Iran’s penal policy towards Hudud has been based on the principle of equality. According to this principle, all perpetrators of fixed penalties are punished equally; thus, the punishment for a person who repeatedly commits a fixed penalty and is a professional offender is the same as for an accidental offender. This viewpoint, despite the principle of individualization of punishments and without considering the various categories of offenders, applies the same approach to all perpetrators of fixed penalties.In Islamic penal law, the institution of pardon has been established to individualize the punishment of fixed penalties. This institution's purpose is to allow individuals who commit a fixed penalty and are deemed worthy of forgiveness to be pardoned and granted a second opportunity to reintegrate into society without the application of punishment.Unfortunately, the lengthy processes determined by the Iranian legislature have diminished the efficacy of this institution.Iran’s penal policy towards Hudud has been based on the principle of equality. According to this principle, all perpetrators of fixed penalties are punished equally; thus, the punishment for a person who repeatedly commits a fixed penalty and is a professional offender is the same as for an accidental offender. This viewpoint, despite the principle of individualization of punishments and without considering the various categories of offenders, applies the same approach to all perpetrators of fixed penalties. In Islamic penal law, the institution of pardon has been established to individualize the punishment of fixed penalties. This institution's purpose is to allow individuals who commit a fixed penalty and are deemed worthy of forgiveness to be pardoned and granted a second opportunity to reintegrate into society without the application of punishment. Unfortunately, the lengthy processes determined by the Iranian legislature have diminished the efficacy of this institution. This research, considering the necessity of individualizing punishments and believing in the dynamism of traditional jurisprudence, employs an analytical-descriptive method to present approaches in accordance with Islamic jurisprudence for applying leniency in fixed penalties. It advocates for the application of conditional pardons and granting judicial authorities the power to pardon perpetrators of fixed penalties. The thesis argues that the functions of leniency institutions, such as deferment, suspended sentences, alternatives to imprisonment, semi-liberty, and parole, do not encounter religious prohibitions in fixed penalties. Moreover, these functions yield positive outcomes, including preventing labeling and promoting decriminalization.

The significant point regarding the proof of non-sexual hudud (pandering, qadhf, wine drinking, theft, muharebeh, insulting the prophet Muhammad, magic, and irtidad) is whether two confessions are required or merely one confession is sufficient? Is there a general rule regarding the above hudud, or the rules vary from one hadd to another? This argument can be presented in two aspects: general evidence for all the hudud, and particular evidence for each one of the hudud. In general evidence, apart from Al-dar’ (the prevention rule), there is no valid reason that necessitates two confessions or suffices one confession. Al-dar’ can also be useful in case of doubt and if there is no evidence to remove doubts. The particular evidence is also not valid for the above cases, yet there are some traditions with respect to theft that if their reputation can make up for their lack of validity, then two confessions are required. Thus, it is possible to resort to priority analogy in those hudud that are severe than theft, but if the above reasoning is not accepted, it is not possible to act accordingly. Finally, most fuqahā's fatwas imply that there must be two confessions and one confession cannot be sufficient in removing the doubts and Al-dar’ rule necessitates two confessions in all the mentioned hudud.

Enforcement of penalties in legal schools has been recognized as the bond of law enforcement. Hadd is one of the penalties which are of paramount importance in criminal law of Islamic system. In fact, enforcement of Hudud is of various degrees in view of the nature of crime. Thus, the types and limits of the penalties are already determined by the legislator and the criminal courts proceed to determine the penalties and issue the verdict within the limit determined by the legislator. With regard to the principles of enforcement of penalties and Hudud, in Islamic jurisprudence rules, penalties are considered as a kind of correction of the criminal in which a particular attention has been paid to human dignity and the principles of freedom and justice and not merely to the revenge on the convict. Then, Islam as a nature rite in the enforcement of Islamic penalties has defended human rights and provided the ground for its perpetuation contrary to the claims of other legal systems. In the present study, Hudud enforcement and its relevance to human rights and international codes have been investigated from Islam's point of view.

