Abstract
<p>Greek philosophers had accepted “rule of law” as desired governance system since it was the only way to provide all citizens’ public interest. In today’s societies where public policy is accountable for the interests of total society or at least its majority, it is too vital to recognize the concept of public interest. Like other concepts, it is also radically transformed in modern age, despite varied perceptions on this concept, modern concept of public interest is understood as recognizing individual rights, accepting utility principle which means to attract the highest interest for most people, respecting legal process and adapting with common values of society independent of individual interests.</p><p>Criminal procedure is shaped in three main areas including criminal process, entities and its governing laws affected by public interest concept. Regulations such as competencies and penal provisional remedy, entities like the public prosecutor’s office and NGOs and criminal process models like crime control are all justified by this concept. In present paper, it is attempted to adapt such claim to Iranian procedural rights by some illuminations.</p>One can claim that criminal procedure is one of the most obvious arenas of public interest where individual rights and freedoms clash. Since criminal procedure is set to provide public interest like many other laws, it also supports individual rights. Such rights include both procedural and substantial rights. On this basis, criminal procedure aims at achieving a balance point between public interest and individual interest. Here, we study the challenge of four rights supported by criminal procedure on public interest in Iranian laws.
Highlights
Criminal procedure is shaped in three main areas including criminal process, entities and its governing laws affected by public interest concept
Justice execution and social order and security are a service provided by crime prosecution, judgments and executing the verdicts by criminal justice system. It is as same as other public services which look for public interest
Criminal procedure law is formed as a method of criminal justice execution by public interest orientation
Summary
“Public interest” or “common good” is similar to the “law” concept. Many philosophers believe that providing public interest is a favored trait of law. Public interest means different things for different persons who change over time, stimulate behavior, give framework to our opinions, does not accept calibration, and involve nature and process (Denhardt & Denhardt, 2010: 6) On this basis, all components of governance and public entities should look for purveying public interest. Achieving such important result is technically possible in accusatory adjudication system To conduct such conflict, classic authors believed that criminal procedure should attempt to find a fair balance between individual and public interests. Contemporary authors believe that achieving such compromise is the radical problems of criminal procedure (Gessen, 2006: 337 – 338) It seems that mixed or French adjudication system is an effort to achieve such balance point between public interest and individual interest so that the principles of inquisitorial adjudication are gathered in preliminary investigation steps and accusatory adjudication principles in trial step. Upon brief recognition of public interest, we study its position in criminal procedure and its major challenge
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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.
