International Law
Abdollah Abedini
Abstract
Introduction
As outlined in the Statute of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the principles of law are directly invoked as a main source of international law for addressing legal disputes. These principles also hold significant standing within the domestic legal systems of individual states. ...
Read More
Introduction
As outlined in the Statute of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the principles of law are directly invoked as a main source of international law for addressing legal disputes. These principles also hold significant standing within the domestic legal systems of individual states. However, in the international law, the principles of law typically serve to address potential gaps, ensuring that legal proceedings can continue uninterrupted before the courts. There is currently a broad consensus that the general principles of law, as delineated in Article (38) of the Statute of the ICJ, include the principles of both national and international legal systems. Yet, the general principles of national law are mainly recognized by the judicial authority in domestic contexts and applied as a distinct principle in the international law. For some legal scholars, the inclusion of Paragraph (3) of Article (38) of the Statute of the ICJ, which allows for the invocation of the general principles of law, is a significant milestone in the international law as it makes the states acknowledge a third source alongside treaties and custom. Some argue that the text-based interpretative approach, as employed by the arbitration and judicial courts, had gained recognition as a general principle of law prior to being formally acknowledged in the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Others contend that the general principles of law are characterized by a general, universal nature. In other words, these principles work more openly in dealing with value-based arguments and as such establish rights in a manner particularly evident in the regimes of international human rights and international humanitarian law.
The present study aimed to examine the approach adopted by the International Law Commission (hereafter referred to as the Commission) towards the topic of general principles of law, as well as Iran’s stance in response to the Commission’s approach. Specifically, the Commission has demonstrated a keen interest in studying the sources of international law over the past two decades. Meanwhile, the approach presented in the last three reports by the Special Rapporteur has sparked considerable debate and controversy among proponents and critics alike, primarily concerning the identification of general principles of law derived from the international legal system. The representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the United Nations General Assembly Sixth Committee has also voiced opinions regarding those reports.
Literature Review
The discussion on the general principles of law has been relatively rare in the Persian-language studies. The topic typically finds its place in the general books on international law, especially in the sections dedicated to sources of international law. Yet, there are a few Persian-language studies that specifically address the issue. For example, in the article titled “The Nature of the General Principles of Law and Their Functions in International Law,” Mahmoudi (2018) studied the scope and function of general principles of law as well as their roles during the implementation. However, Mahmoudi’s research predates the Commission’s study, so it could not deal with the reports of the Special Rapporteur of the Commission. Moreover, the present study explored the Iranian perspective on the general principles of law, as evidenced in the statements made by the representatives of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the United Nations General Assembly Sixth Committee.
Materials and Methods
First, the present study used a descriptive approach to examine the three reports issued by the Special Rapporteur of the Commission. It then analyzed Iran’s perspectives on the reports, concluding with an analysis of Iran’s stances.
Results and Discussion
The present study aimed to examine the Commission’s methodology in studying the general principles of law, followed by an investigation into Iran’s stance concerning the Commission’s conclusions. According to the findings, Iran’s approach to the Commission’s reports on the general principles of law appears to be acceptable in some aspects while warranting further consideration. The positive aspects of Iran’s approach include highlighting the premature presentation of draft materials by the Rapporteur in the initial report, considering a non-hierarchical approach among sources, and advocating for a comprehensive methodology in extracting general principles of law from all legal systems. Conversely, there are aspects that merit reflection, such as solely relying on Article (38) of the Statute of the ICJ for reviewing general principles of law, acknowledging the role of international judges in crafting rules when confronted with legal gaps or ambiguities, recognizing the framework of customary rules as a means to establish general principles of law, basing subordinate rules outlined in Article (38) of the Statute (including the judicial precedent and doctrine) on the general precedent and legal beliefs of states. Regarding the most challenging aspect in the work of the Special Rapporteur on the general principles of law, it must be acknowledged that a review of the third part of Paragraph (1) of Article (38) of the Statute of the ICJ indicates that extracting general principles of law from the international legal system cannot be inferred from Article (38) of the Statute. Therefore, the Special Rapporteur should seek justification beyond mere reference to Article (38) of the Statute.
Conclusion
The general principles of law hold significant importance within the international legal system. This significance is underscored by the former president of the ICJ, who emphasized that the relevance of general principles will continue to grow, particularly as courts encounter new challenges where existing legal regulations may not suffice, or where there is a need to consider fundamental values recognized by the international community as binding legal regulations or principles applicable to specific conditions occurring in inter-state relations. The present study could offer a sound analysis of Iran’s perspective in light of developments in international law pertaining to general principles. Critically examining and scrutinizing these viewpoints can direct the attention of the Iranian international law community towards the importance of acknowledging Iran’s approach to international law. This, in turn, could facilitate the indirect involvement of Iranian jurists, enhancing the legal stance of Iran’s representatives in the Sixth Committee and other avenues for demonstrating Iran’s approach to formulating international law. Iran’s participation in the Sixth Committee, particularly in reviewing and providing feedback on the Commission’s studies, is inherently a positive move, fostering Iran’s engagement in formulating international legal regulations.
