فهرست مطالب mohammadshahab jalilvand

The right to self-determination is one of the most important human "rights" that is considered in international documents and agreements and domestic documents of different countries and has different dimensions such as voting in elections, determining the new political system, Establishing an autocratic government or trying for a new constitution. Therefore, the right to self-determination means accepting the right of citizens in a collective sense to create a new political order, which also entails a significant political strain. In this way, the right to self-determination does not necessarily have a positive aspect and can be manifested by identifying the tasks of citizens and participating in things such as elections or monitoring and interfering in legislation or monitoring its implementation. Therefore, the political task is another aspect of the right to self-determination, which is discussed in the present study from the perspective of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran. In other words, in what ways and in what manner can the political task lead to the realization of the right to self-determination? Based on the findings of the research, public supervision and the possibility of space for criticism and criticism, effective participation such as voting and attending assemblies, associations and parties, although it is considered a kind of duty for citizens, but it is necessarily in opposition to "rights". Citizens are not supposed to and can be the guarantors of achieving the right to self-determination. Also, the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, while accepting the nation's sovereignty over its own destiny in various ways, provides the platforms for exercising the right to self-determination in various ways, including voting, participation in civil and political institutions, recognition of ethnic groups and religious groups, and The right to have a representative has been provided by them. Descriptive and analytical methods and library tools are used in this article.

Despite the fact that the roots of self-regulation should be sought in the 18th and 19th centuries and in the ideas emanating from classical liberal political economy theories, today self-regulation is considered not only one of the effective and useful approaches in moving the wheels of economic systems, but also a successful and useful method in different fields are political, social and even cultural. Meanwhile, the Guild organization has always been one of the institutions demanding self-regulation in the economic field, and with this basis, the issue of the independence of this institution and the extent and type of its dependence on the government is raised as a serious challenge in this field. This article tries to look at the history and functions of Iran's Guild organization, examines this system with a self-regulation approach, and seeks to answer the main question, how is the position of the Guild organization in Iran as a self-regulation institution explained and what are its functions? Based on this, this article concludes with a descriptive-analytical method and using library resources that the Guild organization of Iran, although it has some self-regulating traits, such as: serious participation in the election of the Guild union leader, determining the price and standard of the product, determining the amount of tax, etc. .. has been, but on the other hand, with features such as: limitless supervision of government elements such as: sheriff, inspector, inspector, Darogh, etc. on guild affairs, government interference in the election of the guild leader, lack of development of civil society and dependency Organic to the government and... while being different from western guilds, it did not have the necessary independence as a full-fledged self-regulating institution and does not have it.

Biomedicine is a subject of discussion and opinion from different aspects, including the impact on the standards of human achievement. One of the important topics in this regard is the neglect of human rights standards in the biomedical technology process. Accordingly, the purpose of this article is to examine the challenges of biomedical technology for the fundamental standards of human rights in order to provide legal solutions to overcome the challenges.

The mentioned article is descriptive and analytical and the library method is used.

Ethical Considerations: 

In all stages of writing the present research, the originality of the texts, honesty and trustworthiness have been observed.

Violation of human dignity, discrimination and non-respect of equality between people, lack of public respect and ignoring the principle of free and informed consent are some of the challenges that biomedical technology brings to human rights standards.

With the increasing development of biotechnology in medical sciences and the silence, brevity, conflict, and deficiency of existing laws in responding to the problems raised in this field and the need to defend and protect human dignity and human rights against scientific abuses of human rights, the need to intervene The government and legality of the activities in this field and the updating of the laws and intervention in the organization and protection of high human values against scientific abuses are certain.

In principle, the constitutional court is responsible for protecting the constitution through the application of customary laws to the constitutional principles that it is known as traditional function of this institution. The Guardian Council is also the guardian of the Shari'a and the constitution based on the constitutional principles of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Furthermore,  it is sometimes observed that the Guardian Council monitors the quality of laws beyond a single constitutional court as well as oversee parliamentary approvals in terms of normativity, transparency, stability, enforceability, fairness, coherence, and etc… through examining the Guardian Council's practical practice. This paper attempts to examine the Guardian Council's supervisory principles on the quality of laws through using analytical-descriptive research method. We conclude that although according to the legal critia or fundamental principles of the public law such as legality, incompetence and separation of powers; this kind of oversight is neglected, various foundations such as constitutional spirit, coherence principle, ensuring individuals' fundamental rights and freedoms, ensuring good governance, public interests and the protection of religious principles can justify the Guardian Council's supervision on the quality of laws. Obviously, ensuring citizens' legal security will be one of the fruits of Guardian Council's efforts to establish qualitative laws.

