چکیده:
معاونت زمانی واقع می‌شود که فردی با رفتاری خارج از عملیات اجرای جرم، موجب «تأثیرگذاری بر فرایند اتخاذ تصمیم توسط مرتکب اصلی جرم» شده و یا باعث «تقویت امکان توفیق او در ارتکاب رفتار ارادی خویش» شود. ماهیت معاونت به نحوی است که صرف اثبات عمد (عام و خاص) معاون در ارتباط با نفس رفتار خویش و نتایج آن، موجب تحقق تام عنصر روانی معاونت نمی‌شود. در این خصوص ضروری است معاون واجد نوعی «پیوند روانی با واقعۀ مجرمانۀ اصلی» نیز باشد. پیوند روانی معاون با واقعۀ مجرمانۀ اصلی در صورتی برقرار می‌شود که معاون حین ارتکاب رفتار خویش، «عالم» به «ماهیت یا عنوان» همان رفتار یا نتیجۀ مجرمانه‌ای باشد که عنصر روانی مرتکب اصلی «وقوع» آن را پوشش می‌دهد. با احراز پیوند روانی اخیر «وحدت مسیر روانی معاون و مرتکب اصلی» در ارتباط با عنوان مجرمانه‌ای خاص شکل گرفته و زمینۀ تحقق تام عنصر روانی معاونت فراهم خواهد شد.
Accessory occurs when a person, with behavior out of crime, causes "influence on the decision-making process by the main perpetrator" or causes "strengthening the possibility of his success". Merely proving the intention of the deputy in connection with his behavior will not be equal to the complete realization of the mental element of accessory. In this regard, the deputy must have some kind of "psychological connection with the main criminal event". Such a connection is realized when he, while committing his behavior, is "aware" of the "nature or title" of the crime that the psychological element of the main perpetrator covers its "occurrence". By establishing such a relationship, the "unity of the psychological path of the deputy and the main perpetrator" is formed, and in such a situation, the ground for the full realization of the mental element of the accessory will be provided. 1.IntroductionIn the analysis of accessory, the main focus is usually on the expression of behavioral examples and how to realize its material element. However, the detailed and comprehensive analysis and examination of the way to realize the mental element of accessory is one of the most important discussions that can be presented in this field. it is also possible to adopt an opinion on the necessity of establishing a specific intention in the construction of the deputy's mental element if its material element is bound to the occurrence of a specific result.According to the general rules governing how to realize the mental element of crimes, if the perpetrator has a direct psychological connection with "all the components of his behavior" (general and specific intent), the mental element necessary to realize his criminal responsibility will be fully realized. In this regard, the mental element of the accessory is governed by exceptional conditions. In such a way that only by verifying the intention (general and specific) of the deputy in connection with his own actions, his criminal malice cannot be considered as a reality. In this regard, the deputy must also have some kind of psychological connection with the main criminal event, so that his criminal responsibility can be determined based on that.In this regard, the majority of jurists believe that the mental element of the accessory is fully realized when the mental interactions of the deputy and the main perpetrator are the same and the subject is the "realization" of a single event. But since in relation to the criminal incident, the deputy has a completely different position from the main perpetrator and his actions and results are completely different from the actions of the main perpetrator and outside of the commitment of the main crime. Acceptance of such an opinion will face a fundamental obstacle. However, in a debatable opinion, Iran's criminal legislator has made the fulfillment of the mental element of the accessory subject to the condition of "unity of intent" of the deputy and the main perpetrator.In order to succeed in analyzing the topic of this article, it is necessary to first define the accessory in a precise and comprehensive manner and to determine the position of the deputy in relation to the criminal incident. In the next step, the method of realizing the deputy's intention should be clarified in relation to his own behavior, and then the necessity of the deputy's psychological link with the criminal event and the method of achieving it should be analyzed. Finally, by clarifying the "nature of the psychological commonality of the deputy and the main perpetrator" and its place in the structure of the mental element of the accessory, it is possible to make an accurate opinion about the way to fully realize the mental element of the accessory. 2.Methodology In this research, the constituent elements of the psychological element of the accessory in criminal law have been dealt with by analytical-descriptive method. 3.Results and discussionBased on the findings of this research, it can be considered the full realization of the material element of the accessory when the deputy's actions "influence the decision-making process by the main perpetrator" or "strengthen the possibility of the main perpetrator's success in committing his voluntary behavior".The result-oriented nature of the material element of the accessory means that in order to adopt an opinion on the intentionality of the material element of the accessory, in addition to the general intent, the specific intent of the deputy must also be proven. if the deputy has the "intention" to realize the above-mentioned results or has "knowledge" regarding their occurrence as a result of the committed behavior, his special intention will be verified.Merely verifying the deputy's intention regarding his own behavior (deputy's general and specific intention) will not lead to the full realization of the mental element of the accessory. the deputy also must be knowledgeable about the "nature" or "title" of the same behavior or criminal events whose "occurrence" is the subject of the psychological element of the main perpetrator of the crime.According to the contents of this research, "the unity of the psychological path of the deputy and the main perpetrator" is also a necessary condition for the realization of the mental element of the accessory. According to this condition, it is possible to comment on the full realization of the mental element of the accessory when deputy's malice is towards the "title or nature" of the same criminal event that the psychological element of the main perpetrator covers its "occurrence". It should be noted that the latter condition, in the process of verifying the mental or psychological states necessary to prove the full realization of the mental element of the accessory, is automatically verified. Based on this, the special and separate expression of such a condition does not seem necessary. 4.ConclusionThe realization of accessory as a criminal behavior is always dependent on the occurrence of a specific crime due to the behavior of a person other than the deputy. Based on this, the deputy is never able to violate criminal regulations independently. However, the dependence of the deputy on the main perpetrator has a material nature, and this issue never means the dependence of the deputy on the main perpetrator in order to fulfill his psychological element. Because the mental element of the assistant is independent and completely based on the psychological interactions of the deputy. Based on this, the mental element necessary for the realization of the accessory can be considered fulfilled when, firstly, the deputy is intentional in relation to his behavior and secondly, his behavior is related to the criminal event committed by the main perpetrator. The realization of the deputy's intention in relation to his behavior depends on the deputy's intention in committing behavior that affects the decision-making process by the main perpetrator or ends up strengthening the possibility of his success in committing his voluntary behavior. Further, the deputy's psychological connection with the criminal event is realized when he is aware of the nature of the main perpetrator's behavior while committing his behavior. 5.Selection of ReferencesHassani, Yaghoob; Haji Deh-Abadi, Ahmed (1400), “Knowledge (of the occurrence of the result or the ability of the action to create the result) in the formation of special malice”, Islamic Law, 18th year, No. 68, pp. 37-60. [In Persian].Rahmdel, Mansour (1389), “Points about being an accessory in crime”, Azad Legal Research, No. 8-9-10, pp. 161-186. [In Persian].Qiyasi, Jalaluddin (2010), “Assistance in crime from the perspective of Islamic jurisprudence”, Legal Research, No. 3, pp. 139-166. [In Persian].
خلاصه ماشینی:
اما آيا چنين شرطي با ماهيت و اصـول اساسـي حاکم بر نحوة تحقق معاونت همخواني دارد؟ آيا ميتـوان «تحقـق » موضـوعاتي معـين را به صـورت مشترک متعلق عنصر رواني معاون و مرتکب دانست ؟ از آنجا که در ارتباط با واقعۀ مجرمانه ، معـاون واجد جايگاهي کاملا متفاوت از مرتکب اصلي بوده و اقـدامات و نتـايج رفتـار وي کـاملا متفـاوت از اقدامات مرتکب اصلي و خارج از عمليات اجرايي جرم است ، پذيرش چنين نظـري بـا مـانع اساسـي روبه رو خواهد بود.
بر اين اساس در جريان وقوع معاونت ، تحقق عنصر مـادي جـرم اصـلي يـا عمليات اجرايي واقعۀ مجرمانه به صورت تام و مستقل منوط به اقدامات ارادي مرتکب اصلي بـوده و معاون در اين خصوص فاقد هر نوع نقش و تأثير ارادي و مستقل اسـت ؛ چراکـه تأثيرگـذاري وقـايع ايجادي توسط معاون در عمليات اجرايـي جـرم ، تمامـا منـوط بـه ارادة مسـتقل مرتکـب اصـلي در به کارگيري آن ها در جريان ارتکاب جرم است .
با نظر به مطالب فوق و همچنين با توجه به ماهيت اقدامات و جايگاه معاون ، به نظـر مـا تحقـق عنصر مادي معاونت به صورت دقيق و مشخص منوط به اين است که رفتار ذاتا غير مجرمانۀ معاون ، موجب «تأثيرگذاري بر جريان اتخاذ تصميم توسط مرتکب اصـلي شـده » و يـا بـه «تقويـت امکـان توفيق مرتکب اصلي در ارتکاب رفتار مجرمانۀ خويش » بيانجامد.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.
(
, 
, 
)