Children Criminal Rights seeks tocreate the necessary limitation for the fight against juvenile delinquency in order to achieve the corrent methods to modify and treat the perpetrators under the age of 18. Accordingly, the reaction of the community to the crimes of childrenand adolescents should be proportional tothese goals, which are clearly notablein the formulation ofpunishments in Islamic Penal Code. According to this law, Hudud isexecutable for children andadolescents, but it does not meanneglect of the personality and ageof the offenders. The findings of this article with the purpose ofexamining the manner of issuance and enforcement of Hudud, indicatethat a review of the age ofcriminalresponsibility of children and adolescents based on existing jurisprudential sources is possible and recommended, but in the current legal situation, on the one hand, features of Hudud such as criminal policy of ignoring crime, the difficulty of proving, the need to pay attention to the rule of dar, the process of rule of the Jeb and the powers of governor in issuance and enforcement of Hudud and the light role of the plaintiff in the pursuit of these offenses; indicated that examples of the implementation of Hudud were unique and, on the other hand, the verdict on those matters in according to the strict letter of the law, depends on the proof of growth and understanding of the nature and dignity of the act by the offense committed. Therefore, there is no conflict between the punishment of persons under 18 years and the purposes of the new criminal law.

If Islamic punishments are looked at ostensibly, it may seem that Islamic criminal jurisprudence has adopted a rough and harsh approach towards the wrongdoers; however, by reinvestigating the teachings of Quran, narrations and Islamic jurisprudence one may infer the principle of tolerance in the Islamic criminal system which is a foundation and rule in the stages of discovering, investigating, proving and issuance of judgment. The present study, through an analytical-descriptive method, seeks to prove the existence of the principle of tolerance in the Islamic criminal jurisprudence and examine how it affects criminal jurisprudence. The advice to repentance and restraining from confession, not imposing Hudud (prescribed religious punishments) in cases of doubt and the necessity of multiple confessions and witnesses in proving a crime are clear manifestations of the principle of tolerance in Islamic punishments which indicate the approach of Islam in protecting human dignity on the one hand and encouraging to hide the crimes, decriminalization and depenalization on the other. This principle is not limited to Hudud and may be a foundation of Islamic criminal law and involve other religious punishments. Proving and analyzing the above said principle results in removing ambiguity and responding to the current challenges in the Islamic criminal law.

The functional role of religious principles respondent to Legal & Jural issues (specially the new complicated issues) is no secret to anyone. as these principles shall be considered as a well-founded support for lawyers. judges and jurists in presentation of judicial decrees. judgments and opinions, because solving many Jural/legal issues without relying on afore-mentioned rules shall be difficult and partially inaccessible. Thus in the Islamic religion and a wide range of today world's common regulations (including our country) the existence and effects of these Jural Principles, such as principle of non-damage "using your own property in such a manner is not to cause loss or hardship to another" and correctness are evident, whether in exact form or content. These principles including "prevent huded in case of doubt" and "Doctrine of Innocence" are discussed under chapter of doubts, thus in case that a SHARIA Judge hesitates to prove the crime while investigating the defendant's case or realizes that the accused person/s was/were doubtful of the existence of legal judgment or religious edict and dubious recognition of the subject of judgment while committing the crime, due to religious principles and equity rules, the judge can not attribute any crime to the accused person or enforce a punishment on him, and since Islamic Religion is the law of affection and indulgence. and in view of Islamic justice regulations and Judicial system, consequently the common regulations shall lead the judge to interpret law in the favor of the accused person and his innocence. The Prophet states that "if a judge makes a mistake in forgiving a defendant, this judgment is better than to mistake in and exerting punishment. Also there are strict orders about the interpretation of law in favor of accused person, and abiding by justice and equity and exercising prudence where people's life and reputation is concerned.