Public Law
Ayat Mulaee; Maedeh Soleymani Dinani
Abstract
Introduction
The constitution, as the supreme law of a nation, ensures the rule of law and citizens’ rights, protects human rights, and reduces the likelihood of arbitrary government actions. The establishment of the constitution is commonly considered the most effective means of upholding ...
Read More
Introduction
The constitution, as the supreme law of a nation, ensures the rule of law and citizens’ rights, protects human rights, and reduces the likelihood of arbitrary government actions. The establishment of the constitution is commonly considered the most effective means of upholding constitutional values and protecting the individual’s fundamental rights. However, the absence of a written document of the constitution does not necessarily imply the absence of the rule of law or of the guarantee of human rights or even of control over government actions. Nor does it conclusively indicate the full implementation of constitutional principles and values in societies governed by a written constitution. Therefore, the concept of constitutional law and the associated principles extend beyond written documents. It is now recognized that the written constitution is not the sole authoritative source of constitutional norms. Yet going beyond legal formalism and embracing the institution of the unwritten constitution requires careful examination of its foundations and functions. Simply incorporating this concept without critical reflection on its origin and functions risks incomplete understanding. The contemporary conception of the constitution is imbued with its unwritten norms, so overlooking this aspect of any legal system results in a flawed understanding of the constitution. However, introducing ideas and concepts into the national legal system requires a thorough understanding of their origins and foundations, as well as the consideration of the feasibility of aligning domestic institutions with new concepts. Otherwise, newly introduced concepts may create a patchwork in political and legal structures, thus adversely affecting society and causing significant harm. To attain a precise understanding and prevent potential abuses, emerging concepts in public law, such as the unwritten constitution, must be rigorously analyzed and explored with an eye to their origin.
Upon closer analysis, it becomes clear that the concept of unwritten constitution is not boundless, but rather operates within a specific framework and scope. Failing to grasp the foundations of this concept and inadequately explaining it can lead to increased reliance on discretionary opinions, thus causing ambiguity over the nature of practices, procedures, and rules within the constitutional law system. Consequently, certain political practices or actions may erroneously be considered part of the constitution— albeit in an unwritten form—and subsequently legitimized by being foregrounded in the political arena. Concerning the unwritten constitution, there are some scholarly efforts to clarify and dispel ambiguity surrounding this concept, yet it remains relatively unexplored in the Iranian context. There is thus a need to examine the foundations of legitimacy of the unwritten constitution, and distinguish it from merely political and ephemeral principles, rules, and procedures. In this respect, the present study tried to gain a deeper understanding of the unwritten constitution as a legal institution, shedding light on its most significant foundations through description and analysis. It aimed to address the following research question: What is the origin and source of legitimacy of the principles, regulations, and norms that do not derive their authority from the text of the constitution but nonetheless underpin the rights and freedoms enshrined in the text?
Materials and Methods
As a descriptive–analytical inquiry, the present study used a library research method and note-taking to collect the data from different sources in order to examine the foundations of legitimacy of the unwritten constitution.
Results and Discussion
The research highlighted the necessity of a comprehensive understanding of the unwritten constitution, as a relatively nascent concept within Iran’s constitutional law system. Such an understanding would necessitate the examination of foundations of constitutional legitimacy and their analysis beyond the confines of the national constitutional framework. The approach or methodology employed in identifying the nature of the constitution plays a crucial role in narrowing down or broadening its scope and substance. For example, the formalist approach would focus on the structure and contents as delineated in the codified document, with the constitution being perceived as synonymous with its official, written provisions. The approach towards constitutional legitimacy can significantly influence both interpretation and implementation of the constitution. Therefore, adopting an extratextual approach and embracing the overarching concept of the constitution beyond its textual confines can open pathways to a broader scope of individual and public rights and freedoms.
Consider, for instance, the reason-based legitimacy approach, which rests upon the justice or efficacy of constitutional provisions. This approach bridges the divide between constitutional theory and practice, bolstering the legitimacy of unwritten principles and values. From this perspective, the constitution derives its validity and legitimacy not from its form nor the procedure of ratification, but rather from its substantive content and valuable objectives. Consequently, the legitimacy of the unwritten constitution rests upon the same fundamental principles and substance codified in the written constitution.
