The basis and subjectivity of criminal policy In crossborder crimes

Abstract

Terrorism is a cross-border crime that requires international cooperation. In Iraqi legislation, the amended Penal Code No. 111 of 1969 recognizes the territorial and personal jurisdiction to prosecute crimes inside and outside Iraq that affect state security. It is proposed to amend Article 13 of the law to add terrorist crimes to the crimes of comprehensive jurisdiction, to enhance the fight against international terrorism. Many countries adopt comprehensive legislation to deal with cross-border crimes due to their complexity and impacts..

Comparative legislation includes several principles to combat cross-border organized crimes, including: criminalizing the preparatory and planning acts of the crime due to their potential danger to security and enhancing judicial cooperation between countries through international agreements to facilitate investigations and prosecutions. Crimes within the country are subject to its laws, and personal jurisdiction allows the prosecution of citizens who commit crimes abroad. There is a jurisprudential debate about criminalizing preparatory acts because they violate the principle of legality, and some believe that criminalizing criminal agreements lacks clarity. For example, the United States adopts strict laws and emphasizes international cooperation, while the European Union enhances judicial cooperation among its members. In Egypt, Article 48 of the Penal Code was repealed for being unconstitutional.

The most Important result of the research was that countries should update their legislation to keep pace with cross-border crimes, with a clear definition of criminal acts to enhance justice.