Concerning Hudud punishments, the dominant belief is that except for the Qazf, these punishments are all the right of God, and everything is determined in the Shari'a. The view is so dominant that the scientific discussion about the revealed possibilities of these punishments is left out according to the current rules and approach, the remission by the complainant for Hudud crimes does not affect the maximum punishment. Therefore, many convicts have been sentenced to death with remission by the complainant and are waiting for the execution of their sentence or amnesty. The main question arisen in this regard: Is it possible to raise the right of the people in Hudud and its effect on punishment or not in Hudud crimes where victim position affects the cause of hudud? This article is responsible for answering this question by using library resources and study of judicial procedure. 1. IntroductionIn Iran, two Conventionalism and Shari`atist discourses are competingly put together by the formation of the rule of law. One of the most important areas of contention has been the concept of right. In the post-revolutionary legislation, the vicissitudes of this contention can be clearly seen.The dominate belief in Hudud punishments is that these punishments are all Allah’s right, except the punishment of Qazf, so everything is determined in the Shari'a. The shadow of this view is so heavy that it does not allow scientific discussion and examination of the undisclosed potential of these punishments. Therefore; Although the subject of the verdict is clear in some parts, there are many cases that have not been well seriously questioned and general verdicts have been issued about them, so they do not have clear and distinct explanations. These challenges are now more apparent as some of the jurisprudential-criminal texts have been transferred to law and the courts are obliged to apply these laws.  In Hudud punishments, the legislator's attempt to link jurisprudence with common law is less than other sharia punishments, so the relationship of some concepts of common law with Hudud punishments is not clear. The subject of the right and its owner are among these concepts. By paying attention to some of the behaviors deserving Hadd, one can clearly see the presence of human rights alongside Allah’s right. However, this right does not interfere in the determination of punishments, and the victim of the crime is reduced to one declarant. Not only does his amnesty have no effect on punishment, but the rights of other victims of these crimes are not guaranteed. As a result, it has made the prosecution process more difficult. According to the current rules and approach, the plaintiff's pardon for crimes deserving of a Hadd, has no effect on determining the Hadd punishment. As a result of this approach, there are many convicts who have been sentenced to death despite the plaintiff's pardon and are awaiting the execution of their sentence or amnesty. In this regard, the main question is whether in crimes deserving Hadd, which the victim's position helps to create or increase Hadd, is it possible to raise the rights of the people within the hudud and its effect on punishment or not?  2. MethodologyThe present research has been done by descriptive and analytical method using library resources and judicial experiences and opinions. 3. Results and discussionAccording to the findings of the research, all Hududs are not merely Allah’s right. The title of hudud (meaning the punishments whose cause, type and amount are determined in the Shari'a) does not have the truth of the Shari'a and is in fact in the religionist conduct. In modern terms, this definition is made by the community of jurists and a behavior can be both Allah’s right and People’s right in some circumstances. This amalgamation has been seen in the article and its effect on determining and stabilizing punishments has been measured and have consequences.  4. Conclusioncontrary to the seemingly inflexible provisions of the Hudud, it is possible to determine the position of the victim in the criminal process and his pardon can be considered effective in reducing the punishment in some Hudud. In addition, by understanding the needs of the current society and citing some minority fatwas, a right was considered for people other than the guardians with the behaviors deserving the Hadd.  Selection of ReferencesTavakoli, F., Aghababaei, H. and Shahmalekpour, H. (2015), “Religious Principles and Principles of Criminalization of Insulting Sanctities and Challenges”, Journal of Criminal Law Research, No. 2, pp. 49-74. [In Persian]Hajidehabadi, A. (2018), Rules of Criminal Jurisprudence, Fourth Edition, Qom: Publication of the Research Institute and the University.  [In Persian]Khoei, A. (2011), Criminal islamic jurisprudence, by Alireza Saeed, first edition, Tehran: Nashr-e Khorsandi.  [In Persian]Reza, M., Qolipour, M. and Ali Burji, Y. (2005), “Criteria for distinguishing between Allah’s right and People’s right and its important examples in the jurisprudence of Islamic religions”, Tolo Noor Magazine, No. 15, pp. 1-15. [In Persian]Feyz, A. (1994), Conjunction and Adaption in Islamic Public Criminal Law, First Edition, Tehran: Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance. [In Persian]Mohaghegh Damad, M. and Mousavifar, S.M. (2014), “The crime of apostasy in the traditions of the teachings of criminal law”, Razavi University of Islamic Sciences, No. 8, pp. 1-22. [In Persian]Mahmoudi, M. and Babaei, M.A. (2020), “Fundamentals of criminalization of disregard of religious hijab in Iran”, Journal of Criminal Law, Eleventh Year, No. 21, pp. 274-256. [In Persian]Mousavi Khomeini, R. (2011), Tahrir al-Waseela, Seyyed Abbas Hosseini Nik, Second Edition, Tehran: Majd Scientific and Cultural Association. [In Persian]Meybodi, H. and Gholami, A. (2021), “A Study of the Criteria for Determining the Severity of Discretionary Thefts Based on the Pattern of Hadd Theft”, Journal of Criminal Law, Year 11, Number 1, pp. 25-50. [In Persian]Najafi, M.H. (2014), Jawahar al-Kalam Hudud and Punishment, translated and explained by Dr. Akbar Nayebzadeh, Volume One, First Edition, Tehran: Khorsandi Publications. [In Persian]

