University of Guilan (with the participation of the Iranian Association of Penal Law) Criminal Law Research 2322-2328 Articles in Press 2026 05 28 The State’s Criminal Liability When Acting as a Sovereign The State’s Criminal Liability When Acting as a Sovereign 9645 10.22124/jol.2026.29605.2560 FA Mahdi Samaei PhD in Criminal Law and Criminology, Faculty of Law, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran. Mohammad Jafar Habibzadeh Professor of Criminal Law and Criminology, Faculty of Law, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran Journal Article 2025 01 18 It is commonly assumed that the role of the State is to protect citizens from criminals. The problem, however, arises when the State itself abuses its power and violates the fundamental rights and freedoms of its own citizens. The notion of “state crime” is intended to make theoretical reflection on this very issue possible. Under Iranian law, based on the statutory text, the State may be convicted and held criminally liable in non‑sovereign activities. Nevertheless, this article demonstrates that, even beyond this, a textualist interpretation of the existing statutes allows one to argue—at the level of substantive criminal law—for the possibility of convicting the State for crimes committed in the exercise of sovereign authority as well. However, in such cases, due to the principle of legality, no ta‘zīr may be imposed on the State or the relevant public bodies. A criminal court, by holding the State accountable even in matters of sovereignty, may—on behalf of the political community—formally censure the State for committing criminal conduct against its citizens and symbolically stand against it. It is commonly assumed that the role of the State is to protect citizens from criminals. The problem, however, arises when the State itself abuses its power and violates the fundamental rights and freedoms of its own citizens. The notion of “state crime” is intended to make theoretical reflection on this very issue possible. Under Iranian law, based on the statutory text, the State may be convicted and held criminally liable in non‑sovereign activities. Nevertheless, this article demonstrates that, even beyond this, a textualist interpretation of the existing statutes allows one to argue—at the level of substantive criminal law—for the possibility of convicting the State for crimes committed in the exercise of sovereign authority as well. However, in such cases, due to the principle of legality, no ta‘zīr may be imposed on the State or the relevant public bodies. A criminal court, by holding the State accountable even in matters of sovereignty, may—on behalf of the political community—formally censure the State for committing criminal conduct against its citizens and symbolically stand against it.