تحليل انتقادي درك قانون گذار از مرور زمان تعقيب

Critical Analysis of the Legislatorʹs Understanding of the Prescription of Prosecution

Prescription, as one of the causes for waiving a general criminal action, is usually divided into the three following types: (a) Prescription of a suit, (b) Prescription of prosecution, and (c) Prescription of enforcement of a judgment. Prescription was explicitly mentioned in the Iranian laws before the 1979 revolution and the existence of its various types could be deduced from the criminal penal code and other laws. After the Islamic Revolution, the concept of prescription was challenged by the religious principles and was finally included in Articles 173 and 174 of the Act on the Criminal Procedural Law of Public and Revolution Courts with regard to some crimes. In addition to the inclusion of the prescription of a suit, Article 173 of the Act has also referred to a prescription which has no similarity with the prescription of prosecution. It should also be added that such prescription is in conflict with the philosophy of acceptance of the prescription and it raises some objections if it is viewed from the perspective of criminology. Due to the non-conventional understanding of the legislator and some of judges of the prescription of prosecution, this paper attempts to evaluate and analyse this type of prescription with a view to the philosophy of acceptance of prescription, administration of justice, and criminology.