Public Law
mohammad najafi kalyani; Mehdi Hadavand; alimohammad fallahzadeh
Abstract
One of the most controversial legal and political issues in recent decades - especially since the 1990s - is the recognition of welfare rights in the constitutions of different countries and how to recognize them. Although it seems that most constitutions have recognized these rights, the status of them ...
Read More
One of the most controversial legal and political issues in recent decades - especially since the 1990s - is the recognition of welfare rights in the constitutions of different countries and how to recognize them. Although it seems that most constitutions have recognized these rights, the status of them in the constitutions does not follow a single pattern, and unlike the first generation of rights, the very existence of these rights is seriously questionable. Despite the diminishing challenges at the international level, internal disagreements persist, and these rights continue to be criticized by various thinkers, especially right-wing thinkers. This issue has led to the inconsistent recognition of these rights in the constitutions of different countries. In this article, we seek to examine the models for identifying welfare rights in constitutions. Given the wide impact of the theories of various thinkers on the current state of these rights, it is necessary to examine the objections to them. The results of the research show that the general principle in identifying these rights is their acceptance as "aspirational goals" in the constitution, and their recognition as a "justiciable right" is an exception.
Public Law
mahdi moradi berelian; Mghasem Tanghestani
Abstract
One of the necessities of the rule of law at the level of politicalinstitutions is to provide enforcement guarantees for violations of laws bypolitical authorities. The Iranian constitution has tried to meet theaforementioned necessity by providing various mechanisms for the responsibilityof the president. ...
Read More
One of the necessities of the rule of law at the level of politicalinstitutions is to provide enforcement guarantees for violations of laws bypolitical authorities. The Iranian constitution has tried to meet theaforementioned necessity by providing various mechanisms for the responsibilityof the president. Despite the possibility of the president being tried beforethe Supreme Court for violating his legal duties under Article 110 (10) of theConstitution, Iran's constitutional system is both doctrinaire and procedurallypoor. Based on this, the current research tries to pay attention to thecomparative constitutional law approaches, identify the existing challenges andprovide solutions to solve them, using the descriptive and analytical methodand through legal historical genealogy, a step in the direction of enrichingthe doctrines of the constitutional rights in relation to the president'sresponsibility before the court. The Supreme Court of the country should takeit and provide the ground for creating and strengthening the procedure in thisregard. This study seeks to answer the following questions: In the currentlegal system, what are the ambiguities and challenges of identifying andapplying the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court? And has the jurisdiction any legal and political justification and desirability? Research findings show thatnot enough laws have been passed to implement this responsibility, thegenerality of the constitutional provision on the violation of the president, ambiguity in the competence of the Supreme Court and the General Courts of Justicein exercising this responsibility and the abandonment of the implementation ofthe first part of the aforesaid paragraph in the Constitution are among thenotable challenges in this regard. Amending the constitution and adjusting thepresident's responsibility to the Supreme Court and passing the necessary lawsto put in place should be considered as a solution by the Iranian legalsystem policymakers.
Public Law
mohammadali farahani; morteza hajialikhamse; Hadi TahanNazif
Abstract
Applying the “rule of sharia” over laws and regulations is one of the most important issues of the Islamic Republic of Iran legal system. The implementation of this rule, which is mainly addressed in Article 4 of the law, has created variable legal and judicial effects on the legal system. ...
Read More
Applying the “rule of sharia” over laws and regulations is one of the most important issues of the Islamic Republic of Iran legal system. The implementation of this rule, which is mainly addressed in Article 4 of the law, has created variable legal and judicial effects on the legal system. In other words, announcing the inconsistency or non-inconsistency of the approvals or laws and regulations that have been absorbed by the jurists of the Guardian Council in various forms on the legal and judicial system.Therefore, the manner of announcing the opinion of respected jurists is important. This has created the ground for the realization of Article 4 of the Constitution and the Islamism of laws and regulations in the legal system, or on the other hand, has created the legal system with ambiguity, conflict, and legal creation. Therefore, in this article entitled "Legal effects of the supervision of the jurists of the Guardian Council by announcing and general laws and regulations in the judiciary of Iran" an attempt has been made to make extraordinary works that have emerged as a result of the comprehensive or complete announcement of the jurists of the Guardian Council That is analyzed.Therefore, first, with a descriptive method, the types of objections raised by the jurists of the Guardian Council have been counted, and as an example, the objection of "application or general laws and regulations" has been mentioned, and finally, with an analytical method of works It can be examined and summarized to show its impact on the country's judicial system, in such a way that in order to achieve the purpose of Article 4, the opinions of the jurists of the Guardian Council in the cases subject to this article must be documented and reasoned, and concise opinions must be avoided.