Across all legal systems, it is inevitable to acknowledge the presence of an additional layer of the unwritten law alongside the written one. Unwritten principles exert influence on the implementation of written regulations, thereby limiting or broadening their scope. In this context, it becomes crucial to delve into the foundational reasons underpinning the binding nature of the unwritten constitution. The binding nature is rooted in the substantive realization of the rule of law, reliance on the requirements of natural and human rights, as well as the roles of key judicial bodies and the public in acknowledging and endorsing true principles and values of the constitution. This can delineate the boundaries of the unwritten constitution.
Conclusion
It is thus necessary to take heed of the concept of the unwritten constitution and its status within any legal system. The failure to provide a proper explanation of this concept can lead to increased discretionary opinions and decisions, thus causing ambiguity over the nature of practices, procedures, and rules within the constitutional law system. There is a risk that certain practices or official statements, when foregrounded in the political arena, might erroneously be perceived as integral components of the unwritten constitution, thereby gaining undue prominence.
Public Law
Mojtaba Ghasemi; Hasan Johari
Abstract
Introduction
Pension funds play a crucial role in Iran by providing retirement provisions through paying pension benefits to retirees and their eligible survivors. However, the pension funds currently experience a critical situation due to a significant disparity between their financial resources ...
Read More
Introduction
Pension funds play a crucial role in Iran by providing retirement provisions through paying pension benefits to retirees and their eligible survivors. However, the pension funds currently experience a critical situation due to a significant disparity between their financial resources and pension liabilities. This crisis stems from several factors, including the generosity of pension programs (in terms of retirement age and conditions and scope of support for survivors), demographic changes, and increased life expectancy leading to more pensioners and fewer contributors. Additionally, the challenges such as low returns on investment; transference of loss-making enterprises to the funds in order to settle government debts; and structural, governance, and management issues have exacerbated the situation.
In fact, the primary factor contributing to the current crisis is the inefficiency of laws and regulations governing the Social Security Organization (SSO) and the Civil Servant Pension Fund (CSPF). The existing regulations on the governance of pension funds have changed the government’s role from regulator and guarantor to an intervening party. Consequently, most fund managers are appointed by the government, which sidelines beneficiaries and stakeholders from the governance process. Such a governmental structure, coupled with the lack of stakeholder involvement, exacerbates the problem of representation arising from the separation of ownership and management. This issue manifests itself not only in the traditional form but also in the political form.
To address the problem of representation in pension funds requires supervision and increased stakeholder participation in fund management in order to enhance transparency, accountability, and managerial accountability. Therefore, it is crucial to revise laws and regulations to empower stakeholders’ role in the administration of pension funds. In this respect, the present study aimed to analyze the deficiencies in the laws and regulations on the governance and management of pension funds in Iran through the lens of corporate governance principles and mechanisms.
Literature Review
The regulations on the governance and management of pension funds play a crucial role in their performance. Establishing procedures and processes that promote good governance in pension funds can significantly contribute to the prevention and resolution of the current crisis. In this respect, corporate governance and its principles and mechanisms can serve as a vital tool for assessing the governance and management of pension funds. Pension funds in Iran, particularly SSO and CSPF, lack indicators of good governance in line with the corporate governance principles. The stakeholder involvement in company management, a fundamental right contributing to the mitigation of representation problems, is largely absent from the governance structure of Iran’s pension funds. Moreover, there are no legal requirements mandating transparency and reporting of the performance of pension fund managers. Additionally, the failure to recognize managers’ legal responsibility for their decisions, often influenced by their political affiliations, exacerbates the lack of accountability on the part of managers.
Materials and Methods
The present study used a descriptive–analytical method to address the research questions.
Conclusion
Considering the corporate governance mechanisms, Iranian pension funds (esp. SSO and CSPF) lack optimal conditions. The independence of the board of directors, a crucial aspect of corporate governance aimed at achieving its goals and principles, is fundamentally absent in Iranian pension funds. Moreover, the supervisory structure of pension funds fails to consider tripartism and the role of stakeholders. In addition, the absence of independent audit and actuarial committees within the supervisory framework severely undermines its effectiveness.
The Audit Organization is tasked with auditing pension funds as per Paragraph (d) of Article (17) of Act on Structure of Welfare and Social Security Comprehensive System. However, the Audit Organization lacks the necessary independence and impartiality due to its governmental affiliation. Furthermore, the absence of official actuarial mechanisms to calculate the resources and liabilities of the funds, their exclusion from the establishment of rules and regulations related to fund liabilities, and the lack of public disclosure of report results to stakeholders and beneficiaries all have contributed to increased pension liabilities and financial instability of Iranian pension funds.
Ali Mashhadi; Hormoz Yazdani Zunuz
Abstract
Introduction
The admission of evidence and the burden of proving a claim are crucial elements in asserting rights in any legal proceeding, including the administrative proceeding. Judicial supervision serves specific objectives that the administrative proceeding must align with. Given the disparity ...
