PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS, as the essential stage in preparing the criminal proceeding file are important to determine the judiciary fate of the accused and the adjudication of rights of injured and administrating the criminal justice. To cross-examine the accused is considered the vital part of the PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS, and with regard to the necessity of advocacy of the principle of innocence and maintaining human dignity during the periods of proceeding vindicating rights of these people prior to and during the interrogation compatible to regional and international documents of human rights at the stage of PRELIMINARY investigation are the basic considerations.Examples of vindicating rights in the mechanism of protocol of interrogations are numerous, which in the criminal proceeding systems of countries to be projected and arranged according to the principles of the fair proceeding and related documents. The right of understanding the charge with the mentioning of its reasons, the right of silence and announcing it, the right of having a lawyer and so forth, could be mentioned among these rights. In order to juxtapose with the principles of fair proceeding and guarantees of human rights during the interrogation, present deficiencies must be obviated even though in the criminal proceeding of Iranian law-maker has stipulated some of these rights in the constitution and criminal proceeding law. Iran’s judiciary branch has provided comprehensive Bill of criminal proceeding measures and has submitted it to the government to the extent that some of the short comings have been obviated.

he present article seeks to answer the following questions: What is the status of the prosecutor in the criminal proceedings and what authority does the prosecutor deserve? Does the prosecutor's authority in Iran's criminal justice system suit his position? In this research, at first, the prosecutor's position and authority are explained in the desirable model of the criminal investigation process. In light of recognizing the desirable model, one can study the rules of Iranian criminal law. The findings of the research indicate that the prosecutor is a party to the lawsuit and that his powers should be limited to prosecution and bringing suit in the judicial authorities. In the ongoing criminal proceedings in Iran, a dual position has been guaranteed for prosecutors: a position of the public prosecutor and, on the other hand, the impartial position of the judiciary, the investigating judge or the supervisor of the PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS and the provider of the necessary training for the interrogators. In the existing legal order, the judicial position is not compatible with the position of the public prosecutor, and it cannot be accepted that the public prosecutor, at the same time, conducts PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS or supervises the investigating authorities. The results of the research indicate that in order to guarantee the defendant's defense rights, guaranteeing the material and spiritual rights of the victim and guaranteeing the standard of the criminal investigation process, it is necessary to take away the authority to conduct criminal INVESTIGATIONS excluding Article 302, as well as the authority related to the supervision of PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS or the provision of education. In this regard, the interrogator is required to be excluded from the structure of the prosecutor's office and proceed with the consideration of the unconstrained structure of the jurisdiction.

After committing a crime, the defendants are the first to face a crime scene. Therefore, their actions at these early stages will lead to many uncertainties in the next stages, the same legislator has introduced various types of sanctions. To act in different situations. In the case of some vulnerable people in the community, there is a need for those who have the necessary expertise in this regard. Because today's behavior of an expert specialist, due to the vulnerability of some people, can cause many problems. Prevent crimes. Both the perpetrators and the accused have assignments, which is the fulfillment of justice in the direction of the proper task of the defendants in this regard. Meanwhile, some actions are forbidden. The Criminal Procedure Code was approved by 92 major changes in the areas of sanctions, types of sanctions, measures and prohibitions on certain acts. In this paper, we are going to make these changes, and we will explain the strengths and weaknesses of the law in this regard.

Forensic Victimology is a branch of applied victimology, a scientific examination of victimhood and victimization in order to discover the truth in the process of PRELIMINARY investigation and criminal proceedings. When filing a criminal case, assessing the integrity of the victim''s statements, the evidence and evidence presented in the administration of justice have a significant impact. In the course of the evolution of victimology, the scientific discovery of crimes and the rights of criminal INVESTIGATIONS, the scientific significance of the phenomenon of victimization was considered. The formation of a criminal offense and the victim''s personality record are one of the main achievements of victimization. Detecting a crime, conducting INVESTIGATIONS, identifying the accused and proving his delinquency in many cases relates to the victim. The victim will be the appropriate clerk to identify and prove the crime. In this way, it is possible to draw the criminal offense of the perpetrators. Forensic Victimology by identifying the causes of victimization and victim''s fault can provide appropriate models for crime prevention. On the other hand, determining the type, severity and actual rate of victimization and distinguishing real victimizations from false ones is also one of the most important issues in the process of PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS and trials Criminal should be taken into consideration.

In the criminal proceedings, the PRELIMINARY investigative phase, considering the features and features of this phase, is of particular importance in the subsequent proceedings, in particular the rights of the accused, and the legal influence of the lawyer in guaranteeing and protecting these rights. The presence of a lawyer in the PRELIMINARY investigation phase provides both legal and ethical requirements, respecting the rights of individuals, and equipping them with the opportunity to defend and to exercise their rights. The Criminal Procedure Code adopted in 2013 has effective innovations on the right of the accused to have a lawyer in the PRELIMINARY investigation stage, and the presence of a lawyer in the supervised phase, unlimited attendance, the right to study and access to the case, and the need to appoint a lawyer., From the point of view of guaranteed subject matter rights, and obtaining the latest defense of the lawyer, admonition of the lawyer to the interrogator, maintaining the dignity and dignity of the individual, and segregation from the prosecution to facilitate the intervention of the lawyer in the light of ethical requirements, including the most obvious signs of strengthening the intervention of the lawyer. is considered. In this article, about the right of the accused to have a lawyer during the PRELIMINARY investigation phase, with emphasis on the drafting of this law, its specific rules and provisions are analyzed and described.

