جبران خسارتهای ناشی از بازداشت افراد بی تقصیر (با تاکید بر نقش و جایگاه ضابطین دادگستری)

ﭼﮑﯿﺪه زﻣﯿﻨﻪ و ﻫﺪف: ﻋﺪم ﺟﻮاز ﺑﺎزداﺷﺖ اﺷﺨﺎص، ﻗﺎﻋﺪهای ﺑﻨﯿﺎدﯾﻦ و ﻣﺒﺘﻨﯽ ﺑﺮ اﺻﻞ اﺣﺘﺮام ﺑﻪ آزادی آﻧﻬﺎﺳﺖ. اﻣﺎ ﮔﺎﻫﯽ ﺑﺎزداﺷﺖ ﺷﻬﺮوﻧﺪانِ ﻣﻈﻨﻮن ﺑﻪ ارﺗﮑﺎب ﺟﺮاﺋﻢ ﭘﯿﺶ ﺑﯿﻨﯽ ﺷﺪه در ﻗﺎﻧﻮن در ﻓﺮض ﺗﺤﻘﻖ ﺷﺮاﯾﻂ ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻧﯽ، ﺑﺮای ﺻﯿﺎﻧﺖ از ﻧﻈﻢ و ﻣﻨﺎﻓﻊ ﻋﻤﻮﻣﯽ ﺿﺮورت دارد. ﺑﺮﺧﯽ از ﺑﺎزداﺷﺖ ﺷﺪﮔﺎن ﭘﺲ از اﻧﺠﺎم ﺗﺤﻘﯿﻘﺎت ﻣﻘﺪﻣﺎﺗﯽ ﺑﺎ ﻗﺮار ﻣﻨﻊ ﭘﯿﮕﺮد ﯾﺎ ﺣﮑﻢ ﺑﺮاﺋﺖ ﻣﻮاﺟﻪ ﻣﯽﺷﻮﻧﺪ و ﻋﺪاﻟﺖ اﯾﺠﺎب ﻣﯽﻧﻤﺎﯾﺪ ﮐﻪ ﺧﺴﺎرت وارد ﺑﺮ آﻧﻬﺎ در دوران ﺑﺎزداﺷﺖ ﺟﺒﺮان ﺷﻮد. ﻫﺪف از اﯾﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ، ﺑﺮرﺳﯽ ﺷﺮاﯾﻂ، ﺗﺪاﺑﯿﺮ و ﻣﻌﯿﺎرﻫﺎی ﺟﺒﺮان ﺧﺴﺎرت ﻧﺎﺷﯽ از ﺑﺎزداﺷﺖﻫﺎی ﻧﺎروا ﯾﺎ ﻧﺎﻣﻮﺟﻪ ﻣﯽﺑﺎﺷﺪ. ﭘﺮﺳﺶ اﺳﺎﺳﯽ اﯾﻦ اﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﻗﻠﻤﺮو و ﻣﻌﯿﺎر ﻣﺴﺌﻮﻟﯿﺖ دوﻟﺖ، ﻣﻘﺎم ﻗﻀﺎﯾﯽ ﯾﺎ ﺿﺎﺑﻄﯿﻦ دادﮔﺴﺘﺮی در ﺟﺒﺮان ﺧﺴﺎرات ﻧﺎﺷﯽ از ﺑﺎزداﺷﺖ ﻫﺎی ﻧﺎروا ﭼﮕﻮﻧﻪ ﺗﻌﯿﯿﻦ ﻣﯽﺷﻮد؟روش ﺷﻨﺎﺳﯽ: روش ﭘﮋوﻫﺶ در اﯾﻦ ﻣﻘﺎﻟﻪ، ﺗﻮﺻﯿﻔﯽ ﺗﺤﻠﯿﻠﯽ اﺳﺖ و زﻣﯿﻨﻪ ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻧﯽ و ﺗﺸﺮﯾﻔﺎت ﻣﺮﺑﻮط ﺑﻪ رﺳﯿﺪﮔﯽ ﺑﻪ درﺧﻮاﺳﺖ ﺟﺒﺮان ﺧﺴﺎرت ﻧﺎﺷﯽ از ﺑﺎزداﺷﺖﻫﺎی ﻧﺎروا و ﻧﺎﻣﻮﺟﻪ ﺗﺤﻠﯿﻞ و ارزﯾﺎﺑﯽ ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﺷﺪ و از رﻫﮕﺬر آن ﭼﺎﻟﺶﻫﺎی ﻣﻮﺟﻮد در ﻧﻈﺎم ﻋﺪاﻟﺖ ﮐﯿﻔﺮی اﯾﺮان ﻧﻤﺎﯾﺎن ﺧﻮاﻫﺪ ﺷﺪ.ﯾﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﻫﺎ و ﻧﺘﺎﯾﺞ: ﺑﺎزداﺷﺖ اﺷﺨﺎص ﺑﺎ دﺳﺘﻮر ﻣﻘﺎم ﻗﻀﺎﯾﯽ و از ﺳﻮی ﺿﺎﺑﻄﯿﻦ دادﮔﺴﺘﺮی اﻧﺠﺎم ﻣﯿﺸﻮد. اﺻﻞ اﺳﺘﻘﻠﺎل ﻗﻀﺎﯾﯽ اﯾﺠﺎب ﻣﯽﻧﻤﺎﯾﺪ ﮐﻪ ﻣﺄﻣﻮرﯾﻦ اﻧﺘﻈﺎﻣﯽ و ﺳﺎﯾﺮ ﺿﺎﺑﻄﯿﻦ ﻗﻀﺎﯾﯽ، دﺳﺘﻮر ﺑﺎزداﺷﺖ را ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻧﯽ ﻓﺮض ﮐﻨﻨﺪ. اﻣﺎ ﭘﺲ از ﺻﺪور ﻗﺮار ﻣﻨﻊ ﭘﯿﮕﺮد ﯾﺎ ﺑﺮاﺋﺖ ﺷﺨﺺ ﺑﺎزداﺷﺖ ﺷﺪه از اﺗﻬﺎﻣﯽ ﮐﻪ ﺑﺨﺎﻃﺮ آن ﺑﺎزداﺷﺖ ﺷﺪه، ﺧﺴﺎرت ﻧﺎﺷﯽ از ﺑﺎزداﺷﺖ ﺑﺎﯾﺪ ﺟﺒﺮان ﺷﻮد. ﭼﺎﻟﺶ اﺻﻠﯽ در ﻣﻮﺿﻮع ﺟﺒﺮان ﺧﺴﺎرت ﺑﺎزداﺷﺖ ﺷﺪﮔﺎن ﺑﯽ ﺗﻘﺼﯿﺮ ﻓﻘﺪان ﻣﻌﯿﺎر دﻗﯿﻖ ﺑﺮای ارزﯾﺎﺑﯽ ﻣﯿﺰان ﺧﺴﺎرت وارده و ﻧﺤﻮه ﺟﺒﺮان آن اﺳﺖ. ﻧﺘﺎﯾﺞ اﯾﻦ ﭘﮋوﻫﺶ دﻟﺎﻟﺖ ﺑﺮ آن دارد ﮐﻪ ﻣﻌﯿﺎر دﻗﯿﻖ و ﻗﺎﻧﻊ ﮐﻨﻨﺪه ای ﺑﺮای ﺗﻌﯿﯿﻦ و ارزﯾﺎﺑﯽ ﻣﯿﺰان ﺧﺴﺎر وارده ﺑﺮ اﺷﺨﺎﺻﯽ ﮐﻪ ﺑﯿﮕﻨﺎﻫﯽ آﻧﻬﺎ ﭘﺲ از ﺑﺎزداﺷﺖ ﺛﺎﺑﺖ ﻣﯽﺷﻮد، وﺟﻮد ﻧﺪارد.

