Critical Study of the Credit Approach to Complicity

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Associate Prof., Department of Criminal and Criminology Law, Faculty of Law and Political Science, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran

2 Ph.D. Student in Criminal and Criminology Law, International Campus, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran

3 Assistant Prof. , Department of Criminal and Criminology Law, Faculty of Law and Political Science, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran

Abstract

Introduction
Complicity is one of the forms of cooperation in committing a crime, and examining its nature can clarify its distinction from other concepts such as aiding and abetting. Substantial research has been conducted on complicity. A scrutiny of these studies reveals that some writers have neglected the nature of complicity in Iranian law. For example, some scholars have proposed a different definition for complicity in taziri crimes to address group criminal activities and organized crimes, while others consider unity of intent essential for establishing complicity. Given the negative consequences of overlooking the nature of complicity, this article aims to explain its nature within Iran's legal system, resolve some ambiguities surrounding complicity, and clarify the boundary between complicity and aiding and abetting. Accordingly, the main question of the article is: What is the nature of complicity in Iranian law?
Methods
This article employs an analytical-critical method and reli es on library resources. The first part critiques creditable theories on complicity, the second part presents the author's perspective—namely, the real nature of complicity—and the third part examines the elements of complicity under the real approach.
Results
In creditable theories, the criterion for establishing complicity depends on the will of the legislator, and factors such as intention, conspiracy, and psychological characteristics influence its realization. However, in the real approach, the nature of complicity is not subject to the will of custom, the legislator, jurists, or even Sharia. Complicity is a material fact that arises when multiple factors intervene in the occurrence of an act in such a way that the act is attributable to all intervening factors. This definition applies to all crimes, and the nature of complicity does not depend on the type of offense committed.
Consequently, to achieve objectives such as combating organized crime, it is not permissible to adopt a different definition of complicity in taziri crimes. The legislator's discretion in this area does not imply that it is unregulated, nor does it justify actions contrary to jurisprudential and legal standards or the real nature of complicity.
In this approach, complicity pertains to the actus reus of the crime, and unlike aiding and abetting, it does not involve the constituent elements of the crime itself. Intention, conspiracy, and other psychological characteristics do not affect the realization of complicity. Rather, these characteristics may influence the nature of the perpetrators' liability. Contrary to creditable views that exclude the possibility of complicity in unintentional crimes, the real approach acknowledges complicity even in such cases.
Under the real approach, complicity requires four main elements, and the absence of any one precludes its realization:

Multiplicity of factors
Causal association of the factors
Occurrence of a single event
Attribution of the crime to all factors

Conclusions
Complicity, contrary to what creditable theories (such as the subjective approach and crime control theory) propose, is a real and external reality. Recognizing its material nature is essential for defining complicity and articulating its elements. Legal provisions related to complicity—such as Articles 125 and 535 of the Islamic Penal Code—must be analyzed and interpreted in light of this nature.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

