Legal Studies in Digital Age 5 Serial Number 18 2026 11 01 An Examination of the Offense of Unlawful Occupation of National Lands in Iran and England An Examination of the Offense of Unlawful Occupation of National Lands in Iran and England 1 13 EN Journal Article 2026 05 31 <p>The unlawful occupation of and encroachment upon national and public lands, particularly forests, rangelands, and other natural resources, constitute some of the most significant legal and enforcement challenges in the protection of public property and land management. In Iran, the legislature has sought to address this phenomenon through the direct criminalization of the unlawful occupation of national lands and the establishment of criminal sanctions. Nevertheless, the persistence of unlawful occupations and the complexity of adjudicatory procedures have called the effectiveness of this approach into question. The present study aims to comparatively analyze the criminal policy and legal mechanisms adopted to combat the unlawful occupation of land in Iran and England. In terms of purpose, this is an applied study, and methodologically it employs a descriptive-analytical design with a comparative approach. Data were collected through library and documentary research involving the examination of legislation, judicial practice, legislative documents, and scholarly sources. The findings indicate that, within the Iranian legal system, the protection of national lands is primarily based on direct criminalization, and the establishment of criminal liability requires proof of the land’s national status, demonstration of the act of unlawful occupation, and establishment of the offender’s criminal intent. By contrast, the English legal system employs a combination of criminal, enforcement, and administrative mechanisms to address unlawful occupation of land and, depending on the nature of the conduct involved, relies on rules governing unlawful occupation, trespass, criminal damage, fraud in land transactions, and the enforcement powers of public authorities. The results demonstrate that the principal difference between the two legal systems does not lie in the extent of legal protection afforded to land, but rather in the manner in which legal and enforcement responses to encroaching conduct are organized. According to the findings, the effectiveness of measures against unlawful occupation of land depends less on the severity of punishment than on the promptness of intervention, the certainty of enforcement of legal decisions, and coordination among the responsible institutions. Accordingly, reforming Iran’s criminal policy by strengthening enforcement mechanisms, reducing the complexity of adjudicatory procedures, and adopting an integrated criminal-enforcement model could enhance the effectiveness of the protection afforded to national and public lands.</p> https://jlsda.com/index.php/lsda/article/download/487/483