Journal of Research and Development in Comparative Law

Journal of Research and Development in Comparative Law

Feasibility study of Intervening in “Invisible” Crimes through Reasonable Suspicion of a Crime (Comparative Study of the English Criminal Justice System)

Articles in Press

Document Type : scientific research paper

Author
sajjad kazemi
Associate Professor, Department of Law, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Malayer University, Malayer, Iran
10.22034/law.2026.2084273.1759
Abstract
Crimes are divided into two categories, visible and invisible, from the perspective of the occurrence in the visible and from the perspective of the officers and others. The principle and extent of action and intervention by the officers in each of these categories have important differences from the other. in invisible crimes, according to the first paragraph of Article 44 Criminal Procedure Code, any action by judicial officers is subject to obtaining permission from the judicial authority; that is, judicial officers are not allowed to intervene in these crimes with their “reasonable suspicion” and this reasonable suspicion must first be created in the mind of the judicial authority and then he issues the necessary order to the judicial officer. This research, using a descriptive-analytical method and using library tools, intends to answer this fundamental question: do judicial officers have the possibility of inspecting places and objects in invisible crimes based on their reasonable suspicion (and not the judicial authority)? Comparatively, in the laws of countries such as England, although the “principle” is to obtain an order before any intervention by judicial officers in invisible crimes, special permits have been issued for judicial officers to intervene to inspect places and objects through their reasonable suspicion based on some expediency. In our country's criminal justice system, only one case has been identified for the intervention of a bailiff based on his reasonable suspicion (the crime of smuggling goods), and in the rest of the crimes, the bailiff has no possibility to inspect non-obvious crimes based on his reasonable suspicion and is forced to first arouse the reasonable suspicion of the judicial authority before any intervention so that he can obtain an order for inspection. This issue has created challenges in judicial practice, especially in the inspection of passing vehicles. Draft amendment to some legal articles of criminal procedure has attempted to create some exceptions in this regard and establish permissions for bailiffs.
Keywords
reasonable suspicion
judicial authority
bailiff
crime
intervention
Subjects
1.       Ashouri, Mohammad (2025). Criminal Procedure Code. Volume 1. Twenty-fourth Edition. Tehran: Samt. (in Persian).
2.       Bagheri, Davud and Mirkamali, Alireza and Ghaemi, Nasir (2022). Restrictions on Freedom of Movement in Terrorist Crimes in Iranian and English Law. Comparative Law. 9 (1): 109-130. (in Persian)
3.       Bowling, Benjamin & Phillips Coretta (2007). Disproportionate and Discriminatory: Reviewing the Evidence on Police Stop and Search. The Modern Law Review Limited. 70(6).
4.       Gardner, Thomas J. & Terry M. Anderson (2018). Criminal Evidence: Principles and Cases. 8th. Cengage.
5.       Garner, Bryan A (2022). Black's Law Dictionary. Ninth Edition, USA: West Publishing Co.
6.       Habibzadeh, Mohammad Jafar and Tirbandpi, Ehsan (2025). Measuring the Effectiveness of the Rule of Law in the Iranian Legal System. Research and Development in Criminal Law and Criminology. 2(3): 173-196 doi: . 10.22034/jclc.2025.2049834.1142 (in Persian)
7.       Hall,Daniel (2019). Criminal law and Procedure, Seven Edition. Delmar Cengage Learning Publisher.
8.       Llyod, L. J (2005). An Introduction to Policing and Police Powers. Great Britain. Cavendish Publishing.
9.       Khaleghi, Abolfateh and Saedi, Zahra (2018). The criterion of reasonableness in the Statute of the International Criminal Court and its interpretation by the Pre-Trial Chambers, International Law Journal. 59: 225-248. (in Persian).
10.    Khaleghi, Ali (2015). Points in the Code of Criminal Procedure. Twenty-second edition. Tehran: Shahr Danesh. (in Persian)
11.    Kazemi, Seyyed Sajjad (2017). Criminal Procedure. Second edition. Tehran: Majd Publishing. (in Persian)
12.    Kazemi, Seyed Sajjad and Danesh Ara, Sajjad and Ehsanpour, Seyed Reza (2003). Police inspection of vehicles; the contrast between police procedure and law-based investigations. Criminal Law Doctrines, 20(25): 353-397. (in Persian)
13.    Koushki, Gholam Hossein and Dolatkhah Pashaki, Peyman (2018). Explanation of legal criteria for police stops and inspections in the legal systems of Iran, England and the United States. Criminal Law Doctrines. 15: 217-248. (in Persian)
14.    Masoudi Maqam, Asadollah and Hasheminejad, Nasibeh and Amiri, Milad (2015). The approach of the Criminal Procedure Code (2015) to the detection of suspected crimes. Ta’li Huqoq, 11(2): 129-157. (in Persian)
15.    Moezinzadegan, Hassan Ali and Shakibnejad, Ehsan and Khoramdel, Mohsen (2015). Differentiating the handling of terrorism crimes in the pre-trial stage; A review of the legal systems of the United States, England, and Iran. Research and Development in Criminal Law and Criminology. 2(4): 455-493. Doi: 10.22034/jclc.2025.2068077.1230  (in Persian)
16.    Newburn, Tim & Peter Neyroud (2017). Dictionary of Policing. Routledge.
17.    Parvizifard, Ayatollah and Tahernejad Ledari, Esmail and Jalali, Hossein (2025). “Investigating Visible Crime in the American and Iranian Criminal Law Systems”. Political Studies and Law. 5 (2): 4830503. (in Persian)
18.    Triffterer O. Ambos K (2015). The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Law: A Commentary, Hart Publishing.
19.    Sanders, Andrew & Richard Young & Mandy Burton (2010). Criminal Justice. London: Oxford University Press.
20.    Skolnik, Terry (2015). The Suspicious Distinction between Reasonable Suspicion and Reasonable Grounds to Believe. Ottawa Law Review. 47:1.
21.    Stone, Richard, (2009). Exclusion of Evidence Under Section 78 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act: Practice, and Principle. Web Journal of Current Legal Issues. Available at: https://webclinical.ac.uk/articles3/stone3.html.
22.    Sarikhani, Adel and Iman Mohtarmat Qalati (2019). Interaction of Judicial Officers with the Privacy of Vehicles. Justice Legal Journal. 83 (105): 163-188. (in Persian)
23.    Zeraat, Abbas (2011). Invalidity in Criminal Procedure. First edition. Tehran: Mizan . (in Persian)
24.    Sanati, Seyyed Mehdi and Noorian, Ayub and Ataei Jannati, Majid (2018). Judicial Officers (Military Justice) in the Criminal Proceedings Process, Qom: Dynamic Laws. (in Persian)
25.    Ventura, Manuel J (2013). The Reasonable Basis to Proceed. Threshold in the Kenya and Côte d ’Ivoire Proprio Motu Investigation Decisions: The International Criminal Court's Lowest Evidentiary Standard, The Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals, (12)(1). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2206680.
Journal of Research and Development in Comparative Law

Articles in Press, Accepted Manuscript
Available Online from 01 May 2026