Basics and the Realm of the Teachings of New Penology on the Juvenile Delinquency; with an Adaptive Approach to the Criminal Justice Systems of Iran and the United States

Document Type : Original Article


1 Ph.D. Student of Criminal Law, Islamic Azad University, Qom, Iran.

2 Assistant Professor and Faculty Member of Criminal Law and Criminology, Mofid University, Qom, Iran


The new penology teachings classify offenders to punish based on criteria such as crime risk and community security. The purpose of applying such teachings is management of the cost-effectiveness in enforcing legal penalties that impose a dual policy of strict and alternative punishment. The present study conducted on Adolescent Juvenile Delinquency, based on the legal and judicial data of Iran and The United States of America. The obtained results indicate that the criminal justice system of Iran has been functionalize by using the cost-benefit management model as an innovative measure of the new penology teachings in order to eliminate punitive and delinquent labeling of juvenile offenders. However, the US criminal system seems to be leading in strict monitoring of the behavior of juvenile offenders after committing crimes and simultaneously enforcing judicial measures. Our studies have shown that juvenile delinquency attributed to the threatened and colored people by virtue of the rule of retributivism and labeling, as well as the privatization of criminal justice in US has resulted in the use of de-deductible privileges from new penology has been largely deprive of justice. Our final study showed that the purpose of the Iranian criminal justice system in applying the teachings of new penology is classifying the perpetrators with a view to avoiding the maximum financial and social costs of imprisonment, as well as the reform and socialization of adolescents. The transformation, along with inherent functionalism, faces challenging aspects such as Penal populism and security-oriented in the interpretation of risk criteria.


فهرست منابع

الف. منابع فارسی
حسینی، سید محمد، زهرا ساعدی و آزاده صادقی. «نگاهی به تحولات مفهومی و کارکردی در کیفرشناسی نوین». مجله حقوقی دادگستری 79 (1391): 178-155.
زراعت، عباس. آیین دادرسی کیفری. جلد سوم. ویرایش نخست. تهران: انتشارات میزان، 1394.
زکوی، مهدی. «بررسی ترتیب رسیدگی در دادگاه اطفال و نوجوانان». فصلنامه مطالعات حقوق 1 (1395): 18-1.
ساویگناک، جولی. «ابزارهایی برای شناسایی و ارزیابی خطر بزهکاری در میان جوانان». ترجمه‌ مرضیه دیرباز. فصلنامه مطالعات پیشگیری از جرم 22 (1391): 179-159.
سفیدی، سپیده، مهدی جوهری و سعید دهقان. «تساوی سن بلوغ کیفری میان دختر و پسر و چالش‌های مسئولیت کیفری اطفال با نگرشی بر قانون مجازات اسلامی 1392 و اسناد بین‌المللی». فصلنامه علوم اجتماعی 11 (1396): 29-19.
غلامی، حسین. «الگوها یا گونه‌های عدالت کیفری اطفال». دوفصلنامه آموزه‌های حقوق کیفری 6 (1392): 107-89.
ناظرزاده کرمانی، فرناز و زینب امامی غفاری. «بررسی رویه و نگرش قضات دادگاه‌های اطفال تهران به جایگزین‌های مجازات حبس». فصلنامه دیدگاه‌های حقوق قضایی 65 (1393): 180-157.
هاشمی، سید حسین. «بررسی فقهی ـ حقوقی رویکرد قانون مجازات اسلامی جدید به سن رشد و مسئولیت کیفری». دوفصلنامه حقوق تطبیقی مفید 103 (1394): 74-51.
ب. منابع خارجی
Altschuler, David M. “Issues and Challenges in the Community Supervision of Juvenile Offenders.” Southern Illinois University Law Journal 23 (1999): 1-15.
Cohen, Stanley. Visions of Social Control. First Ed. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2006.
Feeley, Malcolm and Jonathan Simon. “Actuarial Justice: The Emerging New Criminal Law.” The Future of Criminology, Sage 11 (1994): 142-171.
Feld, Barry. “The Social Context of Juvenile Justice Administration: Racial Disparities in an Urban Juvenile Court.” Minorities in Juvenile Justice Sage 69 (1995): 66-97.
Garland, David. “Penal Modernism and Postmodernism.” In Punishment and Social Control, edited by T.G Blomberg and S. Cohen (Eds), 45-74. New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1(45-74), 2003.
Gilbert, Michael J. “Making Privatization Decisions without Getting Burned: A Guide for Understanding the Risks.” In Privatization and the Provision of Correctional Services, edited by G.L. Mays and T. Gray (Eds), 61-74. Washington DC: Anderson Publishing, 2002.
Gillespie, L.K. and M.D. Norman. “Does Certification Mean Prison: Some Preliminary Findings from Utah?.” Juvenile and Family Court Journal 35 (2013): 23-35.
Kempf-Leonard, Kimberly and Henry Sontheimer. “The Role of Race in Juvenile Justice in Pennsylvania.” In Minorities in Juvenile Justice, edited by K. Kempf-Leonard, C. Pope and W. Feyerherm (eds), 148-169. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2010.
Lerner, Soul. Good News about Juvenile Justice: The Movement away from Large Institutions and toward community-Based Services. First Ed. Bolinas, CA: Ittleson Family Foundation, 2009.
Lipsey, M.Whte and D.Braun Wilson. “Effective Interventions with Serious Juvenile Offenders.” Sage 32 (2014): 313-345.
Presidents Commission on Law Enforcement & Administration of Justice. Task force: Juvenile Delinquency and Youth Crime. First Ed. Washington DC: US Printing Service, 2009.
Slingeneyer, Thibaut. “The New Penology: A Grid for Analyzing the Transformations of Penal Discourses.” Techniques and Objectives 5 (2007): 2-23.
Texas Youth Commission. Juvenile Sentencing in the United States. Austin, TX: Texas Youth Commission, 2007.
Wilson, John J. and James C. Howell. A Comprehensive Strategy for Serious, Violent,and Chronic Juvenile Offenders. First Ed. Washington DC: US Department of Justice, 1993.