One of the challenges of the Iran and some other Islamic countries legal system is the scope and depth of acceptance of jurisprudence modernization theories and, accordingly, the reform of jurisprudence-based criminal law. The rule of law based on human rights, which is the result of social constructions and collective conscience, in ups and downs with the traditional reading of jurisprudence, has shown success in the purposeful approach and overcome some bottlenecks around corporal punishments and human inequalities in penal jurisprudence. The defense of human rights is not due to its western origin, but it is based on its alignment with rationality, justice and fairness. Legality, respect for human dignity, prohibition of unnecessary punishments, equality of people before the law, quantification of the consequences of criminalization and clarity of its motivation and purpose are the most important principles arising from human rights norms based on criminal law. The reading of maqasids from jurisprudence honors these principles and has more or less changed the criminal laws of some Islamic countries. It provides valuable capacity and experience to the criminal policy-making apparatus of Iran.

This article, using a comparative analytical method, after analyzing the theoretical foundations of the application of maqasidi jurisprudence in public policy law, especially criminal law, has explained some of the changes in the criminal law of several Islamic countries due to maqasidi jurisprudence and explains the capacity of convergence between criminal laws and human rights norms in the case of making criminal policies on maqasidi bases.