نوع مقاله : علمی - پژوهشی
عنوان مقاله English
نویسندگان English
This research examines the feasibility of classifying alcohol by specific types concerning the establishment of criminal liability and its effects within the Iranian legal system, drawing upon both jurisprudential (fiqhi) foundations and common law approaches. The study details the historical stages of prohibiting and criminalizing khamr (intoxicants) through interpretations of Qur’anic verses and prophetic narrations, clarifying the distinction between alcohol as a chemical compound and khamr as an intoxicating beverage. Furthermore, it analyzes the “procedural (tariqi)” and “substantive (mawdhu’i)” approaches to intoxicant consumption, highlighting their distinctions. By employing the paradigm of sadd al-dhara’i (blocking the lawful means to unlawful ends) and examining this jurisprudential rule’s role in preventing consumption even under controlled conditions, the research evaluates the issue from a legal perspective. Subsequently, through a comparative analysis of Iranian and common law, points of convergence and divergence regarding the acceptance of intoxication-based defenses and the determination of criminal responsibility are analyzed. This research, employing a descriptive-analytical method, assesses the industrial, pharmaceutical, and hygienic applications of alcohol, alongside the social, ethical, and cultural consequences of its consumption, including its effects on mental capacity. The comparative analysis concludes that while neither the Iranian legal system nor common law considers voluntary intoxication a complete negation of criminal responsibility, their underlying rationales differ fundamentally. Iran adopts a preventive jurisprudential approach, whereas common law emphasizes individual liberty and the proof of mens rea at the moment of the offense. Consequently, Iran, relying on rules like sadd al-dhara’i, criminalizes even the non-intoxicating use of alcohol. In contrast, common law intervenes only upon proof of an actual legal violation caused by intoxication. The core distinction lies in their penal philosophy: Iran views punishment through the lens of retributive justice and moral preservation, while common law regards it primarily as a response to breaching the social contract and often adopts a more medicalized view of addiction.
کلیدواژهها English
