عنوان مقاله [English]
According to the penal code of the Islamic Republic of Iran, a judge is authorized to inflict complementary punishment. After revising Islamic Penal Code in 1392/2013, applying complementary punishment, in addition to taʻzīr (discretionary punishments), was also permitted in ḥudūd (the crimes with religiously prescribed punishments) and qiṣāṣ (the crimes requiring retaliation). Considering the principle of non-permissibility of punishment, the question is that what are the jurisprudential bases for the legitimacy of complementary punishment in ḥudūd and qiṣāṣ? Is that innovation in law supported by jurisprudential grounds? However this kind of punishment is permissible, as a primary or secondary ruling, resorting to some hadiths and sub-titles, but examining the hadiths shows that complementary punishment is assigned for some special cases and there is no way to generalize it through the annulment of the specification or refinement of the basis of the ruling. In addition, sub-titles are not strong enough to allow leaving the basic principle of non-permissibility of punishment, which is supported by concrete jurisprudential proofs, and to give the permission to apply complementary punishment in every crime requiring ḥudūd, qiṣāṣ, or even indisputable taʻzīr punishments.