Judicial interaction and cooperation are among the legal solutions at the level of the international system that are pursued in order to combat and prevent serious international crimes and cases such as the fight against drugs, terrorism, war crimes and crimes against humanity. Each country, based on its own considerations, cooperates extensively with international institutions or cooperates with other countries in criminal matters for domestic reasons. In the Islamic Republic of Iran, jurisprudential and religious considerations play an important role in international criminal interaction, and Jazer's research seeks to examine jurisprudential mechanisms to support international criminal interaction and cooperation. The central question is how jurisprudential principles and rules or historical experiences in Islam can lead to the expansion of criminal and judicial interaction in the Islamic Republic? The results showed that criminal interaction in jurisprudence can be extracted by resorting to principles and rules such as: a single Islamic nation and accepting geographical borders instead of ideological borders, the extradition of infidels to non-Muslims during the early days of Islam by the Prophet, the Medina Treaty or Charter, the Peace of Hudaybiyah, adherence to commitments and contracts even with enemies and non-Muslims, and the mandatory execution of all provisions of commitments. It is suggested that the limitations of the Guardian Council be resolved from the perspective of the incompatibility of the laws of other countries with the idea that legal systems are more likely to implement rules to prevent serious international crimes.