Exceptional Trials in Political Crimes with Reference to the Concept of General Will in Rousseau’s Thought

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Assistant Professor of Public and International Law Department, Shiraz University, Iran

2 PhD Candidate of Public Law, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran

Abstract

Political crime is one of the most contested concepts in criminal law and political philosophy, having undergone substantial transformations alongside shifts in the foundations of political legitimacy. This article traces the historical evolution of political crime—from classical Athens and imperial Rome to the medieval intertwining of church and state, and through to the ideological conflicts of the 19th and 20th centuries—highlighting how dissent has moved from being considered heresy and treason to being (partially) legitimized within modern legal frameworks. Drawing on the political philosophy of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, particularly his notion of the "general will," the article proposes a new conceptual framework for distinguishing political crime from ordinary offenses. Through an analysis of three main interpretations of the general will—democratic, transcendental, and critical—the author argues that only the critical reading can meaningfully recognize the political dissenter as a legitimate actor rather than a deviant. Within this framework, exceptional trials in political crimes are not only justifiable but essential for preserving political participation and preventing authoritarian closure. The article concludes by offering a practical model for identifying political crimes and outlining the procedural and penal features of a rights-oriented exceptional trial that safeguards freedom of expression and dissent within the legal order.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

Bauman, R. A. (2004). Crime and punishment in ancient Rome. Routledge.
Bauman, R. A. (2020). Socrates and Andocides. In Political trials in ancient Greece (pp. 95–112). Routledge.
Bellamy, J. G. (2004). The law of treason in England in the later Middle Ages. Cambridge University Press.
Cassirer, E. (1999). The problem of Jean-Jacques Rousseau (H. Shamsavari, Trans.). Tehran: Nashr-e Markaz. (In Persian)
Chilton, C. W. (1955). The Roman law of treason under the early principate. The Journal of Roman Studies, 45(1–2), 73–81. https://doi.org/10.2307/298746
Dworkin, R. (1986). Law’s Empire. Harvard University Press.
Habermas, J. (1996). Between Facts and Norms. The MIT Press.
Hart, H.L.A. (2012). The Concept of Law. Oxford University Press.
Ingraham, B. L. (2020). Political crime in Europe: A comparative study. University of California Press.
Kant, I. (1992). What is enlightenment? (H. Fouladpour, Trans.). Kelk, 22, 48–57. (In Persian)
Moore, R. I. (2014). The simoniac heresy. In The war on heresy: Faith and power in medieval Europe (pp. 87–104). Harvard University Press.
Plato. (1931). Apology. In B. Jowett (Ed. & Trans.), The dialogues of Plato (Vol. 2, pp. 109–116). Oxford University Press.
Riley, P. (1970). A possible explanation of Rousseau's general will. The American Political Science Review, 64(1), 86–97. https://doi.org/10.2307/1955615
Send comment about this article
CAPTCHA Image
Journal of Philosophical Investigations
Volume 19, Issue 52 - Serial Number 52
Articles
52 Autumn 2025
November 2025
Pages 543-564

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics