عنوان مقاله [English]
The policy of the Iranian legislature to prevent narcotic crimes has always been based on penal and repressive prevention, so that in determining the punishments ac-cording to the social ugliness of the act, the perpetrator, human dignity, type of crime and human rights standards that are the criteria of proportionality In addition to be-ing unjust and lacking effective deterrence, the death penalty has in practice had adverse social effects and re-duced the country's international prestige and has not prevented drug crimes. Judges are also reluctant to issue such sentences. Is a reason for the unfair and dispropor-tionate nature of drug punishments, especially the death penalty. Accordingly, the present article with a critical look at the legislative and judicial criminal policy of Iran and other countries in this regard, concludes that the pre-ventive penal policy of the legislature in recent years in terms of out of proportion and moderation in practice has not been successful and even causes undermined of the legitimacy of the death penalty. Therefore, in 1396, alt-hough the legislature took effective steps to reduce these harms in the amendment to Article 45, however, it is necessary to reconsider the remaining cases of the death penalty and to resort to appropriate alternatives.