The Approach of the Iranian and Egyptian Penal Systems to Protective Jurisdiction in International Criminal Law

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 1. PhD Student in Criminal Law and Criminology, Faculty of Humanities, Islamic Azad University, Qom Branch, Iran, Qom

2 Associate Professor, Department of International Law, Faculty of Law, Qom University, Iran, Qom

10.22091/dclic.2026.14929.1139

Abstract

The principle of real (protective) jurisdiction, as one of the most important exceptions to the principle of territoriality of criminal jurisdiction, allows states to exercise jurisdiction over certain crimes committed outside their territorial boundary, regardless of the nationality of the perpetrator, provided that the act committed involves a serious threat to the fundamental and vital interests of the state. The purpose of this study is to analyze and compare the approach of the Iranian and Egyptian legal systems towards this type of jurisdiction and to explain its foundations, scope and legal effects in both systems. In Iranian law, the Islamic Penal Code of 2013, by adopting a crime-based and enumerative approach, has limited real jurisdiction mainly to crimes against internal and external security, territorial integrity, as well as crimes affecting the monetary credibility and official documents of the state, and at the same time, has taken into account the effects of conviction and execution of punishment abroad in determining the Ta'ziri punishment. In contrast, the Egyptian legal system, by accepting real jurisdiction over crimes committed against the security of the state and the fundamental interests of the state abroad, places greater emphasis on the principle of ne bis in idem and limiting domestic prosecution in the event of a final foreign judgment. The research method in this study is descriptive-analytical with a comparative approach and the data were collected through the study of library resources and legal documents. The research findings show that both legal systems, with a narrow and exceptional interpretation of real jurisdiction, seek to create a balance between the necessity of supporting state sovereignty and observing the fundamental principles of criminal justice, although significant differences are observed between them in the way of regulating the effects of foreign conviction and the degree of flexibility in exercising jurisdiction.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

In Persian and Arabic
Ardebili, Mohammad-Ali (2019). General Criminal Law. Volume 1, 14th Edition. Tehran: Mizan.
Ashouri, Mohammad (2018). General Criminal Law. Vol. 1, 26th Edition, Tehran: Mizan Publishing.
Bagheri, Hassan (2022). “Protective Jurisdiction and Its Challenges in Iranian Criminal Law”. Comparative Law Studies Journal, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 91-118.
Goldouzian, Iraj (2016). General Criminal Law. Vol. 2. Tehran: University of Tehran Press.
Islamic Penal Code 2013.
Khaleghi, Ali (2020). International Criminal Law (2nd ed). Tehran: Shahr-e Danesh.
Mir-Mohammad Sadeghi, Hossein (2021). General Criminal Law (Fundamentals and Criminal Jurisdiction). 3rd Edition, Tehran: Mizan Publishing.
Najafi Abrandabadi, Ali-Hossein (2019). Criminal Policy (4th ed). Tehran: Mizan Publishing.
Ouda, Abdul Qadir (2015). Islamic Criminal Legislation Compared with Positive Law. Vol. 1 (10th ed). Cairo: Dar al-Kutub al-Haditha (In Arabic)
Rajabi, Mehdi (2023). “A Comparative Analysis of the State Criminal Jurisdiction in Transnational Crimes”. Justice Legal Magazine, Vol. 17, No. 4, pp. 55-84.
Sadeghi, Mohammad-Hadi (2017). “Study of the Foundations of Criminal Jurisdiction in Iranian Law”. Journal of Criminal Law Studies, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 35-62.
Criminal Law Doctrines of Islamic Countries
Volume 3, Issue 3 - Serial Number 11
Autumn 2026
September 2026
Pages 20-44

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics