Comparison of Examples of Assistance in Crime in Iranian and English Penal Law

Like other crimes, giving punishment to individuals as an accomplice involves penal liability presence and verification of the three elements of crime . In addition to the presence of these elements, unity of intention and precedence or temporal coincidence between accomplices is necessary for proving assistance in crime. However, it seems as if the necessity of the presence of these conditions should not result in the fact that assistance in crime or its punishment is not independent, but assistance in crime has separate causes and independent elements. In spite of this, authentication of these elements and conditions or doubt about the presence or absence of a causal relationship between accompliceʹs action and criminalʹs crime and necessity of commitment of criminalʹs crime for giving punishment to the accomplice results in problems in determination of accompliceʹs material behavior limitation and raises this question how much of behavior of a person includes legal examples of assistance in crime? Answer to this question is one of the most important and complex issues in England penal law. Considering the similarity between the rules and examples of assistance in crime in England penal law and Iranian penal law, it seems that investigation of these similarities and differences in both penal laws can clarify the ambiguous concept of some of these examples and the level of needed behavior for assistance in crime