A long with the development of international law in both criminal and environmental fields, the concept of ecosystem/ ecocide/ geoside was also invented and used by thinkers. This concept, which focuses on widespread, long-term, and severe environmental damage, has been the subject of much debate and theorizing in recent decades and has been limitedly recognized in the ICC Articles of association as an example of war crimes. In addition, the Statute of the Court has the ability to identify some instances of ecosystem as tools for crimes against humanity or genocide. However, for reasons such as the different nature of environmental crimes and the lack of full coverage of ecosystem cases by the statute, it is necessary for this concept to be recognized as an independent crime and internationally criminalized. This research by using descriptive-analytical method seeks to justify the reason for this criminology and to state the reasons for its necessity and to examine the challenges facing it and to provide solutions in this field. Today, it can be argued that conflicting ecosystems is one of the fundamental global values and one of the universal international obligations, the CRIMINALIZATION of which has become necessary and inevitable at the international level.

Criminal law and CRIMINALIZATION is the arena of confrontation between government authority and the rights and freedoms of citizens; various theories, assuming the legitimacy of the government's authority, as an accepted institution for establishing, implementing and dealing with the implementation of the law, defining the crime, determining the punishment and applying it, as well as the implementation of the criminal justice system, have been examined by the thinkers of this field in explaining and justifying CRIMINALIZATION and punishment. Paying attention to the emergence of problems that this attitude creates on the issue of CRIMINALIZATION and sentencing, as well as examining philosophical and criminological reflections outside the circle of accepting the existence of the state, considering the basic rights of citizens, it is necessary that with a view based on aversion to authority, with an anarchist approach and based on the negation of the concept of the state. In this way, in addition to what we find out, from this point of view, CRIMINALIZATION will not be possible, but it is necessary to take help from the school of restorative justice, which seems to lead nowhere in the space of government authority, but in the space of escaping from authority, it can open the way and be effective.

The importance and status of criminal law is such that the fundamental values and moral realities of any society and country can be considered, so much so that if one wants to live anywhere in the world, one must learn the norms protected in the criminal law of that land. Take it and take a step in that direction. Criminal law around the world is based on principles and rules that protect human rights. The method of drafting and legislating criminal laws has its own sensitivities and methods. The legislator of criminal law should be aware of the importance and high status of his work and try his best to pass the criminal law without any objections and problems in writing and criminalizing the law, and its implementation should be clear and unambiguous for law enforcement officials.

One of the most significant principles of legislation in criminal law is law wording explicitly and unambiguously. In Iranian Legal System,  the legislator has considered rebellion CRIMINALIZATION for the first time in 2013 in articles 287 and 288 of the Islamic Penal Code and applying ambiguous, equivocal, and sometimes general statements provided the background for court vote manipulation and judicial criminal politics straying in addition to damaging general principles of penal code; the current study has been conducted utilizing descriptive-analytical research method and its main question is what ambiguities exist in the cases related to rebellion CRIMINALIZATION and how it is possible to remove them? Based on the obtained results and data, it is required to modify and revise the rebellion CRIMINALIZATION.

In an era of rapid information growth in cyberspace, the challenges of criminalizing and controlling the dissemination of misleading information have become prominent issues in ethics and criminal law. Opinions on criminalizing misleading information are divided into two groups: those supporting criminal intervention and those opposing it. This study examines the feasibility and justificatory frameworks for criminalizing misleading information in cyberspace. The main research question is how to justify the CRIMINALIZATION of misleading information dissemination from the perspective of criminal law philosophy. The article employs an inductive-deductive method, analyzing the criteria for justifying CRIMINALIZATION and applying them to the behavior of disseminating of misleading information to determine its feasibility and limits. Focusing on four key criteria of criminal law philosophy—Filtering, Balance of Reasons, Social Acceptance, and Harm Prevention—this research demonstrates how these criteria can provide a justified framework for criminally addressing the dangers of misleading information in cyberspace.

The prominent characteristic of the third millennium and the age of information and communication of technology (ICT) can be looked speed and diversity in advances and innovations. It is a matter that the cognition of the technological phenomena and activism to make them legal is consistently lagging some steps behind the evolutions. One of the most important examples of such phenomena is cryptocurrencies. After more than one decade after issuance and introduction of cryptocurrencies, they include more strategical vacuums in respect to the regulation and adjustment. Undoubtedly in the formation of such sphere the unfamiliarity of the features, applications and the emerging of this technology background of this technology means blockchain have had a prominent role. With applying an active and dynamic approach some states have tried to adopt policy in this field; an approach which is a sign of a dynamic activism in dealing with cryptocurrencies. In this regard one of the most important and controversial aspect of these interventions in the field of cryptocurrencies is the criminal intervention via CRIMINALIZATION around some dangers of this technology, a problem needs to be justified because of the limitation of freedom through it, the necessities of CRIMINALIZATION in the field of cryptocurrencies should be cognized. According to this, the following research with analytic-descriptive method examines the necessities of CRIMINALIZATION and forms of offences in the area of cryptocurrencies.

Terrorism is one of the most important challenges of criminal justice in the domestic and international arena. With the increase in terrorist crimes, some governments have taken new measures to protect citizens and maintain the authority of national sovereignty and ensure public order and security. Hence, extensive changes have taken place in the criminal justice system of different countries. Paying attention to the dangerous state (dangerousness) of the perpetrators and repressive responses has led criminals to become more secure. Since prevention in its specific sense and traditional CRIMINALIZATIONs (criminologies) are not effective lonely, relying on the concept of danger with preconceived (preemption, anticipation) notion implies a new paradigm in preventing terrorist delinquency in the form of new CRIMINALIZATIONs. Premeditated (anticipated) criminality focuses on terrorism-related behaviors and stops the perpetrator himself or herself on the verge of committing a terrorist crime. Instead of waiting for those who seek to commit a terrorist crime to succeed, legislatures are expanding the scope of criminal law to bring the struggle to their knees. Thus, by creating an active and prepared state in criminal law, they either move the realm of criminal law beyond the attempt of a crime or collusion (conspiracy), or by criminalizing crimes related to a terrorist crime or temporary intervention measures, intended for “ before the threat” , extend criminal law as far as possible with the aim of preemption (anticipation) in the fight against terrorism.

Bioethics is a novel branch in the field of applied normative ethics that analyze challenges and problems resulted from creation and development of new biotechnology. Nowadays necessity of prohibition in some scope of bioethics is attracted by some legalists and moralists. In this direction, one of the related issues about bioethics is use of penal sanctions protecting these prohibitions. There are different criteria for justifying the CRIMINALIZATION that give divers response to criminal reaction in bioethical subjects. Legal moralism has a maximum capacity for CRIMINALIZATION in these matters and the principle of harm and legal paternalism can't cover all of bioethical issues.