Journal of Historical Research, Law and Policy 3115-7505 In Press 2026 09 01 Grounds for the Implementation of Extra-Penal and Differential Sanctions from the Perspective of Law and Economics: A Comparative Study of United States Law Grounds for the Implementation of Extra-Penal and Differential Sanctions from the Perspective of Law and Economics: A Comparative Study of United States Law 1 23 10.61838/jhrlp.274 EN Journal Article 2025 11 05 <p>According to criminological studies and human rights doctrines, children and adolescents possess specific developmental and psychological characteristics that justify the adoption of a differential approach within criminal policy toward juvenile delinquency. The establishment of specialized judicial institutions, including juvenile courts, and the adoption of differentiated procedural rules—such as extending certain procedural leniencies applicable to juvenile proceedings to individuals under the age of 18—constitute mechanisms designed to safeguard defendants’ rights within juvenile criminal procedure. The provision of special criminal safeguards represents one of the principal methods for ensuring procedural fairness and protecting the legal status of juvenile suspects. Nevertheless, the limited accessibility of specialized restorative programs for children and adolescents, together with the absence of full institutional separation between juvenile judicial authorities and ordinary courts from the trial stage through appellate review, has created structural deficiencies. These shortcomings have prevented Iranian criminal policy from following a unified and coherent framework in organizing the juvenile justice system and responding effectively to juvenile delinquency. By addressing these deficiencies, it may become possible to achieve, in the future, an efficient, comprehensive, and utilitarian system of juvenile criminal justice grounded in effectiveness and social benefit. Despite considerable similarities between the two legal systems, and notwithstanding the increased attention paid within Iranian criminal law—particularly following the enactment of the Islamic Penal Code of 2013—to extra-penal sanctions, significant differences remain between United States law and Iranian law regarding the implementation of such sanctions for juvenile offenders. The findings of this study indicate that in the United States, extra-penal sanctions constitute the primary response to crimes committed by children and adolescents, while decarceration serves as the dominant guiding principle for juvenile court judges. In contrast, this orientation has not been embraced to the same extent within the Iranian judicial practice.</p> https://www.jhrlp.com/index.php/jhrlp/article/download/274/338