Journal of Research and Development in Comparative Law

Journal of Research and Development in Comparative Law

A Comparative Analysis of Criminal Dimensions and Biosecurity Strategies in Addressing Bioterrorism in Iran, Malaysia, and Pakistan

Articles in Press

Document Type : scientific research paper

Authors
mohadeseh ghavamipour sereshkeh 1
amirreza mahmoudi 1
ghasem ghasemi bivarzani 2
jamal beigi 3
1 Department of Law, La.C., Islamic Azad University, Lahijan, Iran
2 Department of Islamic Studies, Ra.C., Islamic Azad University, Rasht, Iran
3 Department of Criminal Law and Criminology, Mar.C., Islamic Azad University, Maragheh, Iran
10.22034/law.2026.2087246.1780
Abstract
The rapid development of biotechnology and the accessibility of pathogenic agents have transformed bioterrorism into an emerging threat to national security, public health, and social stability. This study examines the criminal law dimensions and biosecurity strategies adopted in Iran, Malaysia, and Pakistan to prevent, control, and respond to bioterrorism. Using a descriptive-analytical method and a comparative approach, the research evaluates criminal legislation, biosecurity regulations, policies, strategic programs, institutional arrangements, and international obligations in the three legal systems. It also analyzes the relationship between criminal policy, preventive mechanisms, public health governance, and crisis management. Particular attention is given to evidentiary challenges, the determination of criminal intent, attribution of responsibility, and the legal distinction between naturally occurring disease outbreaks, accidental biological incidents, and deliberate biological attacks. The findings show that all three countries rely on a combination of criminal sanctions, preventive regulation, administrative supervision, and emergency-response mechanisms, although their approaches differ. In Iran, the principal framework is based on general criminal provisions concerning offenses against public security and public health, together with passive defense policies and interinstitutional health measures. Malaysia has developed a process-oriented model that emphasizes the control of biological agents, regulation of dual-use goods, laboratory biosafety and biosecurity, licensing systems, and multilevel crisis management. Pakistan has focused on export-control measures, biosafety guidelines, public health preparedness, and the alignment of domestic legislation with international non-proliferation obligations. Nevertheless, each system continues to face legislative, institutional, and operational shortcomings, including the absence of a precise and autonomous definition of bioterrorism, fragmented institutional responsibilities, and limited coordination between security, judicial, scientific, and health authorities. The comparative analysis concludes that an effective response to bioterrorism requires clear criminalization of both completed and preparatory conduct, reliable forensic and epidemiological evidence, stronger laboratory oversight, integrated public health surveillance, coordinated institutional governance, and international cooperation. A comprehensive legal framework should therefore connect criminal justice, health security, scientific regulation, and preventive risk management within a unified national biosecurity strategy.
Keywords
Bioterrorism
Criminalization
Biosecurity
Comparative Criminal Law
COVID-19
Subjects
1.    Aghlar, A. A., & Raei, M. (2022). Prohibition of the use of biological weapons from the perspective of international criminal law and Islam. Criminal Law Doctrines, 19(23), 3–32. (in Persian)
2.    Ali, R., & Afridi, M. K. (2020). Prioritizing the defence against biological threats: Pakistan’s response and preparedness. Margalla Papers, Issue II, 1–13.
3.    Armideh-Khoi, R., Hosseini-Tehrani, M., Zareali, M. R., Maleki, H., & Moazzeni, B. (2020). A review of the role of viruses in bioterrorism, with an emphasis on coronaviruses. Nurse and Physician Within War, 8(26), 71–82. (in Persian)
4.    Azarmi, S., Bani-Yaghoub, F., Taghaei, F., Alazmani-Noodeh, F., Hosseinpour, S., & Asgari, N. (2023). Is the COVID-19 pandemic an act of bioterrorism? A review study. Nurse and Physician Within War, 11(41), 38–45. (in Persian)
5.    Binesh, A. H. (2007). Biological warfare. Hosun, (13), 110–125. (in Persian)
6.    Dar, M. I. (2024). The Biological Weapons Convention (Implementation) Bill, 2024. Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Government of Pakistan.
7.    Ebrahimi, M. (2024). Bioterrorism in the criminal policy of the United Nations and Iran. Majd Publications. (in Persian)
8.    Gholami Rezini, M., Davari, M., & Gholami, E. (2025). Analysis of punishment policies concerning bioterrorism in Iranian criminal law and international instruments. Comparative Law Studies, 16(1), 283–304. (in Persian)