Compensation for damages resulting from the detention of innocent persons (Emphasizing on the role of Law Enforcement officers)

Background and Purpose The impermissibility of the detention of individuals is a fundamental rule based on the principle of respect for their freedom. But sometimes the detention of citizens suspected of committing crimes under the law is necessary to protect public order and interests. Some detainees face a restraining order or an acquittal after a preliminary investigation and justice requires that the damage done to them during detention be compensated. Many countries have specific measures and measures in place to compensate for unjustified or unjustified detention. The fundamental question is what is the extent of the responsibility of the government, the judiciary or judicial officers in compensating for the wrongful detention? Methodology The research method in this article is descriptiveanalytical and the legal context and procedures for seeking compensation for unjustified detention will be analyzed and evaluated and through it, the existing challenges in the Iranian criminal justice system will be revealed. Findings and results Detention of persons is carried out by order of a judicial official and by judicial officers. The principle of judicial independence requires law enforcement officers and other judicial officers to prescribe a detention order as legal. However, after the issuance of a restraining order or acquittal of the detainee on the charge for which he was detained, the damages resulting from the detention must be compensated. The main challenge in compensating innocent detainees is the lack of a precise criterion for assessing the extent of the damage and how to compensate. The results of this study indicate that there is no precise and convincing criterion for determining and evaluating the amount of damage inflicted on persons whose innocence is proven after detention.