نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسنده
گروه حقوق، دانشکده علوم انسانی، دانشگاه سمنان، سمنان، ایران
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسنده [English]
Under existing law, the accused is considered in many crimes, from the time the charge is considered and the trial to the completion of the case for a final verdict. The question is, what is the opinion of the religious and moral principles regarding his free meeting with other people, including a lawyer? The findings indicate that by morality and knowing the criterion of establishing a balance between respecting the accused and maintaining the privacy of society, the absolute prohibition of meeting is irrational and unjustified, its absolute permission is also against morality and wisdom of the need for justice. The results indicate that if, at the discretion of the judge, the meeting with the accused is corrupt, delays or damages the process of discovering the truth, including teaching him the way to argue and evade the law, according to reason, nature and morality, he should the supply of materials prevented it. On the other hand, the absolute prohibition of the accused's communication with others may result in undue physical or mental harm to him or his relatives, and may be in conflict with the rights of citizens. Therefore, in terms of rational and moral principles, one should follow the path of moderation and in order to ensure justice, while recognizing the right to meet, by monitoring it, close the way of distorting the truth as much as possible; that is a delicate and sensitive task, by its nature.
کلیدواژهها [English]
منابع
)