جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "قانون اساسی" در نشریات گروه "فقه و حقوق"

Iran's new oil contracts, known as IPC, is a new model of contract to restore relations with the industrial world, which includes all oil operations from exploration and drilling to development and exploitation and increased harvesting. In fact, the purpose of this research is to study these types of contracts For the implementation of upstream projects in the country's oil and gas industry, it is from the perspective of the Islamic Republic of Iran's Constitution, which was written in a descriptive-analytical way, and the findings of the research indicate that the principles of exploitation of oil resources, including the negation of foreign economic domination and economic independence and The observance of public interests and public interests in the provisions of the approved general conditions have been observed and the non-contradiction of this type of contract with the principles and provisions of the Constitution is obvious, and the indicators of foreign financing, security production, technology transfer and maximum use of domestic capacities with the initiative of prolonging the period The contract and tying the contractor's fee to the amount of production from the field or tank, without transferring the sovereignty and ownership of the National Oil Company as the operator of the oil and gas resources, is superior compared to the mutual sale contracts.

Procedural rights are of particular importance as guarantors and supporters of substantive rights. Today, the right to petition and legal recourse is recognized as part of individual fundamental rights and freedoms, and as a vital tool for the protection of the right to life. This right has garnered attention in both domestic and international legal systems, with international legal instruments such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and national constitutions striving to realize it. In this context, although the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran does not overlook the right to legal recourse, the necessary mechanisms for the full realization of this fundamental right are sometimes lacking, and there are normative and structural barriers to its realization. This study aims to examine the Iranian legal system and analyze the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran concerning the right to petition and legal recourse. Using a descriptive-analytical method and library-based tools, this research explores the reasons behind the incomplete realization of this right in Iranian positive law. The results indicate that although the Constitution explicitly affirms the right to legal recourse in light of human rights principles, positive laws may pose barriers to the full realization of this right, disregarding the Constitution.

In this article, it is claimed that in modern law, the drafting of the constitution is one of the most important and sensitive measures in forming the legal order. Because the legal system determines the general framework of individual actions and social interaction of people, and this is both for the present and future and of course, the form of this law is also a matter of choice. In line with justifying this claim, John Elster's theory of rational choice is one of the most influential and comprehensive theories in explaining and criticizing the methods of drafting the constitution, which is based on two principles: the first principle: "the individuality of human action" and the second principle " The benefit-centeredness of human actions" has been proposed. According to this opinion, the electoral behavior of a society is the best example of using a rational choice, and the formulation and construction of the constitution is the best case, because in this work, even if there is no malice, it may make the situation worse than it is, and this is due to "rationality". is incomplete. This essay has investigated the application of this method in the analysis of drafting and revising the basic law, or what is called the design of the constitution, with an emphasis on the thought of John Elster. The purpose of the research is to examine this theory in relation to how and why people participate in drafting and creating the constitution as rational agents. This is a Research Article

Unfortunately, the concept of the founding power remains neglected in discussions on the constitutional law of Iran. It has become a prevailing view that after determining the type and form of the regime and the formation and ratification of the constitution, this creative power comes to an end and dissolves in order to ensure the stability of the established system. This is dangerous because it may lead to the overlooking of the vital role of the people, who are the true creators of a political system. However, it must be noted that the creator cannot dissolve and disappear within its creation. Such a viewpoint leads to dictatorship and the erosion of the people's sovereignty. Therefore in this research, which is conducted using a descriptive-analytical method and library sources, important concepts that are often conflated will first be clarified. Then, the status of the founding power and its role in the 1979 Islamic Revolution will be examined based on Chapter VIII of Carl Schmitt's book, Theory of the Foundation.

