Shahid Beheshti University Legal Research Quarterly 1024-0772 29 1 2026 03 21 Effective Executive Factors in Increasing the Criminal Population Effective Executive Factors in Increasing the Criminal Population 247 267 105308 10.48308/jlr.2025.237237.2790 FA Mahmood Nozari Phd Candidate, Institute of Governance & Policy, Islamic Azad University: Bandar Abbas Branch, Bandar Abbas, Iran Cyrus Zarghami Assistant Professor, Institute of Governance & Policy, Islamic Azad University: Bandar Abbas Branch, Bandar Abbas, Iran Corresponding Author Email: cyruszarghami@iauba.ac.ir 0000-0002-1954-445x Alireza Sayebani Assistant Professor, Institute of Governance & Policy, Islamic Azad University: Bandar Abbas Branch, Bandar Abbas, Iran Journal Article 2024 10 14 Introduction In addition to all judicial factors with legal, criminological, and crime-related aspects, there exist a series of executive or judicial factors arising from administrative and operational conditions in various social systems. Each of these factors is somehow linked to the increase in prison populations and is identified as influential in exacerbating it. These factors generally reflect judges' and courts' perceptions of issues such as the quality and extent of productivity in the intervention of non-governmental sectors in responding to various crimes—issues that have yet to secure a desirable position in many legal systems and, consequently, contribute to the factors increasing prison populations. The primary and general objective of this paper is to highlight and clarify the quality and levels of impact of criminal judges' operational approaches, and more broadly, the judicial criminal policy system, on the increase in the rate and size of prison populations in the current state of the criminal justice system within the Bandar Abbas judicial district. Along this path, several specific objectives are also considered, summarized as follows: Identifying macro-judicial factors stemming from the judiciary system's approach and the Iranian Judiciary that contribute to excessive incarceration and, consequently, the increase in the national prison population rate. Identifying and diagnosing the main manifestations of criminal judges' disregard in the Bandar Abbas judicial district toward the requirements of a reformist-minimalist incarceration culture. Method This article adopts a combined and dual methodological approach in elucidating and advancing its positions. At one level, where studying general concepts, theoretical foundations, and related issues is intended, the descriptive method is employed. In sections analyzing the role of judicial factors in the expansion and increase of prison populations, the analytical method is used. Subsequently, in the research findings section, which evaluates theoretical positions from the perspective of the criminal judges' own thoughts and views, a field study method involving qualitative interviews will be utilized. This section serves as a case example, against which the validity of the positions and claims in the theoretical sections will be measured and examined through assessing the views and opinions of a number of criminal judges. Thus, the overall research method in this article is a combination of theoretical and field studies, which is currently regarded as a valid and superior method for studying legal and social issues. Results and Discussions The judicial criminal policy system of the Islamic Republic of Iran (as a holistic entity) that forms the basis of emergent judicial sub-streams and practices across the country's judicial districts, generally—as inferred and understood from provisions in texts such as the Constitution, the Criminal Procedure Code, and other supra-legal and sub-legal norms—possesses a series of overt and covert objectives. Many of these are explicitly referenced in the mentioned texts in expressions such as adopting reformist-preventive judicial practices, guaranteeing the nation's fundamental rights, alignment with religious principles, and the like, while others are inferential and discernible in practice from the Judiciary's macro-level operations and the prevailing judicial practices in courts at a more micro level. Pursuing de-incarceration policies and efforts to reduce prison intake rates and, overall, quantitatively lower the national prison population has been the most prominent and important goal of Iran's judicial criminal policy system in recent years, even repeatedly recommended in directives from the Supreme Leader. Existing evidence and facts—as mostly confirmed by the research's statistical population—and particularly the current state of prisons and prisoner population rates in the country's prisons, indicate that despite various legal and judicial positions signaling the necessity for the judicial criminal policy system to move toward such goals, in practice, ideals like de-incarceration and prison reduction remain unrealized. This stems from factors such as the lack of intellectual discipline in de-incarceration judicial policy documents and planning within the Judiciary, on one hand, and the subdued activity of judges and courts in pursuing such goals, on the other. These facts demonstrate that the current judicial criminal policy governing Iran's legal system cannot yet be considered a truly de-incarcerative one, and numerous judicial, legal, and executive obstacles remain identifiable in its realization path. Therefore, at the level of pursuing such macro objectives, despite relatively successful experiences like expanding legal and judicial frameworks for resorting to alternative policies such as lenient and tolerant provisions in regulations like the Islamic Penal Code, and facilitating the application of newer generations of punishments, especially alternatives to imprisonment. However, it is still not possible to claim that the Judiciary as a whole is on a comprehensive and maximal path to realizing these objectives. Another justification and defined objective for the Judiciary and the country's judicial criminal policy system is moving toward the use of modern prison management models and patterns in the country. Examination of the approach and content of documents and laws such as the new Prison Organization Regulations reveals a significant gap from the required intellectual frameworks and prerequisites. Therefore, at this level as well, the outlined objectives remain far from practical pursuit and realization. Conclusion Overall, judges, when confronting the accused, are influenced by prior training, culture, creativity, and ethics, and they counter crime and the criminal by relying on legal texts. This, combined with issues such as limiting the framework of punishment execution to the formal criminal justice space and the lack of constructive