Read More
Introduction
The admission of evidence and the burden of proving a claim are crucial elements in asserting rights in any legal proceeding, including the administrative proceeding. Judicial supervision serves specific objectives that the administrative proceeding must align with. Given the disparity in power between citizens and administrative bodies, the admission of evidence in administrative proceedings should be facilitated in favor of citizens. Moreover, that the burden of proof rests with the claimant is a principle that should be adjusted in favor of citizens, and the court should accurately identify the true claimant party. Furthermore, the court’s decisions should be supported by evidence-based reasoning. During proceedings, both parties present their evidence, and the judge should actively seek additional evidence when required. Merely reflecting the conclusion of reasoning in the court’s decision falls short of characterizing the decision as evidence-based. In this respect, the present study aimed to examine a number of decisions by the Administrative Court of Justice concerning the distribution of the burden of proof, the judge’s active approach in seeking evidence, and the incorporation of reasoning process in the decisions. The study tried to address the following research questions: How is the burden of proof distributed between the parties during court proceedings? And to what extent are the issued decisions based on evidence?
Literature Review
A review of the related literature revealed a Persian-language article titled “Critical Analysis of Consideration of Evidence in the Administrative Court of Justice” (Mohsenzadeh, 2018), which investigated the issue of evidence in the Administrative Court of Justice.
Materials and Methods
Using a library research method, the present study analyzed the textual content of decisions issued by various branches of the Administrative Court of Justice.
Results and Discussion
Not every citizen who files a complaint in the Administrative Court of Justice is necessarily the claimant; they may have initially been accused of a violation by the administration. In such instances, the administration is the actual claimant, despite the citizen initiating the legal complaint. Moreover, when the administration fails to fulfill its legal obligations, the plaintiff citizen is burdened with proving the nullity in the lawsuit. Therefore, imposing the burden of proof on the citizen is not commensurate with the objectives of administrative proceedings.
In instances where the administration accuses a citizen of a violation and issues a decision or some kind of punishment based on that accusation, the administration should provide clear and compelling evidence—as imposing punishment necessitates incontrovertible proof. Put differently, by assessing evidence presented by both parties with a margin of 51% favoring the administration and 49% favoring the citizen, one cannot subject the citizen to penalties such as fines, building demolitions, or the revocation of business licenses. In cases where there is no punishment for the citizen, the administration must be held accountable, providing a rationale for its actions and decisions. Consequently, the burden of proof cannot be placed on the citizen making the claim as practiced in civil lawsuits, but rather it is necessary that the judge get actively involved in seeking evidence.
In administrative proceedings, most documents are under the control of the administration, leaving citizens without access to them. It is thus becomes incumbent upon the judge to request those documents from the administration and thoroughly examine them. In administrative proceedings, the judge must not adopt a passive stance, merely accepting the evidence presented by the involved parties. Instead, they should take an active role in seeking out evidence pertinent to different aspects of the case. Furthermore, if necessary, the judge should delegate the investigation to judicial officers or refer the matter to an expert.
Act on Organizations and Procedures of the Administrative Court of Justice addresses this need in Article (7) by considering the referral of matters to experts, as well as in Article (41), which predicts any investigation and the use of judicial officers for such purposes. Additionally, Article (44) grants judges the authority to demand documents from the administration. These articles underscore the imperative for judges to get actively involved in seeking evidence and to leverage these capabilities to uncover the truth and establish certainty in administrative proceedings. These legal provisions are designed to create balance and empower citizens, who often find themselves in a disadvantaged position against administrative bodies wielding public power. Therefore, it is of paramount importance to use such legal provisions in administrative proceedings to safeguard the rights of citizens.
Additionally, the court’s decision must be accompanied by evidence-based reasoning. A reasoned judgment includes the evidence presented by both parties. Moreover, the judge shall be tasked with determining what evidence is the most powerful and persuasive and why. The judge should clearly state both the premises of reasoning and the conclusion in the final verdict. Merely using phrases such as according to the contents of the case and the arguments expressed, followed by the conclusion, does not meet the criteria of evidence-based, valid judgment. Judges must not merely rely on the reasoning process as it goes on in their minds, nor is it sufficient to simply state the conclusion. Instead, they must incorporate the premises, the reasoning, and the conclusion in the final decision.
Conclusion
The findings indicate that the burden of proving the claim weighs heavily on the citizen. The judge, however, rarely exhibited the requisite level of diligence in seeking evidence and leveraging the provisions outlined in Articles (7), (41), and (44) of Act on Organizations and Procedures of the Administrative Court of Justice. It was also found that the reasoning process underlying the court’s decisions was not clearly articulated in the decisions.
