University of Tehran Public Law Studies Quarterly 2423-8120 46 4 2016 12 21 The prudentially of the constitution in the definition of political offense The prudentially of the constitution in the definition of political offense 929 955 60524 10.22059/jplsq.2016.60524 FA Ghodratollah Rahmani Assistant Professor, Department of Public Law, Faculty of Law and Political Science, Allameh-Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran 0000-0002-8386-3818 Journal Article 2016 08 20 Despite the recognition of the concept of political offense and even in the golden ages of the leniency regime in favor of political offenders, the Western Law has never provided a set of unambiguous laws regarding political offenses or in determination of who qualifies as a political offender. None of the main legal systems including France, as the founder of the concept of separation of political and non-political offenses, at any time, have incorporated the definition of political offense. However, mainly in cases of "extradition", the Courts have traditionally taken upon themselves to determine the offenders of crimes of such nature. The historical custom of "avoiding the legal definition of political offenses" which, contrary to the popular belief, is not a result of frustration or compulsion by the legislator's part, but due to respect of free will and expedience by legal systems. The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, has required the legislator to define the concept of political offense which is a practical approach by the Constitution. The Law on Political Offense is yet to be approved after more than two decades of continuous efforts to realize the mandate of Article 168.  Nevertheless, it deems necessary to disregard the mentioned stipulation and choose the expedient approach. Despite the recognition of the concept of political offense and even in the golden ages of the leniency regime in favor of political offenders, the Western Law has never provided a set of unambiguous laws regarding political offenses or in determination of who qualifies as a political offender. None of the main legal systems including France, as the founder of the concept of separation of political and non-political offenses, at any time, have incorporated the definition of political offense. However, mainly in cases of "extradition", the Courts have traditionally taken upon themselves to determine the offenders of crimes of such nature. The historical custom of "avoiding the legal definition of political offenses" which, contrary to the popular belief, is not a result of frustration or compulsion by the legislator's part, but due to respect of free will and expedience by legal systems. The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, has required the legislator to define the concept of political offense which is a practical approach by the Constitution. The Law on Political Offense is yet to be approved after more than two decades of continuous efforts to realize the mandate of Article 168.  Nevertheless, it deems necessary to disregard the mentioned stipulation and choose the expedient approach. https://jplsq.ut.ac.ir/article_60524_efaa2847cc46aad8c397f0891358fb7e.pdf