Legislative Countering of Violent Extremism Leading to Terrorism: Between Deterrence Requirements and Human Rights Guarantees (A Comparative Study)

Abstract

This study, titled "Legislative Countering of Violent Extremism Leading to Terrorism: Between Deterrence Requirements and Human Rights Guarantees (A Comparative Study)," aims to examine and compare a complex and pivotal legal and criminal-policy issue of the modern era. The study proceeds from the premise that violent extremism is not merely a transient criminal act; rather, it is a complex human, cultural, and social phenomenon—manifesting as a dangerous ideology or cultural mindset—resulting from the accumulation and interplay of various political, economic, social, religious, and educational factors. The exceptional danger of this phenomenon lies in its role as the intellectual foundation and essential precursor that fuels—and inevitably leads to—terrorist behavior. The study highlights the dilemma facing criminal and constitutional legislators: the challenge of balancing the requirements of general and special criminal deterrence—aimed at protecting societal security and state stability—against the obligation to uphold human rights guarantees and established constitutional principles (such as the principle of criminal legality, equality before the law, freedom of thought and religious belief, and protection against intellectual and political coercion). The study employs analytical, inductive, and comparative methodologies to review and deconstruct the legislative and constitutional frameworks regarding... ...both Iraq and Egypt. The study concluded that successfully addressing violent extremism through legislation does not necessarily require the inclusion of flexible definitions or the expansion of criminalization to cover mere abstract intellectual intent; rather, it relies on the precise criminal drafting of the material and incriminatory acts that pave the way for violence. This must be balanced with the safeguarding of public freedoms and ensuring that exceptional or deterrent legislation does not deviate to the point of infringing upon the constitutional guarantees afforded to all individuals without exception.