9.    Hashemi, R., Ghannad, F., & Kanaani, M. A. (2025). The legislative policy of the Iranian legal system toward bioterrorism. Scientific Journal of Comparative Criminal Jurisprudence, 5(3), 61–75. (in Persian)
10. Khalil, A. T., Tanveer, F., & Shinwari, Z. K. (2015). Pakistan’s bio-preparedness with regard to biosecurity, biodefense strategies and policy measures. Journal of Bioterrorism & Biodefense, 6, Article 132, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.4172/2157-2526.1000132
11. Khurshid, S. J. (2019). Bioterrorism: A threat to national security. Journal of Bioterrorism & Biodefense, 10(1), Article 168. https://doi.org/10.4172/2157-2526.1000168
12. Majid, M. A. (2012). Meeting the biosecurity concerns of genetically modified organisms through Malaysia’s Strategic Trade Act 2010 and Biosafety Act 2007. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, 162, 325–335.
13. Ministry of Defence Malaysia. (2020). Defence white paper: A secure, sovereign and prosperous Malaysia. Ministry of Defence Malaysia.
14. Ministry of Health Malaysia. (2015). Malaysia laboratory biosafety and biosecurity policy and guideline (1st ed.). National Public Health Laboratory.
15. Molina, C., Toro, R. A., Manzano, C. A., Canepari, S., Massimi, L., & Leiva-Guzmán, M. A. (2020). Airborne aerosols and human health: Leapfrogging from mass concentration to oxidative potential. Atmosphere, 11(9), Article 917. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos11090917
16. Mousavi, S. A. A., Masoud, G. H., & Raei, M. (2019). An analysis of the Iranian legal system’s approach to bioterrorism, with a brief examination of Islamic jurisprudential perspectives. Journal of Islamic Jurisprudence and Foundations of Islamic Law, 12(2), 151–168. (in Persian)
17. Mousavi, S. A. A., Masoud, G. H., & Raei, M. (2021). An analytical approach to bioterrorism in international instruments and domestic laws. Comparative Law Quarterly, 8(1), 253–282. (in Persian)
18. Naeem, Z., Sohail, N., & Iftikhar, S. (2019). Bioterrorism, an emerging threat. In Trends of environmental forensics in Pakistan (pp. 111–124). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-819436-2.00007-8
19. Nejati, J., Pourghahramani, B., & Beigi, J. (2025). Social crime-prevention strategies regarding soil pollution: A comparative study of the criminal policies of Iran and England. Research and Development in Comparative Law, 8(29), 199–231. Doi: 10.22034/law.2025.2064365.1672 (in Persian)
20. Nourashrafoddin, S. V., Hajitabar-Firoozjaei, H., & Ehsanpour, S. R. (2020). Historical development of bioterrorism and strategies for confronting it. Journal of Medical History, 12(45), 1–13. (in Persian)
21. Nozari, M., Karami, D., & Vaziri, M. (2024). Iran’s criminal policy toward bioterrorism in light of international instruments. World Politics, 12(4), 271–288. https://doi.org/10.22124/wp.2024.28921.3433 (in Persian)
22. Osman, N. D. (2025). Emerging biological threats: Biosecurity regulations in selected ASEAN countries (IKMAS Working Paper No. 3/2025).
23. Revill, J. (2017). Past as prologue? The risk of adoption of chemical and biological weapons by non-state actors in the EU. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 8(4), 626–642.
24. Sadeghi, S., Samadi-Rad, B., & Eslami, T. (2025). A comparative study of mechanisms for combating bioterrorism against children: With a comparative approach to international conventions and the legal systems of the United States, Canada, Australia, and Germany. Research and Development in Comparative Law, 8(28), 340–377. https://doi.org/10.22034/law.2025.2046784.1575 (in Persian)
25. Verma, R., Bhardwaj, V., Fotedar, S., Thakur, A. S., Vashisth, S., & Thakur, A. (2025). Bioterrorism: An emerging global threat. Dental Journal of Indira Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences, 4, 10–13.
26. Vikneswaran, M. (2015). Bioterrorism preparedness for the Malaysian environment. Journal of Defense Management, 6(1), Article 138. https://doi.org/10.4172/2167-0374.1000138
27. Yekrangi, M., & Vahedi, M. (2020). Strategies of Iranian and international criminal policymaking systems in confronting the security threats of bioterrorism. Strategic Studies Quarterly, 22(3), 159–182. (in Persian)
28. Zakaria, N., & Mohamedsha, I. H. (2019). Plague-d by an invisible threat: Reviewing bioterrorism readiness in Malaysia. The Journal of Diplomacy and Foreign Relations, 18(1), 85–110.
29. Zare-Bidaki, M., & Balali-Mood, M. (2015). Bioterrorism and biological weapons from the past to the present: A classical review. Journal of Birjand University of Medical Sciences, 22(3), 182–198. (in Persian)
Journal of Research and Development in Comparative Law

Articles in Press, Accepted Manuscript
Available Online from 13 July 2026