Exigency , coercion and duress are raised as three elements disturbing intention in the foundations of criminal capacity. Most experts in law study them under two separate titles , i.e. coercion and duress as one and the same title, and exigency as a different one. This distinction has been recognized by legislators before and after the Islamic revolution . So in the relevant articles, coercion and duress have been considered synonyms having the same bearing and conditions. However, these three concepts seem to be different each having its own definition and conditions. Coercion is the outcome of pressurizing somebody by a human or non human agent in which the coerced one loses his free will and freedom. If pressure does not give rise to lack of free will and freedom, in case lack of consent and peace of mind emanates from a non human agent, exigency is the result. Of course , exigency may have an indirect human origin. However, if lack of consent and peace of mind limits free will and freedom not to the extent of their elimination, happening by a human agent, there would be duress. Therefore, coercion and duress are two separate institutions distinguished by their creating agent, and extent of freedom, and free will, having different titles and bearings.
gholami, A. (2012). Exigency, Coercion, and Duress: from Synonymity to Difference in Meaning. The Journal of Islamic Law Research, 13(1), 39-72. doi: 10.30497/law.2012.1013
MLA
ali gholami. "Exigency, Coercion, and Duress: from Synonymity to Difference in Meaning", The Journal of Islamic Law Research, 13, 1, 2012, 39-72. doi: 10.30497/law.2012.1013
HARVARD
gholami, A. (2012). 'Exigency, Coercion, and Duress: from Synonymity to Difference in Meaning', The Journal of Islamic Law Research, 13(1), pp. 39-72. doi: 10.30497/law.2012.1013
VANCOUVER
gholami, A. Exigency, Coercion, and Duress: from Synonymity to Difference in Meaning. The Journal of Islamic Law Research, 2012; 13(1): 39-72. doi: 10.30497/law.2012.1013
)
