Document and Scope of the Rule of Obligation to Repel the More Corrupt with the Corrupt

In the legal system of Iran, punitive measures are determined for committing religious prohibitions or violating governmental regulations. The legislator has always sought to provide an appropriate legal mechanism for safeguarding and preserving religious injunctions through criminalizing sins. However, public acceptance of punitive regulations has received less attention from him; traditional perceptions regarding the government's duty to uphold religious injunctions have hindered attention to the necessity of public acceptance of punitive regulations. In this regard, it is necessary to examine whether, from a jurisprudential perspective, the determination and enforcement of punishment by the legislator for religious sins is a discretionary act or an obligation. If the enforcement of punishment is considered discretionary for the Islamic legislator, then it is evident that the role of public acceptance in the criminalization of sins cannot be emphasized, as the Islamic legislator is obligated to determine and enforce punishment for the commission of religious prohibitions, whether accepted by the general society or not. However, if the determination and enforcement of punishment are perceived as discretionary for the Islamic legislator, then public acceptance can be considered as a legislative component within the scope of Islamic legislation. This paper, utilizing a descriptive and analytical approach and relying on library resources, examines the role of public acceptance in the criminalization of sins through the exploration of the aforementioned topics and presents opinions by distinguishing between specified and unspecified punitive crimes.