Abstract
Undoubtedly, in many cases, the definition of a legal term or an entity provided by lawyers has significant difference with the definition provided by the institution of the legislature. Therefore, it can be distinguished between the concept of abbeting from a legal perspective, i.e., from the perspective of lawyers and the legal perspective as well as that of the legislature. There is no single definition of abetment from a legal standpoint, but there are various definitions of the term. However, the definitions have much in common. Iranian legislator has not defined “abetment” in the Islamic Penal Code (2003) but addressed some cases of behaviors that may constitute complicity in the crime. In addition, the Iranian legislator has extended the scope of the crimes that shall also apply abetment in IPC (2013). This is contrary to the principle of minimumality of criminal law based on the scope of the criminal law must be limited. In addition, the new law has serious flaws that have the current paper tried to remind objections and provide recommendations for amendments.
Highlights
To explain the concept of abetment, first the term “abet” must be defined on the one hand and on the other hand abetment formation conditions to be examined
Even in the IPC (2013) legislators stipulates that “in punishable offenses” means abetment in all the punishable crimes are prone to punishments, again it is not clear predicted only crime in the Islamic Penal Code or other laws are in place
The abetter is under the influence of acompliance emotions, and on the other hand the committed crime is not of such a degree of importance, to sentence the acompliance seems enough and the abetter punishment does not seem necessary, even if the legislator wants to punish them, it is suggested to select an appropriate punishment according to Paragraph “D” and sentence them to prison
Summary
To explain the concept of abetment, first the term “abet” must be defined on the one hand and on the other hand abetment formation conditions to be examined. Operations benchmarks are set based on objective and subjective criteria In this context, it is assumed that the crime preliminary arrangements are whenever two or more people make the decision to commit a criminal act and engage in appearant offensive behaviors without naturally criminal natures. Suppose that the person (A) does not take any action in order to commit robbery, but (B) attempts to steal from the bank In this case, there is a unity with the intention to steal, the person (A) can not be considered an abetter since is not involved in the robbery by any action (Rahmdel Mansor, 2010). The crime committed must be done completely for the realization of abetment It seems that abetment is ruled out if two people have the idea of criminalizing the crime and one attempt to prepare and make arrangements to carry out and the other operates, but crime is not fulfilled (Rezaei Gholam Hossein, 2006). Iranian legislator has not defined abetment, but only provided some cases that can be dealt with abetment
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
