Naseer Sabbar Lafta Al-Jubouri I believe that, according to Salmond's definition of law, punishment plays an important role in enforcing legal rules. Salmond says law is "a body of principles recognized and applied by the state in the administration of justice." In this sense, punishment acts as a key mechanism for upholding these principles. Without it, rules might just be guidelines, something to follow if you want to, but not something that truly binds people to act in a certain way.

In my opinion, a penalty is necessary because it creates the deterrence needed to maintain order. It's not just about making someone "pay" for breaking a rule, but about ensuring that others understand the consequences of doing the same. A legal penalty, in this context, is a form of corrective justice, it ensures that those who break the law are held accountable, and it helps reinforce the idea that laws are not optional.

As for the authority that imposes penalties, it’s generally derived from the state's power to regulate its citizens’ behavior. This is where the nature of authority becomes key. In any region where a penalty is imposed, the government or legal system is seen as the institution with the legitimate power to enforce rules. Characteristics of a legal penalty would include its legitimacy, consistency, and fairness. It’s not just about punishing; it’s about ensuring the penalty aligns with the gravity of the offense and is applied fairly to maintain justice. Lastly, I would like to say that punishment isn't just about retribution, but about reinforcing the legal framework that keeps society functioning smoothly.