Abstract

Explaining the role of intoxication in criminal liability requires knowing the impact of using intoxicants and finally the impact of intoxication on the perpetrator's will, as well as the way of thinking and insight governing the society towards the drunken persons. The drunkenness can lead to the loss or deterioration of will. The fundamental question that arises is what are the similarities and differences between the legal systems of Iran, Islamic jurisprudence and Scotland in this regard? In the present study through a descriptive-analytic method, the most important results are as follows: in each of the mentioned legal systems depriving the will resulting from drunkenness, except if there is a will prior to deprivation of the will to commit a crime (voluntary drunkenness), precludes the criminal liability. The difference is that voluntary drunkenness does not absolve the drunken criminal liability in Scottish criminal law at all because of the element of guilt. This approach is consistent with the well-known position of Islamic jurists regarding drunken murder. In Iranian criminal law, voluntary drunkenness is not recognized as precluding criminal liability if drunkenness is committed with the intent to commit a crime. Albeit, in Iran, drunkenness does not eliminate criminal responsibility for premeditated murder. In addition, identifying the person responsible for proving drunkenness is another difference in these legal systems. The study of Iran's and Scotland's criminal policy on drunkenness implies adopting a rigorous approach (especially in Scotland's criminal law) as to the criminal liability of those who are committing a crime in drunkenness.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

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 call