(Public prosecution's intervention in the execution of penal sanctions) -Comparative analytical lessons-

Perhaps the most important thing that the criminal legislator adopts when drafting the text, whether substantive or formal, is based on achieving a basic principle, which is balance, which is the principle based on balancing the relationship between public and private benefits. Therefore, jurisprudential schools have worked hard on the issue of balance in terms of benefit (utilitarian balance). They - the schools of thought - differ on the issue of priority between benefits and individuals and their rights, or prioritizing rights over benefits or benefits over rights. Some schools gave priority to the individual and his rights when drafting any legal text, some gave it to social interests, and some sought to reconcile them with the necessity required by the criminal legislator. The research problem starts from studying a fundamental point that discusses the desired goal of the existence of criminal law, the basis of which is the balance in public and private benefits, obtained through preserving protected benefits and avoiding harm caused by conflicting benefits, to raise the issue of balance between the means and the desired goals, and this balance must be expressed in A utilitarian relationship in which several matters intersect, the most important of which are the reasons for criminalization, the purpose of punishment, and others. Therefore, the problem of research focuses on what is raised by the problem of the tendencies of the rules of criminal law towards one interest over another, or the pursuit of the benefit of one party over the other.