The Philosophical Dimension of the Specificity of Criminal Procedures Against Women – A Comparative Study

Abstract

The specificity of criminal procedures against women poses a fundamental problem regarding the legal system's ability to reconcile the principle of equality before the law with the requirements of de facto justice. The uniform application of procedures, despite its apparent neutrality, may conceal a form of discrimination when it fails to take into account the differences in women's psychological, social, and biological makeup. A comparison of the legal systems in Iraq, the UAE, and Saudi Arabia reveals disparities in the extent to which this specificity is accommodated. Some legal systems demonstrate a progressive trend toward establishing procedural guarantees that take into account women's status during investigations or trials, while others remain bound by general texts that assume formal equality without positive discrimination.

Behind this disparity emerges a deeper legal philosophy based on the idea of adaptive justice, which holds that justice cannot be achieved by applying the same law to everyone, but rather by adapting it to the realities and human circumstances of individuals. The procedural treatment of women is inseparable from their physical and psychological dignity and their social status, making consideration of this specificity both a moral and legislative necessity. The analysis concluded that procedural privacy is not a privilege granted to women, but rather a mechanism for correcting a historical flaw in the legal structure and ensuring more equitable and humane justice for the state's treatment of its citizens within the penal system.