Family Law
mohsen safari; Zahra Mashayekhi
Abstract
The family is a social institution and a natural unit that we have witnessed significant changes in its definition, structure and function in recent decades. In many legal systems, the family is an ideological institution whose laws are enacted in the light of religious rulings; Laws that are typically ...
Read More
The family is a social institution and a natural unit that we have witnessed significant changes in its definition, structure and function in recent decades. In many legal systems, the family is an ideological institution whose laws are enacted in the light of religious rulings; Laws that are typically authoritarian and the will of individuals to determine their relationships is limited and partial. However, because of the dominance of such rules, one should not ignore the individual areas of human life in the institution of the family and prescribe the violation of their most fundamental rights and freedoms. Fundamentalism is a phenomenon that seeks to protect the fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals in society at the judicial level, and the fundamentalization of family rights seeks to amend strict laws whose absolute application will result in nothing but crisis and turmoil in the family institution. It also violates the fundamental rights and freedoms of family members, indiscriminately and extensively. In this research, in a descriptive-analytical method, by reviewing and criticizing the views of proponents and opponents of constitutionalization of family rights and by presenting criteria in line with the Iranian legal system, we have designed and explained the theory of conditional constitutionality. Prevent the fundamental rights of family members and the fundamental values of the family institution, and shine a light on the minds and consciences of our intellectual judges.
Public Law
zahra Bidar; ebrahim abdipour
Abstract
The general principles and rules of public economic law indicate how the government intervenes in the economy and its evolution towards redefining the regulatory role of the government. Studying the indicators of judicial supervision in the field of economic regulation of the government requires reviewing ...
Read More
The general principles and rules of public economic law indicate how the government intervenes in the economy and its evolution towards redefining the regulatory role of the government. Studying the indicators of judicial supervision in the field of economic regulation of the government requires reviewing the procedure of the General Assembly of the Court of Administrative Justice and extracting the mentioned principles. The purpose of this descriptive-analytical study is to reach the conclusion that the principles accepted by the Court of Administrative Justice in this area and how they are crystallized in the practice of this institution. The findings of this study show that the principle of protection of private property, the principle of freedom of trade and industry, the principle of equality, the principle of competition and the principle of proportionality are among the principles that are explicitly and implicitly documented based on their legal principles in Iranian law. The annulment of government regulations by the General Assembly of the Court of Administrative Justice falls within the scope of public economic law.
Public Law
Mozhgan Nemati; Mohammad Ja’far Habibzadeh; Doraid Mousavi Mojab
Abstract
In recent years, the necessity of the accountability of public institutions has become a key issue under the influence of New Public Management (NPM). The basic principle is that being responsible and possessing power makes the person accountable. Accordingly, the judiciary, as well as other public institutions, ...
Read More
In recent years, the necessity of the accountability of public institutions has become a key issue under the influence of New Public Management (NPM). The basic principle is that being responsible and possessing power makes the person accountable. Accordingly, the judiciary, as well as other public institutions, must be held accountable for its performance at various levels, in particular, the procedures, decision-making process and implementation of decisions. However, accountability in the judicial system has always been faced many opposite views to guarantee judicial independence and other considerations such as sensitivity and specific function of the judiciary. In this paper, with emphasizing the necessity of creating a balance between the two competing values, namely 'independence' and 'accountability', the available capacities of the Iranian legal system are examined specifically regarding the accountability of the judiciary to the legislature and its members. The research method is descriptive-analytical and by utilizing library resources, this article while explaining why the judiciary is accountable to parliament, attempts to analyze and critique opposite views in this regard. The results of this study show that although the accountability of the judiciary has some differences and limitations compared to other institutions, undoubtedly judicial independence never means impunity or exemption from accountability. The examination of the available capacities in the constitution, including the right of parliament members to express comment and investigate, as well as the mechanism for dealing with complaints and reports submitted to the commission of the ninety principle, illustrates the fact that can be achieved to a degree of accountability of the judiciary to the parliament -especially with regard to judicial processes- while guarantee and respecting the judicial independence.
