The principle of proportionality of criminal responsibility compared to the principle of punishment: a comparison between Iranian and Iraqi law

Abstract

The issue of proportionality in criminal responsibility has received great importance in criminal jurisprudence, and the idea of ​​proportionality has been adopted in most modern legal legislations, since criminal penalties are no longer only of a material nature, but have become of a personal nature, where the perpetrator of the crime and the factors and circumstances surrounding him and pushing him to commit the crime are taken into account. The purpose of these penalties is not limited to hurting the criminal, but rather extends to reforming and rehabilitating him, which requires that this penalty be proportionate to the personality of the perpetrator of the crime. The research has concluded that the principle of proportionality in criminal responsibility is of great importance in both Iranian and Iraqi law, and is evident in constitutional and legislative texts as well as in judicial rulings. Despite some similarities in the legal basis and applications, there are clear differences arising from cultural and legal differences between the two systems. This study emphasizes the need to strengthen this principle to ensure the achievement of criminal justice and the development of penal policies in order to achieve the required balance between punishment and crime. The application of the principle of proportionality varies across different crimes, reflecting the flexibility in achieving criminal justice. The concept of criminal risk differs from the concept of social risk, based on the criterion of the location of the risk. If the probable cause is social, we are dealing with social risk, while if the probable cause is the commission of a crime, we are dealing with criminal risk.