Public Law
Fardin Moradkhani
Abstract
Constitutional law is one of the most important fields of legal knowledge and its close connection with political science has led thinkers in the other fields of humanities to discuss the concepts and principles of this knowledge. Max Weber, one of the most important thinkers of recent centuries, has ...
Read More
Constitutional law is one of the most important fields of legal knowledge and its close connection with political science has led thinkers in the other fields of humanities to discuss the concepts and principles of this knowledge. Max Weber, one of the most important thinkers of recent centuries, has carefully reflected upon the knowledge of law, especially Constitutional law. He lived in a turbulent time and witnessed the rise of Germany as well as its decline. In the midst of World War I, Weber addressed Constitutional law issues and provided analyses in this regard and later played a vital role in drafting the Weimar Constitution. He was a supporter of the presidentialism and the extraordinary powers of the president, which were enshrined in the Weimar Constitution and later created many problems. This article aims to examine Weber's theory of Constitutional law and to explain his outlook and interpretation towards issues such as the president, parliament, and democracy
Fardin Moradkhani
Abstract
Constitutional review is one of the important concepts of constitutional law that, although begun in the nineteenth century and in the United States, grew worldwide in the twentieth century. Initially European countries and gradually other countries around the world also adopted this system.but According ...
Read More
Constitutional review is one of the important concepts of constitutional law that, although begun in the nineteenth century and in the United States, grew worldwide in the twentieth century. Initially European countries and gradually other countries around the world also adopted this system.but According to their political system and history; countries have provided many models for it. This theory was founded in the twentieth century by Hans Kelsen in Austria and Germany, and the European tradition first stood against it. The most important criticism of Kelsen was provided by the great German lawyer Carl Schmitt. He believed that this system was contrary to the principle of democracy and did not correspond to the space and history of European countries. If the constitution is to be guarded, the president himself will suffice as a symbol of all people. This article attempts to examine Schmitt's most important critics to constitutional review and his foundations and solutions by looking at Germany at that time. Schmidt's critiques to date have been one of the most important critiques of constitutional review and have been revisited in many ways in many countries.
Mohammad Jalali; Rezvan Ziaei
Volume 15, Issue 39 , July 2013, , Pages 129-166
Abstract
In every society, power is deemed as an essential element for securing andmaintaining sovereign governments worldwide; however, human history showswhere it is not laid under control and supervision, in the absence of unaccountabilityto members of society, there is a likelihood of its inclination towards ...
Read More
In every society, power is deemed as an essential element for securing andmaintaining sovereign governments worldwide; however, human history showswhere it is not laid under control and supervision, in the absence of unaccountabilityto members of society, there is a likelihood of its inclination towards abuse of powerand corruption. Meanwhile, even so the government structure may well be assumedas democratic, maintaining constant supervision over its various constituentelements and divisions is a prime objective destined, within a legal framework, to beachieved and that it requires efficient supervisory vehicles in place as to carry outduties of such grave importance. Notwithstanding that, it is a duty assumedprimarily on judicial bodies to fulfill, prevalent complexity and bureaucracy in mazyaisles of courts coupled with lengthy proceedings therein, compelled some statesestablish organizations delegated to deal with complaints brought by people throughnon-judicial fast and brief process. These organizations were termed “Ombudsman”or non-judicial supervisory institutions.Nowadays, Ombudsman-providing the public with convenient non-judicialmechanism, through which their complaints against government are heard - isconsidered as an indication of political development and an inalienable part ofeffectively protecting basic rights of citizens living in democratic societies, to suchextend that one may argue that the notion of a democratic and developed nation maynot realize without independent and efficient Ombudsman in place. Indeed, bystriking a balance between the interests of the people and the government to whichthey are nationals, Ombudsman function as powerful mean laying down thenecessary foundation for realization of a favorable democracy. Accordingly, giventheir superb functionality and potentials, Ombudsmen may well serve the vitalpurpose of developing and institutionalizing a democracy by reinforcing itsfundamental principles and satisfactory addressing of citizens grievances or petitionswhich may arise as a result of government wrongdoing.Adopting a question-oriented approach and through a descriptive-analytic method, thispaper attempts to examine the relationship between democracy and Ombudsman as anon-judicial supervisory establishment; and respond to the questions of how and bywhat means may it globally contribute to development of democracy.