The quest for meaning in various texts lies at the heart of hermeneutics, the study of interpretation. This pursuit of understanding transcends mere words, aiming to bridge the gap between a text and its intended audience across time, culture, and personal perspectives. Nowhere is a consistent and well-defined interpretive approach more crucial than in the legal realm, where the interpretation of foundational documents like constitutions carries significant weight. This paper examines the interpretive approach employed by the Guardian Council in Iran for interpreting the nation's constitution. By analyzing the Council's practices through the lens of hermeneutical theories, this work seeks to illuminate the strengths and weaknesses of their approach and suggest potential avenues for improvement.The Iranian constitution, like its counterparts around the world, occupies a position of paramount importance within the legal hierarchy. It serves as the bedrock upon which all other laws are built, and its interpretation carries the weight of shaping the nation's legal landscape. A consistent and well-defined interpretive approach is therefore paramount to ensure clarity, fairness, and the upholding of the constitution's original intent.Here, hermeneutics comes to the fore. By offering frameworks for understanding texts, hermeneutics provides valuable tools for navigating the complexities of constitutional interpretation. Different schools of hermeneutical thought, each with its own emphasis, offer diverse perspectives on how to approach the task of interpreting a text. Understanding these schools is crucial for evaluating the Guardian Council's interpretive practices. Traditionally, hermeneutics has been understood as operating within a triangular framework comprised of the author, the text, and the interpreter. The author-centered approach prioritizes the original intent of the text's creator. The text-centered approach focuses on the inherent meaning within the text itself, independent of the author's intentions. Finally, the interpreter-centered approach emphasizes the role of the interpreter's background, experiences, and biases in shaping their understanding of the text.The Guardian Council, in its official pronouncements, declares its interpretive approach to be centered on the "intent of the legislator" (the constitution's framers). This suggests an adherence to the author-centered model of hermeneutics. However, the Council's methodology in practice reveals a more nuanced picture.One aspect of the Council's approach aligns with objectivist hermeneutics, a branch of the author-centered school. Objectivist hermeneutics emphasizes the importance of understanding the text within its historical context and the original intent of its creators. The Council's reliance on references to the law-making process demonstrates a partial commitment to this principle.However, the Council's practices often deviate from a purely objectivist approach. In some instances, the Council resorts to literal interpretations, focusing solely on the plain meaning of the words in the constitution. While this approach can be useful for achieving clarity, it can also lead to rigidity and fail to capture the nuances of the text's meaning in its broader context.More concerning are instances where the Council goes beyond literal interpretations. Such extra-literal interpretations, while potentially motivated by a desire to adapt the constitution to changing circumstances, can stray from the spirit of the document and the intent of its framers. This inconsistency in the Council's approach can generate confusion and inconsistencies in the legal system.The Council's use of extra-literal interpretations, particularly when it deviates from the text's spirit and authorial intent, suggests a potential shift towards a fusion of meaning horizons. This concept, associated with philosophical hermeneutics, highlights the interaction between the interpreter's understanding and the meaning inherent within the text. While valuable in some contexts, a fusion approach can lead to interpretations heavily influenced by the interpreter's own biases and agendas, potentially undermining the objectivity of the legal process.Furthermore, the Council's interpretive pronouncements often lack clear justifications for their rulings. This opacity makes it difficult to discern a consistent interpretive approach and raises concerns about accountability. Without clear explanations of the rationale behind their interpretations, the Council risks accusations of arbitrariness and undermines public confidence in the legal system.Despite aiming for the "intent of the legislator" and often employing elements of objectivist hermeneutics, the Guardian Council's approach falls short of fully embracing the strengths of this school. To achieve more consistent and well-founded interpretations, the Council could benefit from a more thorough application of objectivist hermeneutics.One crucial element is the hermeneutical circle, a concept that emphasizes the cyclical nature of interpretation. The interpreter begins with a preliminary understanding of the text, which is then refined through a deeper analysis of its historical context, authorial intent, and the language used. This analysis, in turn, informs a more nuanced understanding of the text, leading back to a potential reinterpretation. By engaging in this iterative process, the Council can arrive at interpretations that are more grounded in the text's original meaning and historical context.Another important aspect of objectivist hermeneutics is the consideration of both grammatical and technical (psychological) interpretations. Grammatical interpretation focuses on the literal meaning of the words within the text. Technical interpretation, on the other hand, delves deeper, considering the underlying social, political, and cultural context in which the text was created. By employing both methods, the Council can achieve a more holistic understanding of the constitution's intended meaning.Furthermore, objectivist hermeneutics emphasizes the importance of attempting to reconstruct the author's perspective. This involves delving into the debates and discussions surrounding the constitution's creation to gain a deeper understanding of the framers' intentions and the reasoning behind specific clauses. By incorporating this element into their interpretive process, the Council can ensure their interpretations remain faithful to the spirit of the constitution.By embracing the full framework of objectivist hermeneutics, the Guardian Council can navigate the space between "interpretive reality" and "interpretive truth." Interpretive reality refers to the initial understanding of the text based on the interpreter's background and current context. Interpretive truth, on the other hand, strives to arrive at an understanding that is as close as possible to the original meaning intended by the authors.While the interpreter's perspective can never be entirely erased, a well-developed objectivist approach can minimize the influence of personal biases and agendas. By employing the hermeneutical circle, engaging in both grammatical and technical interpretations, and attempting to reconstruct the author's perspective, the Council can move closer to achieving interpretive truth. This, in turn, will lead to more consistent, well-founded, and ultimately, more meaningful interpretations of the Iranian constitution.The interpretation of the Iranian constitution plays a critical role in shaping the nation's legal landscape. Examining the Guardian Council's interpretive approach through the lens of hermeneutics reveals both strengths and weaknesses. While the Council demonstrates a partial commitment to objectivist hermeneutics, inconsistencies and a lack of transparency remain areas for improvement. By embracing the full potential of objectivist hermeneutics, the Council can achieve a more robust and well-defined interpretive framework, ensuring that the Iranian constitution's meaning remains clear, consistent, and true to the original intent of its framers. This, in turn, will contribute to a more stable and predictable legal environment for all citizens of Iran.

