Public Law
Abdolmajid Soudmandi
Abstract
"Reasonableness and legality of judicial decisions" is one of the most accepted legal principles governing judicial and quasi-judicial institutions and it can be assumed a result of presumption of innocence and a precondition of justice in judicial settlement of disputes. This rule has always not only ...
Read More
"Reasonableness and legality of judicial decisions" is one of the most accepted legal principles governing judicial and quasi-judicial institutions and it can be assumed a result of presumption of innocence and a precondition of justice in judicial settlement of disputes. This rule has always not only been part of Iran's Acts of procedure, but principle 78 of amendment to the Constitutionalism Constitution and principle 166 of the Islamic Republic of Iran' Constitution also have emphasized on it. Hence, it is obvious that Administrative Justice Court as a judicial institution established by the Islamic Republic of Iran's Constitution is subject to this rule.In this paper, we study the adherence of the General Board of Administrative Justice Court to this rule and discuss, in an analytical way, some cases of violation of the above rule by General Board of Administrative Justice Court in invoking legislative Acts, and it would be seen that this violation is in three forms: "defects in legal documentation and legal arguments", "failure to invoke a specific Act" and "failure to invoke specific articles of Acts". The study also reveals that two major consequences of this violation is "issuing wrong or doubtful decisions" and "adoption of regulations similar to previous revoked regulations". Hence, given that the General Board of Administrative Justice Court is the unique referee for complaint of regulations and its decisions are not supervised by any other institution, it can rightly be expected that it try harder for precise observance of this rule; in particular, given that the consequences of wrong decisions of it, Contrary to decisions of other judicial bodies, in revocation or not revocation of regulations is not confined to the complainant but can affect a large group of people.
