Abstract

One of the fundamental principles of criminalization is that the criminal legislator shall consider criminalizing tangible conduct represented in observable physical action. It is impermissible to criminalize people for having thoughts and ideas, irrespective of the degree of their embedded danger or perversion. Also, a criminal legislator shall not criminalize people according to their determination and resolution to execute crimes. Moreover, S/he shall not criminalize the culprits even if s/he has admittedly confessed or disclosed harboring such serious thoughts and ideas, as long as the concerned persons did not proceed to carry out such thoughts or ideas. Therefore, there is no punishment for merely harboring the idea of a crime or preparing or designing for committing a crime. However, the criminal legislator has departed from this principle in relation to crimes against state security in order to avoid any threat to the identity, entity and institutions of the state. This applies even if the actions of the culprits did not exceed the mere contemplation or designing or preparation for committing such crimes. Hence, the criminal legislator stipulates punishment for the crime of conspiracy against state security, which does not go beyond an arrangement between more than one person to commit a state security crime. Thus, this paper discusses and compares the policies adopted by both the Jordanian and Emirati legislators in regulating the provisions of the conspiracy crime against the state security.