Foundations of Dejudicialization and Its Instances in Iranian Criminal Law

Abstract

Dejudicialization is one of the most significant issues that has occupied the minds of criminal law scholars, particularly in light of the increasing criminal population. Criminal prosecution is a dual-faceted process that, on one hand, relates to the rights and freedoms of individuals in society, and on the other hand, concerns public order and security. The adjudication and resolution of disputes arising from criminal offenses generally fall within the jurisdiction of judicial authorities. Dejudicialization refers to the removal of adjudication and dispute resolution operations from the formal criminal proceedings process. The implementation of such dejudicialization may vary across different legal systems. The emergence of new conditions and exigencies has compelled criminal law to observe new issues and regulations in order to align with contemporary perspectives in judicial procedures. Among these are the fundamental principles governing punishments, which require criminal law to adopt and follow new approaches consistent with these principles. The present article aims to examine the theoretical foundations of dejudicialization and its instances within Iranian criminal law, as well as to identify the positive functions of dejudicialization within the judiciary. Methodologically, the study is applied in purpose and relies on a documentary research method through the examination of laws and authoritative sources. The collected data have been analyzed using a descriptive-analytical approach. Based on the findings, it can be concluded that dejudicialization reduces the heavy burden placed on the judicial system and decreases the volume of incoming cases to the courts. Ultimately, it facilitates the realization of justice in a simpler, more economical, and consequently fairer manner.