Aliabadi, A. (2005). Judicial Standards of the General Boards of the Supreme Court, V. 1. Tehran, Publishing Company, First Edition. [In Persian]
Aminzadeh, M. (2018). The Rule and Regulation of the Simultaneous Accumulation of Causes, Two Quarterly Study of Islamic Jurisprudence and Fundamentals of Law, 13 (39), 113-127. [In Persian]
Blakeley, S. and Poortvliet, K. (2023). Pinkerton v. U. S. Case Brief, study.com/learn/lesson.
Dressler, J. (2008). Reforming Complicity Law: Trivial Assistance as a Lesser Offence?, Ohio State Journal Law, vol. 5, no.2, 427-448.
Fazel Hendi, M. (1995). Kashf al-Letham, V. 10, Qom, Al-Nashr al-Islami Institute. [In Arabic]
Fletcher, G.P. (2004). Fundamental concepts in Criminal Law, Translated by S.M. Seyedzadeh, Mashhad, University Razavi of Islamic Sciences Publications. [In Persian]
Forutan, M. (2017). The Perpetrator of the Crime in Iranian Criminal Law with a Comparative Study in Iranian and English Law, Tehran, Khorsandi publications, First Edition. [In Persian]
Habibzadeh, M, J. and Farhoudinia, H. (2001). Preliminaries in Iranian Criminal Law, Journal of the School of Literature and Human Sciences (Tabriz), 43, 95-120. [In Persian]
Haji Dehabadi, A. (2018). Attribution and Its Role in “Participation in Crime”, Journal of Legal Research, 53, 107-146. [In Persian]
Haji Dehabadi, A. (2016), Crimes against Persons (Murder), Tehran, Mizan Legal Foundation, First Edition. [In Persian]
Jabei Ameli, Z. (n.d). Masalek al-Afham, V. 2, Qom, Basirati Publications. [In Arabic]
Jain, N. (2011). “The Control Theory of Perpetration in International Criminal Law”, Chicago journal of international criminal law, 12(1), 159-200.
Manning, M. (2006). A Common Law Crime Analysis of Pinkerton v. United States: Sixty Years of Impermissible Judicially Created Criminal liability, Montana Law Review, 67(1), 89-119.
Marashi Shushtari, M.H. (1995). Lectures on Criminal Jurisprudence, PHD Course, Tarbiat Modares University. [In Persian]
Menatinejad, S. (2021).Objective and Subjective Criteria in Criminal Law, Tehran, Mizan Legal Foundation, Second Edition. [In Persian]
Mirmohamad Sadeghi, H. (2014). Crimes against persons, Tehran, Mizan Legal Foundation, 14th Edition. [In Persian]
Mostafa Mahmoud, M. (1961). Description of Penal Code, Qahere, Dar al-Kutob al-Arabi. [In Arabic]
Mousavi Khomeini, R. (n.d). Tahrir al-Vasile, V.2, Qom, Ismailian Press Institute. [In Arabic]
Mousavi Khoei, A. (2007).Mabani Takmelat al- Menhaj, V. 42, Qom, Institute for Revival of Imam Khoei Works. [In Arabic]
Mousavi Sabzevari, A. (1992). Mohazab al-Ahkam, V.28. [In Arabic]
Najafi, H. and Sadeghi, M. and Shahbazinia, M. (2018). Jointness in Torts; Comparative Study in US and Iranian Law Emphasizing the Concept of Attribution, Two Quarterly of Islamic Law, 20 (2), 353-398. [In Persian]
Ohlin, J.D. (2015). “Co-perpetration: German dogmatic or German invasion?” The law and practice of the International Criminal Court: a critical account of challenges and achievements, Carsten Stahn ed., Oxford University Press.
Qomashi, S. (2006).Examining Participation in Crime, Faculty of Literature and Human Sciences Quarterly, 1, 30-46. [In Persian]
Robinson, P H. (1984). Imputed Criminal Liability, The Yale Law Journal, vol. 93, no. 4, 609-676.
Saadat Mostafavi, M. and Aminzadeh, M. (2011). The Multiplicity of Factors Causing Damage in Iranian Law and Imami Jurisprudence, Tehran, Imam Sadiq University Publications, First Edition. [In Persian]
Sadeghi. M.H. (2012). The Accumulation Indirect Causes in the Islamic Penal Code 1392, Criminal Law Doctrines, 6, 33-56. [In Persian]
Sadeghi. M.H. (2014). The Accumulation the Direct and Indirect Causes in the Islamic Penal Code 1392, Journal of Legal Research of Shiraz University, 6 (2), 97-123. [In Persian]
Sadeghi, M.H. (2016). Compensation to Physical Injuries, Tehran, Mizan Legal Foundation, first edition. [In Persian]
Sadeghi. M.H. (2014). Crimes against Persons, Tehran, Mizan Legal Foundation, 20th edition. [In Persian]
Sadeghi, M.H. and Mirzaei, M. (2015). Factors Involved Damages and Explanation of their Distinguishing Criteria, Islamic Law, 13 (48), 37-71. [In Persian]
Samii, H. (1969). Criminal Law, Tehran, Press Company Publications. [In Persian]
Sharifi, M. (2021). An Inquiry on Changes of Beginning the Crime in the Iranian Penal System, Journal of Legal Research, 20 (46), 29-54. [In Persian]
Taheri Nasab, S.Y. (2009). Causation Relationship in the Criminal Law of Iran and England, Tehran, Dadgostar Publications, First Edition. [In Persian]
Sheikh al-Islami, A. (2016). The Basics of Legal Developments in the Realm of Those Involved in Committing Crimes, Journal of Criminal Law Research, 8 (1),135-162. [In Persian]
Yousefian Shuredeli B. and Rasouli Astani, L. (2017). Reconsidering the Definition of the Concept of “Co-Perpetration” for Tackling Coordinated Group Criminal, Journal of Criminal Law Research, 9 (1), 237-262. [In Persian]
 

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics