Types of Medical Errors and the Operational Mechanisms of Forensic Medicine Institutions: A Comparative Study of Iraqi and Iranian Law

Abstract

This study examines the principal forms of medical error and the operational mechanisms of forensic medicine institutions under Iraqi and Iranian law. It proceeds from the problem of the fragmentation of the rules governing medical criminal liability, the lack of a clear dividing line between occupational or professional misconduct and medical error amounting to a criminal offence, the complexities involved in proving fault, harm, and causation, and the varying practical probative value of forensic medical reports in shaping judicial conviction. The significance of the study lies in the direct impact of these issues on the rights to life and bodily integrity, as well as in the need to ensure that physicians are not subjected to criminal liability merely because an adverse outcome has occurred, particularly in light of the expanding use of digital medical systems and electronic evidence. The study aims to classify the most significant forms of criminal medical error, particularly a physician’s absence from the workplace or presence while intoxicated, refusal to provide medical care, errors in clinical examination, diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up, and breaches of the duty to supervise members of the medical teamThe principal research question is: To what extent do Iraqi and Iranian legal rules ensure a legally sound criminal characterization of the various forms of medical error and provide a reliable forensic mechanism for proving them in the context of technological transformation? The study adopts a comparative descriptive and analytical methodology by examining criminal, procedural, and health-related legal provisions, together with the regulations governing forensic medicine, and by comparing the rules of criminalization, evidence, and technical expertise in the two countries. The study concludes that criminal liability may arise from an omission or failure to act whenever such conduct creates a risk to patients’ lives or health, even where no harmful result materializes, although the occurrence of harm and the existence of a causal link affect the legal characterization of the offence and the applicable penalty. This deficiency is more pronounced in Iraq, whereas the Iranian legal system demonstrates comparatively greater progress.