This research aims to study the organized crime, its characteristics, and the legislative role in combating it. Due to its reception of many refugees from Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and Libya, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Jordan witnessed a widespread of numerous forms of organized crimes such as drug crimes, money laundering, and human trafficking. The authors seek to clarify how Emirati and Jordanian lawmakers dealt with such crime, and whether their legal texts were sufficient and consistent with international conventions. An analytical and comparative approach was the methodology utilized to conduct the study. The authors tackled this research through, the demonstration of the concept of organized crime in the international conventions and national legislation and the viewpoints of Jurisprudence in this regard. Organized crime is described as a threat to national security and as a crime that has dire political implications at the national and international levels (Campbell, 2014). The research has focused on the laws concerning common organized crimes such as narcotic drug trafficking, human trafficking, and money laundering. This research highlighted the efforts exerted by legislators in both countries to combat organized crimes. The findings indicate that both countries enforced specific laws and regulations to stop such crimes

The postponement of punishment execution is considered among the most important guarantees decided by the UAE legislator on the convicted persons. The law made this postponment obligatory in some cases; while allowed its envisagation in other cases, even if it retains an executive power. These punishments are then excuted after the demise of the reason(s) of postponement. Theses postpoonments take many aspects into consideration; including those caring for the rights of the convicted persons as well as the public interest. In order to achieve the aim of the research, which is identifying cases of postponing the implementation of the punishment stipulated by the UAE legislator and the statement of compatibility as well as comparing it to the Egyptian and Jordanian legislators; the research is divided into three topics: First, clarifying the concept of postponement of punishment execution. Second, illustrating the cases of postponements of the execution of the punishment. Third, illustrating the cases of the permissible delay of punishment execution. The conclusion includes the most important results and recommendations.

The postponement of punishment execution is considered among the most important guarantees decided by the UAE legislator on the convicted persons. The law made this postponment obligatory in some cases; while allowed its envisagation in other cases, even if it retains an executive power. These punishments are then excuted after the demise of the reason(s) of postponement. Theses postpoonments take many aspects into consideration; including those caring for the rights of the convicted persons as well as the public interest. In order to achieve the aim of the research, which is identifying cases of postponing the implementation of the punishment stipulated by the UAE legislator and the statement of compatibility as well as comparing it to the Egyptian and Jordanian legislators; the research is divided into three topics: First, clarifying the concept of postponement of punishment execution. Second, illustrating the cases of postponements of the execution of the punishment. Third, illustrating the cases of the permissible delay of punishment execution. The conclusion includes the most important results and recommendations.