"Transparency" as one of the qualitative features of the law is one of the important elements in the realization of the legal security of the countries and Both the Guardian Council of Iran and the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany monitor the transparency of the law in various aspects, considering the work of the constitutional courts in order to ensure the implementation of quality laws. This article tries to examine and critique and analyze the criteria and method of supervision of the Guardian Council and the Federal Constitutional Court by using a descriptive-analytical method and reviewing the verdicts of the Constitutional Courts of Iran and Germany. The outcome of this article is that the practice of the Guardian Council and the Federal Constitutional Court is to monitor "transparency" as a verdict and content of law, but the basics of these two institutions are different for this form of control. The Guardian Council carries out oversight of the transparency of the law from the Shari'a's jurisdiction, while the Federal Constitutional Court considers the transparency of the law as an introduction to the fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals.

Islamic Republic of Iran is a state with unique features in the present time that the matching characteristics with the characteristics of the modern state, there are many opinions dispersed. The modern state, which has its roots in the history of the West, has 10 features that distinguish it from pre-modern states. Meanwhile, the Constitution is an essential characteristic of the modern state That means adherence to the constitution. Therefore, the theory of constitutional government emphasizes that the the government is basically guardian of order based on the constitution 's power structure and the structure of power in all its aspects should be based on the constitution. This article tries to comment on the constitutional criteria, in the characteristics of the modern state, and the state's political power structure in the Islamic Republic of Iran in this respect will be reviewed and concludes that although in cases such as: the structure of representation, separation of powers, rule of law and the judicial process of securing the Islamic Republic of Iran, there are roots of the development of a governance structure based on the constitution, but with a little reflection on some of the principles of the constitution and also delving into some practice, it is observed that in the context of community governance, constitutional ambiguities of criteria has occurred.

The legal system of the Islamic Republic of Iran has foreseen non-judicial control methods to protect the Sharia and the constitution and this is done by the Guardian Council. While the Iranian constitution on different principles than "constitution" and "Sharia" as the main norms Guardian Council to review the decisions of Parliament have anticipated; but by examining the practical practice of the Guardian Council it is clear that this council has, in some cases, adopted its own norms, such as ordinary laws, The decisions of the Expediency Discernment Council, the general policy of the system, the statutes of some revolutionary institutions, and so on. In this article, by carefully examining the norms, it is clear that the implementation of parliamentary approvals with the general policies of the system and the statutes of some revolutionary institutions is justified because it is approved by the Supreme Leader and is considered a government decree and it may also be possible to implement parliamentary approvals of some of these norms in order to improve the quality of the law and to bring transparency to the rules. This is despite the fact that the implementation of parliamentary approvals by the Council of Ministers by the Guardian Council is not rational and legal, even if it is aimed at disambiguation and transparency in the laws.
This paper tries to criticize the Guardian Council's practical approach with an analytical descriptive method and providing examples of these norms

Principally the guardian of the Constitution protects the Constitution by means of reviewing the Constitutionality of the Enactments of the Islamic Consultative Assembly as the traditional task of this entity. Nevertheless, examining the practical precedents indicate that both the Constitutional Council of France and the Guardian Council of Iran have in some cases gone beyond the scope of this inherent task by reviewing the quality of the acts. According to this, the main research question is that how and by what criteria the Guardian Council reviews the quality of the acts? This article through a descriptive-analytic method indicates that this entity while examining the enactments of the Islamic Consultative Assembly based on the Islamic criteria and the Articles of the Constitution, has in some cases reviewed these enactments based on normativity, transparency, stability, enforceability, justiciabilty, coherence, and etc. The result of this research is that despite the presence of signs of the quality review approach by the Guardian Council, there is still no comprehensive analysis regarding the above theories and therefore, it seems that the precedent of the organ of Constitutional review in the Islamic Republic of Iran should provide the qualitative standards in this regard.