Abstract
Although the political crime courts are mentioned in the country's constitution, after more than 40 years, the number of courts formed to deal with political crimes is still very limited. Although the definition of a political criminal and his rights have been studied by researchers, the current situation of political criminals in the process of criminal proceedings has received less attention This research answers the question of whether the current procedural and substantive law has the power to protect the rights of political criminal by requiring the judicial authorities to form a political crime court? By examining the legal process of dealing with political crimes, it has been found that despite granting him special privileges in the process of investigation, the lack of differential procedure has caused the political criminal to enter the criminal process like other criminals. Despite the fact that the law of political crimes considers the determination of the motive of the perpetrator as a condition in political crimes, in practice, in the process of criminal investigation, there is no suitable platform for considering the determination of the motive of the perpetrator, as well as a suitable mechanism to defend his right in this process And the silence of the legislator causes personal interpretations of the regulations by the judicial authorities, as a result of which there is no opportunity to form political courts.
Keywords: Political Criminal, Criminal Procedural Law, Jury, Judicial Interpretation, Political Crime Court.
 
Introduction
During the ratification of the Constitution of Iran, unlike general crimes the proceedings of political crimes are open and held in presence of a jury, which shows the attention of the framers of the Constitution to the importance of differential procedure of it.
Although political crime has been defined in political law, in practice, adherence to this law by the courts has been very little, and despite the fact that according to the principles of the constitution, the said trials should be held open.
Various researchers have discussed the definition of political crime and its philosophy, as well as the special privileges and rights of the perpetrator of a political crime during the trial and during the punishment, and some others have discussed the legal background and The possibility of accepting the concept of political criminal in the Islamic government and its requirements have tried to explain the contents.
What has not been investigated in the meantime is to pay attention to the fact that in the current situation and assuming the acceptance of the current regulations and free from numerous non-legal obstacles in the establishment of a political crime court and considering the process of investigation and investigation specified in the procedural law. criminal and with the proposed definition of political crime, what gaps in the regulations have caused a barrier for holing political crime courts? In this research, an attempt was made to find an answer to the question of what inadequacies and deficiencies exist in the implementation of legal regulations by examining the regulations governing political crimes and the procedure.
This research has been devoted to the investigation of the definition of political crime and the practical problems of its legal definition and the implementation problems caused by this definition. Also, the process of dealing with political crime in the prosecutor's office and criminal court has been examined step by step and the problems caused by the ambiguity of procedural and substantive regulations have been counted.
 
Materials & Methods
The purpose of this research was to investigate the judicial challenges of forming a political crime court by emphasizing the implementation deficiencies of the political crime law and criminal procedure, and the main question in this research is: Do the legal provisions have implementation deficiencies for the formation of a political crime court? And whether it seems necessary to identify the specific rules of differential handling of political crimes by examining the process of formal handling of political crimes?
 
Discussion & Result
As it was mentioned at the beginning, according to the definition of the political crime law, most of the criminal behaviors that can be included in the definition of political crime in common sense are excluded from the scope of its legal definition, and the crimes whose material element is mostly through linguistic expression have been identified as political crimes. This is despite the fact that, as mentioned in the practice of some other countries, crimes against public security can be considered under the definition of political crimes.  For example: the crime of collaborating with hostile governments and being a member of opposition groups; In other words, the reason for not forming a political crime court is the narrow and limited definition of political crime.
Regarding the obstacles related to the proceedings in the prosecutor's office, the prosecutor as the representative of the government in the preliminary investigations of crimes with a political nature is always under suspicion of acting not unbiased. So investigations should be done in a way that prosecutor's power won't affect the impartiality of investigation.
 
Conclusion
At the stage of proceedings in the criminal court, although privileges have been counted for the accused, but in practice, political crime case is treated similar to other cases and the accused does not have a suitable platform practicing the rights in the proceedings, because in the preliminary session the court can decide on non-political nature of act, without considering the accused defence and the opinion of the jury, As a result, the defendant's right might be violated.
Regarding the jury, considering the recent decision of supreme court, which did not oblige the criminal court to comply with the opinion of this panel. It expanded the power of the court in making decision about the matter regardless of jury's comment.
Finally, it seems that the criminal procedure law and the political crime law in the current situation do not have the power to protect the perpetrators rights. Therefore, it seems necessary to foresee the differential procedure in order to protect the rights of the accused in this process.