SUMMARY
Criminal influence, also referred to in this paper as influence misuse, is one of the crimes that, in addition to affecting the healthy performance of the judiciary, the legislature, and the executive, violates the principle of rule of law and has seriously challenged the governance and administrative system of Afghanistan. From a critical perspective and with focus on the years of the last republic system, this paper aims to answer this question: What are/were some of the serious challenges of Afghanistan's preventive legislative policy on dealing with criminal influence? The research methodology of the paper is descriptive-analytical gathering the required data from library resources, laws and legal documents and instruments. The findings of the article indicate that despite establishing and deploying judicial, organizational, cultural, economic, research and partnership mechanisms by the Afghan lawmaker to combat the crime of influence misuse, there are still shortcomings and weaknesses: No needs assessment done for legislative purposes; non-existence of a “Crime Prevention Law” and “Counter Influence Misuse Law”; lack of definition for the term and scope of influence misuse as a crime in the Penal Code; lack of a criminological, sociological, and psychological approach by the legislator to influence misuse; non-existence of academic research organizations focused on crime prevention research; no monitoring and control mechanisms over government institutions; no legal provisions for a clear framework of coordination and cooperation among the relevant institutions tasked with addressing crimes; and lack of a system to ensure transparency and accountability in the government revenue sector. Accordingly, drafting and passing two special laws covering crime prevention and the fight against the crime of influence misuse based on well-designed detailed needs assessments from a criminological, sociological and psychological perspective for identifying the scope and forms of influence misuse; defining a mechanism for monitoring and control over government departments; and ensuring transparency and accountability while providing a framework for coordination and cooperation among legal and judicial institutions and other organizations concerned with addressing crimes are among the solutions recommended to overcome the identified challenges.