interaction between official and executive agencies and other societal sectors in this domain, has evidently contributed to the increase in prison populations. Meanwhile, amid transformations in the criminal justice system, various tools exist to engage administrative and executive mechanisms with the judicial bodies of societies. Introduction In addition to all judicial factors with legal, criminological, and crime-related aspects, there exist a series of executive or judicial factors arising from administrative and operational conditions in various social systems. Each of these factors is somehow linked to the increase in prison populations and is identified as influential in exacerbating it. These factors generally reflect judges' and courts' perceptions of issues such as the quality and extent of productivity in the intervention of non-governmental sectors in responding to various crimes—issues that have yet to secure a desirable position in many legal systems and, consequently, contribute to the factors increasing prison populations. The primary and general objective of this paper is to highlight and clarify the quality and levels of impact of criminal judges' operational approaches, and more broadly, the judicial criminal policy system, on the increase in the rate and size of prison populations in the current state of the criminal justice system within the Bandar Abbas judicial district. Along this path, several specific objectives are also considered, summarized as follows: Identifying macro-judicial factors stemming from the judiciary system's approach and the Iranian Judiciary that contribute to excessive incarceration and, consequently, the increase in the national prison population rate. Identifying and diagnosing the main manifestations of criminal judges' disregard in the Bandar Abbas judicial district toward the requirements of a reformist-minimalist incarceration culture. Method This article adopts a combined and dual methodological approach in elucidating and advancing its positions. At one level, where studying general concepts, theoretical foundations, and related issues is intended, the descriptive method is employed. In sections analyzing the role of judicial factors in the expansion and increase of prison populations, the analytical method is used. Subsequently, in the research findings section, which evaluates theoretical positions from the perspective of the criminal judges' own thoughts and views, a field study method involving qualitative interviews will be utilized. This section serves as a case example, against which the validity of the positions and claims in the theoretical sections will be measured and examined through assessing the views and opinions of a number of criminal judges. Thus, the overall research method in this article is a combination of theoretical and field studies, which is currently regarded as a valid and superior method for studying legal and social issues. Results and Discussions The judicial criminal policy system of the Islamic Republic of Iran (as a holistic entity) that forms the basis of emergent judicial sub-streams and practices across the country's judicial districts, generally—as inferred and understood from provisions in texts such as the Constitution, the Criminal Procedure Code, and other supra-legal and sub-legal norms—possesses a series of overt and covert objectives. Many of these are explicitly referenced in the mentioned texts in expressions such as adopting reformist-preventive judicial practices, guaranteeing the nation's fundamental rights, alignment with religious principles, and the like, while others are inferential and discernible in practice from the Judiciary's macro-level operations and the prevailing judicial practices in courts at a more micro level. Pursuing de-incarceration policies and efforts to reduce prison intake rates and, overall, quantitatively lower the national prison population has been the most prominent and important goal of Iran's judicial criminal policy system in recent years, even repeatedly recommended in directives from the Supreme Leader. Existing evidence and facts—as mostly confirmed by the research's statistical population—and particularly the current state of prisons and prisoner population rates in the country's prisons, indicate that despite various legal and judicial positions signaling the necessity for the judicial criminal policy system to move toward such goals, in practice, ideals like de-incarceration and prison reduction remain unrealized. This stems from factors such as the lack of intellectual discipline in de-incarceration judicial policy documents and planning within the Judiciary, on one hand, and the subdued activity of judges and courts in pursuing such goals, on the other. These facts demonstrate that the current judicial criminal policy governing Iran's legal system cannot yet be considered a truly de-incarcerative one, and numerous judicial, legal, and executive obstacles remain identifiable in its realization path. Therefore, at the level of pursuing such macro objectives, despite relatively successful experiences like expanding legal and judicial frameworks for resorting to alternative policies such as lenient and tolerant provisions in regulations like the Islamic Penal Code, and facilitating the application of newer generations of punishments, especially alternatives to imprisonment. However, it is still not possible to claim that the Judiciary as a whole is on a comprehensive and maximal path to realizing these objectives. Another justification and defined objective for the Judiciary and the country's judicial criminal policy system is moving toward the use of modern prison management models and patterns in the country. Examination of the approach and content of documents and laws such as the new Prison Organization Regulations reveals a significant gap from the required intellectual frameworks and prerequisites. Therefore, at this level as well, the outlined objectives remain far from practical pursuit and realization. Conclusion Overall, judges, when confronting the accused, are influenced by prior training, culture, creativity, and ethics, and they counter crime and the criminal by relying on legal texts. This, combined with issues such as limiting the framework of punishment execution to the formal criminal justice space and the lack of constructive interaction between official and executive agencies and other societal sectors in this domain, has evidently contributed to the increase in prison populations. Meanwhile, amid transformations in the criminal justice system, various tools exist to engage administrative and executive mechanisms with the judicial bodies of societies.

https://lawresearchmagazine.sbu.ac.ir/article_105308_9dea64c3959d8f77e2d7348592392158.pdf