Document Type : Research Paper
Authors
1
Associate Professor, Department of Law, Faculty of Humanities, Bu-Ali Sina University, Hamedan, Iran
2
Master's Graduate in Criminal Law and Criminology, Department of Criminal Law and Criminology, Faculty of Law, University of Judicial Sciences and Administrative Services of Justice, Tehran, Iran
3
PhD Student in Jurisprudence and Fundamentals of Islamic Law, Department of Jurisprudence and Fundamentals of Islamic Law, Faculty of Theology, Islamic Studies and Guidance, Imam Sadegh University (peace be upon him), Tehran, Iran. Level Four Scholar of Jurisprudence and Principles of Qom, Qom, Iran
Abstract
The evolution of administrative corruption methods, particularly in the form of non-financial bribery, has presented legal systems with a novel challenge, necessitating a reevaluation of the scope and boundaries of criminalization. This article, employing a descriptive, analytical, and comparative approach, examines the necessity of criminalizing non-financial bribery in Iran's legal system in light of the standards outlined in the Palermo and Merida Conventions and with reference to the coherent experience of German criminal law. Analysis of the above conventions and German criminal practice indicates that explicitly criminalizing unlawful non-monetary advantages, along with guarantees of prosecutorial certainty and accelerated adjudication, and the imposition of proportionate penalties, constitutes a core component for reinforcing institutional justice and enhancing accountability. In Iran, however, not only does non-pecuniary bribery remain uncriminalized, but ambiguity surrounding the scope of illicit non-monetary benefits, fragmentation in identifying the material and mental elements of the offense, and weaknesses in the mechanisms for detecting and reporting this form of corruption have all undermined the effectiveness of the criminal justice system. The findings demonstrate that, in tandem with precise and comprehensive criminalization, the deployment of complementary institutional safeguards and intelligent, comparative benchmarking monitored through context-specific indicators is essential to achieving effective deterrence and protecting the integrity of public administration. Such criminal interventions, when situated within a coherent penal policy and aligned with administrative developments, will possess the requisite efficacy and legitimacy.
Keywords
Main Subjects