International Law
Meisam Norouzi; Pouya Berelian; Mehdi Eskandari Khoshgu
Abstract
Introduction
Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of humanity. Human activities, notably fossil-fuel combustion, release greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, thus exacerbating climate change. The adverse effects of climate change are already affecting the world, and they may continue ...
Read More
Introduction
Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of humanity. Human activities, notably fossil-fuel combustion, release greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, thus exacerbating climate change. The adverse effects of climate change are already affecting the world, and they may continue to have potentially harmful ramifications at the global level. Despite existing obligations, the efforts made by the world states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions have proven ineffective, leading to continued increases in emissions. In this light, the approach to legal obligations of states to mitigate environmental risks associated with the greenhouse gas emission must offer fresh perspectives on environmental harm while fostering the search for sustainable, ethical, and equitable alternatives. Following international treaties, international conventions addressing environmental concerns should enforce punitive measures against environmentally detrimental actions, often perpetrated under the government’s supervision or tacit approval, including those carried out by the private sector. Some governmental actions and the ensuing greenhouse gas emissions result in environmental pollution and global warming, ultimately leading to the total destruction of the Earth’s environment. It is thus necessary to devise an approach towards the obligations of states to control environmental risks associated with greenhouse gas emissions, which could hold the states accountable for any environmentally harmful measure. In this respect, the present study aimed to address the following research questions: What are the obligations of states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in combating global climate change? And to what extent these obligations are legally binding? The study is based on the hypothesis that states, in combating climate change, are indeed burdened with specific obligations to decrease greenhouse gas emissions compared to past, and these obligations are typically of a soft nature.
Literature Review
The realm of international obligations concerning the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions has been the subject of valuable research. A number of Persian-language studies (e.g., Khadivi et al., 2019; Mashhadi & Rastegar, 2017; Pourhashemi et al. 2021) delved into the crisis of global climate change by focusing on the regulations and principles of international environmental law, as well as the future trajectory of international law in this regard, with an eye to the role of states. Moreover, several English-language articles (e.g., Ekardt et al., 2018; Hulme, 2009; Morine & Patino, 2010; Shahbazi & Pouya Berelian, 2020) examined the obligations of states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in combatting global climate change, often analyzing international agreements and considering future developments in the field.
Materials and Methods
The present study used a descriptive–analytical method and a library research method to collect and analyze the data sourced from international documents, books, and related articles.
Results and Discussion
There is a significant likelihood that if actions against international environmental obligations of states are not addressed within a criminological framework, their activities and greenhouse gas emissions will result in environmental pollution and global warming, ultimately leading to the complete destruction of the Earth. The current study highlighted the significant role of the media in elucidating environmental crimes. If environmental destruction and greenhouse gas emissions are criminalized at the international level, states can be held accountable. Consequently, they may use the media to raise awareness of the issue in the national context, informing both the public and private sectors about crimes related to environmental pollution and greenhouse gas emissions by factories. Given that fulfilling the obligations of states necessitates criminalizing undue interference in climate change, it is necessary to consider criminal laws, in addition to states’ obligations, concerning potential non-compliance. Legal actions may encompass not only the issue of climate change itself but also the costs of combating climate change. Therefore, both financial and non-financial aspects must be included. States must take action in case of violations of the responsibility, aiming to compensate for harmful and destructive actions against the environment. Moreover, both public and private sectors should be subject to strict monitoring for environmentally detrimental behavior. In fact, if the governments are tasked with specific obligations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in line with combatting global climate change, it will automatically lead to compliance on part of the private sector. Thus, there should be strict obligations for the world states, with current soft commitments changing into hard, enforceable ones.
Conclusion
Considering environmental meetings, conventions, and even the Paris Agreement, it seems that such agreements—notwithstanding their binding nature—may fail if member states face challenges such as economic problems. In such cases, the countries may continue to produce greenhouse gases in various ways. Even in the face of complaints by environmentalists, governments will justify their actions on the grounds of economic conditions, employment issues, or managerial considerations. Therefore, if anti-environmental actions—which often occur under the government supervision or with government support and knowledge—are not addressed within a criminological framework, they will likely result in environmental pollution and global warming, leading to the potential destruction of the Earth. This research highlighted the relation between the international environmental protection and the need for a new institutional order, which justifies creating an international court dedicated exclusively to environmental issues. Two significant international commitments in 2015 (i.e., the U.N. 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the 2016 Paris Agreement on Climate Change) underscore the need for specialized environmental courts. The international agreements and obligations, as well as the resulting environmental disputes, have highlighted the importance of having specialized courts to handle such cases. Even before the 2016 Paris Agreement, climate change had already led to numerous lawsuits and judicial decisions. There are two ways to establish an international environmental court: through an international treaty, either within or outside the U.N, or through a U.N. resolution. Moreover, the present study emphasized the crucial role of the media in raising awareness of environmental crimes. As a conclusion, it is necessary to monitor and control both the private and public sectors for environmentally harmful behaviors; however, government obligations to cut greenhouse gas emissions to combat climate change will also positively impact the private sector.
Public Law
Ali Reza Nasrollahi; Mostafa Mansourian
Abstract
Introduction
The concept of public rights is commonly understood as the rights of the general public. However, when scrutinized more closely, this notion becomes somewhat ambiguous, leading to questions and disagreements among legal doctrines and jurists. This ambiguity revolves around the precise ...
Read More
Introduction
The concept of public rights is commonly understood as the rights of the general public. However, when scrutinized more closely, this notion becomes somewhat ambiguous, leading to questions and disagreements among legal doctrines and jurists. This ambiguity revolves around the precise definition of the term, its instances, and its scope, such as whether it pertains solely to criminal law or extends to non-criminal law. Examining the scope of public rights reveals numerous and sometimes conflicting interpretations. Legal and judicial opinions on the scope of public rights generally fall into two general yet conflicting approaches, namely narrow and broad. Given the divergent viewpoints, it is crucial to adopt a valid interpretive approach within the legal system to establish a systematic framework aimed at reaching an understanding. Objective consequentialism, as a normative-based interpretive method, serves as a valuable theoretical tool for evaluating these approaches. In this line, the present study sought to address the following research question: Which of the two approaches, narrow or broad, to the scope of public rights is deemed acceptable from the perspective of objective consequentialism?
Literature Review
Legal and judicial opinions concerning public rights can generally be categorized into two competing approaches. On one hand, there are viewpoints advocating for a narrow interpretation, which suggests limiting the scope of public rights in times of uncertainty. On the other hand, there are perspectives that advocate for a broader understanding of public rights, incorporating a wider range of interpretations and instances. Although there is no coherent and methodical discussion on this matter in legal literature thus far, various schools of legal interpretation have debated different methods, such as objective consequentialism. In objective consequentialism, the focus lies on discerning the purpose of the law, so the interpreter, whether a judge or a lawyer, seeks to deduce the purpose of the law from the text itself and other relevant sources. Subsequently, they interpret provisions of the law in light of the general purpose. In this method, justification for interpretation is grounded on the objective purpose behind establishing the rule. The purpose of the law can be inferred from the very text of the law, including its title, preamble, or relevant chapters. Furthermore, the purpose may be predestined or assumed, with implications being inferred through logical or judicious readings of the text of the law—based on the premise that the legislator is judicious. Therefore, it is assumed that the legislator has intended for legal provisions to have meaningful effects rather than being rendered null or futile. Objective consequentialism seeks to uncover the underlying purpose behind a given law or provision.
Materials and Methods
The present study relied on objective consequentialism, which is an interpretive method based on the normative ground, in order to evaluate the two approaches concerning the scope of pubic rights. The study aimed to address the following research question: Which of the two approaches, narrow or broad, to the scope of public rights is deemed acceptable from the perspective of objective consequentialism?
Results and Discussion
According to objective consequentialism, fostering a broad understanding of the concept of public rights while maintaining a systematic view of functions of the judiciary body can result in an appropriately balanced understanding aimed at claiming public rights. The present study synthesized the opinions sharing a common essence and overarching direction, discussing the existing legal approaches regarding the scope of public rights. Additionally, considering the principles of the Constitution, a hypothesis (called the conceptual approach derived from purposiveness) was formulated and tested about the distinction between the scope of public rights—as outlined in the Constitution—and the restoration of public rights. The scope of public rights can be either narrowed or expanded, considering the purpose of the law and of justice outlined in each instance, as well as the implications derived from a judicious interpretation of the law.
Conclusion
Public rights can be re-evaluated with an eye to the purpose of the law, hence interpreted as rights and interests arising from the objective goal of the law. In this light, the scope of public rights becomes meaningful considering the purpose of the law, the justice it guarantees in each instance, and the implications stemming from the judicious interpretation of the law. Therefore, there two central points here: rights (the conceptual standpoint) and the negation of oppression and injustice (the functional standpoint). From the conceptual standpoint, public rights extend to legal rights. Yet the functional standpoint would include those instances of rights that have been or are about to be unjustly taken away from their rightful owners, making it impossible for the beneficiaries (whether individuals or groups) to reclaim them.
Public Law
Seyedeh Zahra Saeid
Abstract
IntroductionIn most political systems, parliaments or legislative assemblies play a crucial role in government formation. Oftentimes, the agreement or disagreement within the legislative assembly can determine the success or failure of government formation. Disagreements may either result in the failure ...
Read More
IntroductionIn most political systems, parliaments or legislative assemblies play a crucial role in government formation. Oftentimes, the agreement or disagreement within the legislative assembly can determine the success or failure of government formation. Disagreements may either result in the failure to form a government or simply delay its formation. In the former scenario, parliamentary supremacy dictates that disagreement within the parliament may necessitate a re-election. In the latter scenario, while the government maintains authority given its legal status, it may have to compromise on its preferences to avoid the delayed government formation. The investiture vote or vote of confidence, as a legal institution, typically characterizes the first situation in parliamentary and semi-presidential systems, whereas the appointment confirmation process mirrors the second scenario in presidential systems.Articles (87) and (133) of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI) address the investiture vote or vote of confidence. As stipulated in Article (87), “The President must obtain, for the Council of Ministers, after being formed and before all other business, a vote of confidence from the Assembly.” According to Article (133),Ministers will be appointed by the President and will be presented to the Assembly for a vote of confidence. With the change of Assembly, a new vote of confidence will not be necessary. The number of Ministers and the jurisdiction of each will be determined by law.These articles mandate that the government must obtain an investiture vote from the Islamic Consultative Assembly. At first glance, it may appear that the investiture vote outlined in the Constitution seems to be similar to the specific institution of investiture vote in parliamentary and semi-presidential systems. However, a comparative analysis reveals nuanced differences. In this respect, the present research aimed to address the following research questions: What legal role does the Islamic Consultative Assembly play in government formation as stated in the Constitution? In other words, does the concept of investiture vote in the Constitution of the IRI align with its specialized usage in parliamentary and semi-presidential systems? The study is based on the hypothesis that there are some distinctions between the investiture vote in the Constitution of the IRI and its counterparts in parliamentary and semi-presidential systems. Literature ReviewA brief analysis of the nature of the investiture vote can be found in a recent article titled “The Parliamentary or Presidential Nature of the Vote of Confidence to the Council of Ministers in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran” (Taghizadeh & Taghizadeh-Chari, 2022). The present study not only confirmed the conclusions of the aforementioned article but also delved into the nature of the investiture vote outlined in the Constitution in more details by identifying the components inherent in the investiture vote and the appointment confirmation process. Materials and MethodsThe present study employed a critical–analytical approach to examine the nature of investiture vote in the Constitution of the IRI and the distinctions between the investiture vote in Iran and analogous processes in other political systems. Results and DiscussionThe findings of the study revealed three important points. First, in parliamentary and semi-presidential systems, the investiture vote typically concerns three categories: the entire composition of the cabinet, the head of government, or the government’s program. Different countries based on parliamentary and semi-presidential systems may adopt varying formats of investiture vote, accepting one category or all the three in their legal systems. However, the appointment confirmation process is conducted on an individual basis, focusing on each cabinet member separately. While the Constitution of the IRI refers to the entire composition of the cabinet for the investiture vote, practical challenges necessitate an individual format, thus aligning it more closely with the appointment confirmation process. Second, in parliamentary and semi-presidential systems, it is necessary that the government be aligned with the parliamentary majority. Consequently, in case of changes in members of parliament, the government must seek a new investiture vote. This reflects the political context of the investiture vote as a legal institution. In the appointment confirmation process, however, the government’s political alignment with the legislative majority is not obligatory. Instead, the qualification of cabinet members in such systems is primarily based on their competence, resumes, and experiences. Article (133) of the Constitution of the IRI states that the government is not obliged to seek an investiture vote in the event of changes of Assembly. This stipulation, along with the procedure undertaken by members of parliament to scrutinize the qualifications of cabinet members, points towards a non-political context surrounding the investiture vote and its similarity to the appointment confirmation process.Third, in parliamentary systems, the failure to obtain an investiture vote prevents the formation of government. In some countries, successive failures in securing the investiture vote may lead to the dissolution of parliament. However, in presidential systems, if the president fails to garner the consent of the senate, alternative secretaries may be introduced, ultimately resulting in the formation of the government albeit with a delay. Similarly, in the IRI, the failure to secure an investiture vote does not obstruct the establishment of the government; rather, it simply prolongs the process, potentially leading the president to compromise on proposed ministers in order to expedite government formation. Furthermore, the constitutional requirement to seek an investiture vote for a minister who is removed or resigns, as well as the presidential directive to individually appoint ministers, further emphasizes the resemblance between the investiture vote in the IRI and the appointment confirmation process in presidential systems. ConclusionAs a conclusion, it seems that the investiture vote in the Constitutional of the IRI bears greater resemblance to the appointment confirmation process observed in presidential systems.
International Law
Hojatollah Mansouri; Soheyla Koosha; Mohammadreza Hatami; Hossein Alkajbaf
Abstract
IntroductionProtecting women’s rights has been a perennial concern of human rights advocates over the past two centuries. Their dedicated efforts have resulted in the recognition of gender equality in key human rights documents such as the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration ...
