This is not a complete sentence, so it cannot be translated accurately. Please provide a complete sentence or text to be translated.
Hossein Raeisi

Today, through the implementation of a criminal justice system based on the principle of rule of law and the utilization of fair laws alongside the use of fair enforcement mechanisms, independent judicial institutions primarily aim to control the relationship between the government and the people. In these legal systems, the use of criminal justice standards is attempted to prevent the misuse of power by the government and the police. However, this issue sometimes creates a conflict between the establishment of justice on one hand and ensuring security and maintaining the well-being of society without any harm on the other hand. What is important is the level of harm that is caused to public freedoms as a result of establishing judicial security. The balance between respect for public freedoms and the preservation of human dignity for all citizens on one hand, and the establishment of security, well-being, and order in society on the other hand, demonstrates the value and credibility of the criminal justice system in society.

What is understood from the proportionality between criminal response or punishment in the structure of criminal law in society and crime or anti-social behavior, shows the fair and just level and is based on preserving the human dignity of criminal responses in cases of violating laws or being in a position of accusation or criminal position.

The question here is to what extent is the proportionality between crime and punishment observed in the structure of criminal law in Iran regarding drug offenses, and whether this proportionality is based on fair standards or not? It may be argued that this proportionality is not observed in all circumstances. Although this criticism is relevant and worthy of attention, due to the fact that the focus of this short essay is only on some drug offenses that carry the death penalty, we are excused from addressing all legal aspects of this issue.

Criminal justice systems, based on research findings, have from the very beginning of the fight against crimes and the establishment of criminal reactions to violations of criminal laws, clarified their duty with organized crimes such as drug trafficking (comprehensive fight against the causes of crime instead of the victims). Based on this, although drug crimes are considered global crimes and the United Nations has activities to control it (UNODC’s Office for Crime Prevention and Drug Control), a unified definition of all drugs has not been presented and accepted among countries. On one hand, drug use or addiction is considered a crime in fewer countries, while in Iran, drug use and consumption are recognized as crimes, and on the other hand, the types of recognized drugs are not the same in all countries. The United Nations has tried to standardize this, but Iran does not align its criminal policy with global policies in this regard. As a result, while in the Netherlands and some states in the United States, some drugs such as grass have

The findings of criminology have clearly shown that the criminal sanctions of governments have no positive impact on reducing and controlling this type of crime. Therefore, regardless of whether you agree or disagree with the principle of capital punishment for all crimes, based on the following reasons and briefly, the existing behaviors and reactions to execution in drug crimes can be seriously questioned.

First of all:

Execution in drug crimes does not reduce crime. Because these crimes are considered economic crimes and on the one hand, those who engage in drug trafficking and therefore have the possibility of being arrested and convicted, are mainly drug workers rather than those who have a major role and benefit from these crimes.

Secondly:

By executing a smuggler, even if it is a real smuggler, organized crimes are not destroyed, but the destruction or prevention of such crimes depends on the elimination of all the causes that create them and the fight against the chain of creating an environment for production, distribution, consumption, and the main causes of inclination towards them. The failure of governments to eliminate the causes of people’s inclination to be involved in this chain usually ends with temporary suppression or elimination of those involved in this chain.

Thirdly:

The lack of opportunity for cultural, economic, and social growth, and being subjected to government and religious restrictions such as not having access to basic rights for a healthy economic, social, and cultural environment – for example, being able to watch a desired movie or attend a concert of a favorite singer – and neglecting personal, economic, and social roots, which are mostly beyond individual control, lead to a tendency towards consumption, buying, and selling of drugs. Execution in these crimes will not prevent the inclination towards these substances. As a result, executing smugglers will not disrupt the drug consumption environment in any way.

Fourthly:

Execution in drug crimes only contributes to the intensification of the activity space to some extent, which is not beneficial to society, but rather benefits powerful groups and behind-the-scenes drug traffickers. As long as the consumption environment remains and the economy and culture of society are affected, the real smuggler will use more difficult methods to deliver drugs to the consumer, and will also demand more money for it. Harsh policies such as execution lead to the empowerment of smugglers and demand for more money, and their profiteering does not end with the lives of people.

Fifthly:

The policy of execution has led to the approach of producing low-risk industrial materials (on-site production) and in terms of consumption, it has only changed the taste and led to the consumption of more hazardous industrial materials.

These reasons demonstrate the futility of harsh punishments. Now we can ask the question, what punishment is appropriate instead of the death penalty?

It is obvious that society expects the government to establish security and preserve the health of its citizens; however, it is observed that the death penalty is not an appropriate response to reducing the consumption of drugs in society. As a result, the health and safety of citizens have not significantly improved despite the existence of the death penalty for such crimes. This is where the existing solutions are being questioned and the need to search for various solutions regarding the appropriate response of society to these types of crimes is felt.

The value of a Muslim is that the death penalty is by no means appropriate for the all-encompassing fight against this type of crime. The question being raised here is what is the appropriate punishment for combating these crimes?

In the first place, it must be said that there is no clear answer to this question and that the punitive solution is not always the best and most appropriate solution. Therefore, a comprehensive approach to addressing the underlying causes of crime is important. This leads us to the question of how the government, according to the social contract, should meet the expectations of citizens in improving their living environment. In response to this question, it should be noted that the use of punitive measures in response to crime is only effective if the government has the support and trust of the people and is committed to ensuring the long-term and permanent interests of society and all its people. The fundamental problem in this regard is that a government that imposes the death penalty for various crimes is incapable of managing society and resorts to suppression to avoid its true responsibilities. Instead, it should seek to address the root causes of crime through social, cultural, educational, and economic programs. As a result, the nature of a government can demonstrate whether it has

It is expected that without pre-judgment, attention will be paid to scientific research and criminal recognition as a substitute for the death penalty in drug-related crimes. Research findings from around the world can be effective in this path. What is important is the necessity of using criminal justice standards based on preserving human dignity, observing principles of fair trial, comprehensive methods of crime prevention, and fighting the causes of crime simultaneously. It is obvious that without considering the government’s responsibilities in providing a decent life for all people on one hand, and freeing from repressive methods in creating judicial security on the other hand, it will not be possible to achieve appropriate reactions to possible crimes.

A worthy government is one that provides all-around happiness for its people without deceit and trickery. The use of capital punishment is considered a form of deceiving the public. It cannot be replaced by a predetermined version for the people, but rather, the findings of unbiased intellectuals must be utilized to reach a solution based on justice, preservation of human dignity, and human rights.