Public Law
keivan eghbali
Abstract
The suspension of the human rights is one of the solutions which was designed to strike a balance between the need to respect human rights and human freedom and safeguarding of public interests in the emergency status. In the meantime, in order to prevent any possibility of misuse of authority in recognizing ...
Read More
The suspension of the human rights is one of the solutions which was designed to strike a balance between the need to respect human rights and human freedom and safeguarding of public interests in the emergency status. In the meantime, in order to prevent any possibility of misuse of authority in recognizing the necessity or non-necessity of the suspension of the human rights by government, some preconditions have been provided. In this context, due to the implicit recognition of the possibility of suspension of human rights within laws of Iran, the present study aims to investigate with a descriptive-analytical method whether the judicial oversight in the process of suspending human rights can play an effective role in preventing possible human rights violations in this process? The results indicate that after review of existing jurisprudence one can conclude that judicial oversight of the judiciary on implementation of preconditions of the suspension can play an effective rule in protecting the rights of the citizens. It is important to note that in the entire supervisory process, three basic criteria and principles, namely the rule of law, judicial independence and impartiality, must always be at the forefront of the work of the relevant institutions in the judiciary; Criteria that each of them depends on appropriate guarantees by the judiciary.
Criminal Law
vali rostami; Sina Rostami; Hasan Kabgani
Abstract
The point of departure for the law and the sign of adherence to the rule of law is the existence of a constitution in any country. In the legal system of Iran, the safeguarding of the constitution is enforced by the Guardian Council and the Judiciary. Nevertheless, the Guardian Council seems not to be ...
Read More
The point of departure for the law and the sign of adherence to the rule of law is the existence of a constitution in any country. In the legal system of Iran, the safeguarding of the constitution is enforced by the Guardian Council and the Judiciary. Nevertheless, the Guardian Council seems not to be fully in line with the principles of fair trial enshrined in the constitution. Because by reviewing the legal and fundamental principles of the Code of Criminal Procedure, approved in 2013, one may easily realise that some of the provisions of this law are in conflict with the principles of fair trial enshrined in the constitution. Accordingly, it seems necessary to analyze the existing conflicts as well as to examine the possibility for court judges to invoke the constitution, as well as the non-implementation of legal articles contrary to the principles of the constitution. The present study uses a descriptive-analytical method to measure the compliance of ordinary laws related to the principles of superior proceedings and in case of changes and non-compliance, to describe the guarantee of implementation of these discrepancies. The results indicate that the Code of Criminal Procedure, passed in 2013, despite the great progress made in observing the principles of fair trial enshrined in the constitution, in cases related to the right to appoint a lawyer and the publicity of dealing with political and press crimes, the principles related to the separation of powers and other cases, still contain sentences contrary to the spirit of the Constitution.
Public Law
Mghasem Tanghestani
Abstract
The Statute is the most important source of Law in countries with civil law system. Understanding the nature of the statute and its differences from similar concepts such as “policy” is a requisite of comprehension for legal and judicial systems and holds an effective role in creation of ...
Read More
The Statute is the most important source of Law in countries with civil law system. Understanding the nature of the statute and its differences from similar concepts such as “policy” is a requisite of comprehension for legal and judicial systems and holds an effective role in creation of legal norms and applying them. There are different experts in the field of law like, judicial sciences, public policy making, social sciences, economy, linguistics and etc. all taking role in policy making process, especially judicial policy making. But the question is “What is the nature of legislation?” “What is the role of law in forming the statute?”, “What is the specific nature of a judicial bill” and “What is the role of the judiciary in judicial policy-making”? The sovereignty of state is applied by different political bodies and powers. Systematic cooperation of governmental bodies (Including the judiciary) in doing their duties is a requisite of good governance. Several state bodies take part in process of ratification of the statute. Desirable function of the statute depends on proper functioning of competent institutions in the policy cycle. The question which will be discussed here is that “What is the role of judiciary in judicial policy making process?” In this research, by descriptive-analytical method and using library and web resources we will try to answer the mentioned questions. According to the findings of this study primarily, legislation is a political act. In the process of judicial policy making, law has both a reinforcing role and a limiting role; the role of the judiciary is also important in the various stages of that process (from problem identification to evaluation and providing corrective solutions).
