Iraqi and Lebanese Criminal Policy Towards Obstruction of Justice

Abstract

Abstract: Misleading the judiciary is considered one of the most dangerous crimes that threaten the integrity of the judicial system and negatively impact justice in society. This deception includes providing false or misleading information to the judiciary to influence the course of justice. In this context, this thesis examines the criminal policy adopted in both Iraq and Lebanon towards this crime, aiming to understand the legislation, procedures in place, and mechanisms to combat it. Despite the existence of legislation in both Iraq and Lebanon to combat judicial deception, there is a disparity in the effectiveness of these laws and their application. This disparity raises many questions about the efficiency of both legal systems in addressing this crime and its impact on achieving justice.This thesis aims to analyze Iraqi and Lebanese legislation related to the crime of misleading the judiciary and compare criminal policies between the two countries to provide a clear picture of how both legal systems deal with this crime. A descriptive, analytical, and comparative approach was adopted in this study. Data was collected from reliable legal and legislative sources and analyzed accurately to compare criminal policies in Iraq and Lebanon. Previous studies and field research were also used to provide a comprehensive and comparative analysis. The study showed a significant disparity between Iraqi and Lebanese legislation in terms of the severity of penalties and the detail of legal texts related to misleading the judiciary. It was found that the application of laws in Iraq faces greater challenges compared to Lebanon, due to different political and security circumstances. The results confirmed that the effectiveness of combating judicial deception largely depends on the independence and integrity of judicial institutions in both countries. The study showed an urgent need to enhance societal awareness about the seriousness of the crime of misleading the judiciary and its impact on justice. The results emphasized the importance of strengthening international cooperation between the two countries to combat judicial deception, especially in cases that transcend national borders.