نوع مقاله : علمی و پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 استادیار گروه حقوق - دانشکده علوم انسانی- دانشگاه آیت الله العظمی بروجردی - بروجرد - ایران
2 استادیار گروه حقوق، دانشکده علوم انسانی، دانشگاه آیت الله العظمی بروجردی (ره)، بروجرد، ایران
3 استادیار گروه حقوق دانشگاه آیت الله العظمی بروجردی (ره)، بروجرد، ایران
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
Today, more than a decade after the birth of alternative punishments to imprisonment in the country's legislative system, the number of prisoners is still increasing, and in addition, the findings of some studies show the ineffectiveness of the current model of alternative punishments in reducing the criminal population of the country's prisons. Therefore, it seems that the time has come to identify the roots and causes of this failure. The present study has investigated this issue by adopting a descriptive-analytical method and has concluded that one of the reasons for the inefficiency of alternative punishments to imprisonment is legislation without considering necessity and utility, which in turn is rooted in the process of merging the "Alternatives to Imprisonment Bill" (which was prepared in the implementation of the Fourth Development Plan Law approved in 2004) in the Islamic Penal Code approved in 2013. In this hasty and imprecise process, the supervision period, which was envisaged in the bill as an independent punishment from the imprisonment and has a significant scope, was reduced to a lesser punishment than the probation due to non-expert changes and developments, and as a result, it lost its existential necessity and usefulness, but nevertheless it was approved and enforced, but after more than ten years Since the law came into force, the judges of the criminal courts have not used it. Therefore, due to the lack of necessity and usefulness, it seems that its elimination is necessary in order to reform the system of alternatives to imprisonment.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
)
ارسال نظر در مورد این مقاله