For many years, all the attention was focus on the rights of the accused in the criminal procedure. It was justified by the defendant being defenseless before the prosecutor's office. In the meantime, the role of the victim in the advancement of the PRELIMINARY investigation process was underestimated and he was passive. With victim-oriented approach, some of the criminal justice systems targeted his role. In the Criminal Procedure Code of Iran, victim's rights have undergone major changes in the Code of Criminal Procedure, approved in 2013, in accordance with human rights standards. At the head of these developments are the right to security and the right to maintain identity. Our studies have shown that the approach of the Criminal Procedure Code of Iran, in comparison with the former laws, has taken into account a participatory and active role for the victim in the context of preparatory research. The prediction of the innovative rights in the law provides for the further participation of the victim in order to declare, disclose, prosecute and investigate the crime; including the explicit and transparent support of victim's security against potential threats and the need to maintain his identity.

One of the objectives of the trial procedures in the criminal law is observing the citizen’ s rights and freedom and providing the accused persons whit defending rights and to achieve a judgment, it looks necessary for the investigator to be independent from being chased by the prosecutor, however based on the article 92 of criminal law (2013), approved in 1392, the prosecutor is allowed to do the PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS; including gathering information against the accused, issuance of the accused also commenting about the accused whether he is the guilty or innocence, along with being the responsible for pursuing and performing public litigation against the accused. So the prosecutor’ s authority on doing PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS sometimes looks predominant while, based on the justly trial principles, like the equality of the opponent parties, the neutrality of the judge, disowning security and freedom, it necessitates the independency of the

The prosecutor's office according to the criteria of the" investigative procedure" In which PRELIMINARY research is secret and written and non-profit, Is responsible for gathering the evidence of the crime and completing the case and defending the interests of society. In addition, the prosecutor's office as a party to the public lawsuit, also has duties in relation to the observance of the fundamental rights and citizenship rights of the plaintiff and the accused and witnesses and  informed persons. The necessity of respecting the fundamental and citizenship rights of the accused requires determining the enforcement guarantee to prevent their violation. Something that has not been considered in the background of citizenship rights researchs. The main question is what guarantees are provided for the observance of the fundamental and citizenship rights of the accused, based on human rights standards in the constitutional and ordinary laws? This issue has been studied by descriptive theoretical and legal analysis in this article, and four types of sanctions have been identified for it. Sanctions provided in the Iranian judicial system for the protection and observance of the fundamental and citizenship rights of the accused by the judicial authorities and judicial officers are as follows: invalidity of decisions and actions that violate the fundamental and citizenship rights of the accused, the disciplinary actions supervising the restrictions and professional deprivations of the investigating authorities, Punishment for illegal actions and decisions that violate the defence and citizenship rights of the accused and civil liability for compensation to the accused, which are categorized and examined in separate headings in this article.

Given the abstract and authoritative nature of legal entities, the manner in which these persons commit crimes is different from that of natural persons. Legal entities commit crimes through their representatives, and therefore, it is necessary to establish regulations and rulings for prosecuting and investigating their crimes differently from investigating crimes of natural persons. In 2013, in parallel with the explicit recognition of criminal liability for legal entities, the legislator provided nine articles in the Criminal Procedure Code to investigate the crimes of such persons. Given that for many years in Iran, except in a few cases, criminal liability for legal entities had not been recognized, therefore, the issue of how to investigate the crimes of these persons was not considered a major challenge. However, by clarifying the recognition of this liability for legal entities, given the abstract nature of legal entities and also the natural person approach of the criminal procedure regulations, many challenges were created from a formal point of view in conducting PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS into the charges attributed to these persons. Challenges such as the manner of summoning and explaining the charges against a legal entity, voluntary dissolution of a legal entity during PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS, criminal security orders, and the use or non-use of some conciliatory institutions such as archiving the case or suspending prosecution of legal entities are among these. This research attempts to propose solutions to overcome them by using a descriptive and analytical method and by studying related sources, while proposing challenges.

The purpose of this article is to investigate the degree of observance of civil rights of defendants in the PRELIMINARY investigation stage by judicial officers. This research is applied in terms of purpose, and descriptive and survey in terms of method. The statistical population was all executive staff and NAJA queues in different sections in all provinces of the country. The number of samples was 539 and they were selected by random sampling method. Data analysis was performed using SPSS software. Defendants' citizenship rights in the PRELIMINARY investigation stage are divided into six components: "Basic principles of defending the accused", "Rights related to maintaining physical and mental security and protection measures", "Rights related to privacy and social prestige", and "Rights related to guarantee". "Financial rights", "Defendant's defense rights", "Right to judicial assistance" were divided and the items (examples identified from legal sources) were adjusted accordingly and the collected data were determined using inferential analysis. In all six components of the defendants' citizenship rights, there is a significant correlation between the degree of observance and the degree of importance, but according to the correlation coefficient, it can be said that there is no strong relationship between the degree of importance and observance; That is, the degree of importance and the degree of observance of citizenship rights are not the same from the point of view of the officers, and in all the identified cases, the degree of observance is less than the degree of importance. Defendants' citizenship rights were ranked according to the statistical community and from highest to lowest: 1. Rights related to guaranteeing financial rights 2. Rights related to protection of privacy and social status 3. Defense rights of the accused 4. Rights related to protection privacy and social status 5. Basic principles of defending the accused 6. The right to judicial assistance. Achieving the desired situation in respecting the citizenship rights of the accused by the police as one of the officers, requires reforms in the field of legislation, policy-making, training programs, changes in the NAJA rate system and design of monitoring systems in the headquarters and queue areas to continuously measure defendants citizenship rights.