the rights of European subjects against legislative actors through its jurisprudence. In this regard, by emphasizing certain characteristics of law, it has introduced the principle of legality into the qualitative dimension. According to this qualitative approach, only a law that conforms to the components of legal quality—namely, the necessity of clarity, foreseeability, and accessibility—can be considered a qualitative or high-quality law. Based on the Court’s jurisprudence, the absence of any of these conditions renders the relevant law invalid.The enactment of the controversial Article 220 of the Islamic Penal Code, although by omitting certain problematic hudud provisions mentioned in the draft bill it has reduced some legal, judicial, and international complications, has nonetheless led to the emergence of numerous qualitative deficiencies. The aforementioned article reflects the reality that the hudud specified in the law constitute only a portion of the hudud recognized by the legislator of this law. This recognized yet unspecified portion in the law is referred to as “unspecified hudud.” In this article, the authors, by considering the intended concept of legal quality as understood by the European Court of Human Rights and employing descriptive and analytical methods with a critical approach, have concluded that the problems arising from the understanding and application of the above-mentioned article—in connection with Article 167 of the Constitution—violate all three indicators of legal clarity, accessibility, and foreseeability.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
)
ارسال نظر در مورد این مقاله