Hadd is a punishment which cause, type, quantity and quality of its execution have been prescribed in the holy religion. Nevertheless, the Imamia jurists have different opinions about its causes, examples, type and implications. The Islamic penal code of 2013, not accepting the standard fatwa, has, mostly, adopted two attitudes of extensive criminalization and restrictive penalization in the area of hudud. Therefore, the extension of hudud domain has not been accompanied with the extension of penalties. Failing to be a regulated attitude, failure to determine, exactly, the limits of certain haddi crimes (crimes with fixed punishments), defective extension of hudud implications to religious taazirat which have been mentioned in hadiths, failure to declare the standard fatwa in determining the hudud, violation of the principle of nullum crimen, nulla poena sine praevia lege poenali, contradiction of this attitude with the decriminalization policy of the judiciary, penal inflation and the criminalization of hudud being affected by western human rights concepts are among the critiques as to this attitude. This paper concludes that the legislative criminal policy in the field of haddi crimes should adopt the principle of changeability of penalties, based on their inherent finalism and subsequently, in case of doubt as to whether a punishment is hadd or taazir, adopt the principle that the examples are taazirat.

Repentance (Tobeh) includes returning with Penitence toward God and avoiding sinning. The penitent should make a resolution not to do sins again. And also the sinner should ask for God's forgiveness and try to compensate for his past. Regarding to Quran and Sunna, repentance has a special and important place. It is an opportunity given to the guilty to repent from his wrongs and to try to right. In addition to the other worldly effects, repentance has mundane effects, too. Since scholars differ about the amount of its effect in mundane punishments, it is necessary to consider its effects in punishments. There are several opinions about the effect of repentance in penalties. Zahariah believe that repentance does not have a role in the lapse of mundane penalties. Because accepting the lapse of punishments by repentance leads up to God's hudud come to a standstill. They believe repentance causing to lapse of unworldly penalties. The religions of Hanafieh, Malekieh and Shafehieh believe that punishment merely renders null the crime of combatant (Mohareb) and doesn't have any effects in other punishments, on condition that the combatant repents before government forces take action because only in proportion of the crime of fighting (together) (Moharebeh) there is a clear text (Nass-e-Sarih). Hanableh, Emameih and Shafehieh in one of the saying rely on Ahadis and in comparison (Qias) with other penalties, believe repentance generally clears Hudud. It seems that this opinion is more correct.

The principle of Dar’ (درا) as a assurance to protect defendants (the accused) from the imposition of punishment in the circumstances of doubt in their guilts. For the first time in the Islamic penal code (1392) in the formation of the canon and comprehensive has been noted. It is possible to be stablished the doubt of Dar’ in the process of the judicial proceeding by the magistrate whether he privately has doubt about the defendant’ s guilt or a the defendant’ s claim creates doubt. The Islamic penal code of Iran has not a parallel about the sufficiency of such claims and minds approach for the abolition of the punishment. Sometimes the Islamic penal code accepts the merely claim and sometimes it stipulates the possibility of the rightness without presenting criterion for it. In this paper with analytic-descriptive method, the sources of Shi'a-Imamiyyah jurisprudence have been investigated. The consequence of this research shows that the inclusion of this maxim requires to assume the possibility of the doubt related to the accused person. And according to the objective standard based on usual (customary) persons’ judgment such possibility is logical. A strong possibility is not necessary. Therefore, the apparent contradictions of the regulations which are originated from some negligence in the process of the legislation should be interpreted with considering the precedent and specially the Islamic jurisprudential bases in the aforementioned frame work.