مناقشة رسالة ماجستير حول ذاتية الجريمة الجمركية في القانون الفلسطيني- دراسة مقارنة

The Faculty of Graduate Studies and Scientific Research at Al-Istiqlal University held an online defense on Saturday for a master’s thesis submitted by student Montaser Hmayel, entitled “The Distinctive Nature of Customs Offences under Palestinian Law: A Comparative Study.”

The examination committee comprised Dr. Adel Yahya, Supervisor; Dr. Mohammad Bidosi, Internal Examiner; and Dr. Abdul Latif Rabaya, External Examiner.

Conducted in comparison with Jordanian and Egyptian law, the study sought to analyze the concept of the distinctive nature of customs offences and identify their legal and substantive characteristics. It also aimed to define the constituent elements of customs offences under Palestinian legislation, establish their legal foundations in accordance with the general principles of criminal law, and undertake a systematic comparison with Jordanian and Egyptian legislation to identify similarities and differences and draw upon their advanced legal practices.

The findings demonstrated that customs offences possess a distinct legal character, reflected in the particular nature of the interests protected under criminal law. Such offences concern not only the protection of public funds but also the safeguarding of the state’s customs policy, the regulation of foreign trade, and the enforcement of economic, health, environmental, and security restrictions governing the cross-border movement of goods.

The study further indicated that the material element of a customs offence encompasses a broad range of criminalized conduct. It is not limited to smuggling itself but also includes attempted smuggling, possession, transportation, concealment, dealing in smuggled goods, and participation in the offence in any form. This broad scope reflects the legislators’ intention to provide comprehensive criminal protection for customs-related interests and prevent offenders from evading legal responsibility. By contrast, the mental element of the offence remains founded on criminal intent.

The study also found that the distinctive nature of customs offences extends to procedures relating to detection, investigation, and evidence. Customs authorities are granted exceptional powers to conduct searches and inspections, seize goods and means of transportation, and prepare official seizure reports that carry particular evidentiary value. Nevertheless, the authority to conduct criminal investigations and prosecutions remains vested in the Public Prosecution in accordance with constitutional and procedural rules.

Moreover, the findings revealed a substantial degree of consistency among Palestinian, Jordanian, and Egyptian legislation regarding the general principles governing customs offences, particularly in relation to the criminalization of smuggling, the expansion of the scope of liability, and the granting of special enforcement and evidence-gathering powers to customs officers.

At the conclusion of the defense, the examination committee commended the researcher’s efforts and distinguished presentation of the study. The committee recommended that he be declared successful, subject to the completion of certain revisions intended to further strengthen the research.