Read More
IntroductionProtecting women’s rights has been a perennial concern of human rights advocates over the past two centuries. Their dedicated efforts have resulted in the recognition of gender equality in key human rights documents such as the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. However, these documents alone have fallen short of achieving the anticipated goals in promoting gender equality. This gap prompted the drafting of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) to address gender discrimination in the member states. However, reports from the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women reveal that many member states have not fully complied with the provisions of CEDAW. This failure has raised doubts about the effectiveness of CEDAW in safeguarding women’s rights. On one hand, some states have entered reservations to specific provisions of the Convention; on the other hand, there appears to be a lack of binding mechanisms to hold them accountable for violating their obligations. It is thus crucial to re-evaluate the fundamental concepts of gender discrimination and the provisions of CEDAW in order to examine their feasibility in societies with different norms. CEDAW consists of 30 succinct articles aimed at eliminating all forms of discrimination against women in all societies, regardless of cultural, religious, or ethnic differences. However, it does not explicitly address specific religious or cultural norms, presenting only a universal solution that may not align with diverse contextual complexities. Consequently, several member states, including secular and Islamic ones (e.g., India, Pakistan, and Indonesia), encounter challenges in implementing the provisions. The challenges apparently stem from CEDAW’s emphasis on individualism, which overlooks communal concerns and requirements. Predictably, this approach, coupled with affirmative action favoring women, has sparked backlash against the status of women, even in the U.S. and Europe. In this respect, the present study tried to address the following research questions: What approach does CEDAW take towards the norms governing different societies? And what legal model does Islamic Sharia require to be applied in the domestic legal system, particularly within the framework of CEDAW? The research is based on the hypothesis that the effectiveness of CEDAW can be criticized in terms of normative frameworks and legal guarantees for enforcement. Materials and MethodsAs a qualitative inquiry, the present study used a descriptive–analytical method as well as library resources to examine the contemporary approaches of states toward gender equality. To achieve the objective, the study analyzed about 40 primary and secondary documents and sources, including books, journal articles, reports, etc. Results and DiscussionThe study focused on the needs and interests of involved entities, namely the member states, individual members of societies, and particularly women. The examination of the foundational concepts concerning gender equality and the provisions of CEDAW helped gain insight into the overall approach of the document towards cultural and religious norms governing different societies. CEDAW advocates for women’s rights by promoting equality between men and women in society, regardless of their distinctive roles and status within the family and broader community. Consequently, it does not explicitly address equality of rights in terms of equity or in a just or fair manner. Rather, its focus is on placing men and women in the same, equivalent positions. Furthermore, CEDAW does not explicitly refer to norms. Instead, it calls upon the member states to “modify the social and cultural patterns of conduct of men and women.” This approach can be characterized as somewhat abstract and vague, resembling radical individualism or even libertinism. However, many secular and Islamic states possess diverse social and cultural norms, customs, and taboos regarding the individual and social rights of women. Moreover, the teachings of religious leaders and traditional attitudes are heavily influenced by communitarianism. A notable example can be found in the teachings of Imam Ali, who approves or condemns personal behaviors based on their potential impact on society as a whole. Indeed, he strongly advocates for cultural reforms without any prejudice, recognizing the necessity for change when it serves the greater good.It is worth noting that some countries, such as the Islamic republic of Iran which is not even a member party of CEDAW, have reformed their national laws to eliminate discrimination against women, thus aligning more closely with CEDAW’s requirements. However, there are still concerns regarding the scope and the applicability of these social and legal reforms. Recent social backlash against affirmative action favoring women’s rights, freedom of homosexuality, and same-sex marriage in Western societies highlight the challenges in this regard. International legal documents should not underestimate the significance of social and cultural norms of societies, as radical individualism or libertinism can lead to serious issues such as civil disobedience and increased crime rates. There is thus a need for reforms in the provisions of CEDAW in order to meet the diverse needs and requirements of the global community. ConclusionHaving provided a brief overview of fundamental concepts related to gender equality, the present inquiry tested the hypothesis and examined the main shortcomings of CEDAW by delving into their nature and underlying causes. The analysis focused on the points of contention between the provisions of CEDAW and the positive laws in Iran, particularly in light of Islamic teachings. The analysis is crucial because the perspective of Shia leaders (esp. Imam Ali) on gender equality, which is significantly influenced by their communal concerns, has often been overlooked. Concerning the effectiveness of CEDAW, it is essential that interpreters or drafters of any alternative document consider different norms prevailing in the social context of member states, with particular attention to Sharia-based norms. Such an approach enhances the comprehensiveness of the document, enabling it to address different facets of gender discrimination in the member states