The necessity of overseeing elections is an inevitable and indisputable matter, and it serves as a crucial mechanism, authorization, and determining factor in the electoral process and the acceptance of election results. Given Article 99 of the Constitution, and considering the interpretations and methods of oversight by the Guardian Council, particularly the supervisory authority which leads to the expenditure of system resources to justify arbitrary and often political behaviors, there is a clear need for reform and review in this regard. In light of the shortcomings and issues present in the electoral process, and in order to improve the country's electoral system to protect the people's votes, an optimal oversight model is deemed necessary. Regarding oversight models for elections, it should be noted that, based on the experiences of other countries, supervisory bodies such as the legislature, executive, judiciary, electoral commissions, and supreme courts vary. In many democratic countries around the world, election oversight is carried out by judicial bodies, typically entrusted to institutions such as constitutional courts and supreme courts. Therefore, if the conditions allow for a constitutional revision in the Islamic Republic of Iran, judicial oversight could be proposed as the most appropriate model for election oversight in Iran among the various political systems. Judicial oversight refers to the involvement of institutions such as the Supreme Election Court, the Supreme Court, the High Council of Justice, or specialized courts with specific duties, powers, jurisdictions, and membership structures overseeing elections.

In the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the necessity of accountability of the executive branch to the parliament is emphasized and various ways have been considered for this accountability. One of these ways can be the need to give a collective vote of confidence to the cabinet - that is, a vote of confidence in the entire group before a vote of confidence in individual ministers. The present article seeks to answer the question with a descriptive-analytical view, what is the verdict of collective vote of confidence in the Council of Ministers in the constitutional law system of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The finding of the article is that according to the text of several principles, the issue of giving collective vote of confidence to the Council of Ministers is foreseen in the constitution, but this issue has not been seriously considered either in the common laws or in the practical procedure. Although this way of supervision of the parliament over the government is basically one of the characteristics of parliamentary systems, our constitution prefers to use it in order to make the government more accountable to the parliament. In this way, in addition to the individual program of each minister, the parliament will also supervise the general policy of the government.

The principle of "individuality of the effect of judicial decisions" is considered one of the procedural principles and one of the dimensions of protection from the substantive aspect of judicial independence. Based on this principle, the decisions issued by the courts are effective only in the rights and duties of the people involved in the proceedings and are ineffective for other people. Considering that the absolute acceptance of this principle in some cases may lead to differences in procedures and as a result injustice, Article 161 of the Constitution has established the authority to issue unanimity votes to the Supreme Court in order to solve this issue. Despite this importance in the legislative approach regarding the Court of Administrative Justice in general and the recent reforms of the Court Law in particular, the legislator has considered the votes issued by the branches and boards of this institution to have a specific and general effect, contrary to the aforementioned legal principle. Among these provisions is Article 93 of the Law of the Administrative Court of Justice, which considers the opinions of specialized boards and general boards in the capacity of handling complaints against government approvals to be valid and criteria for administrative and judicial bodies and authorities. The review of the legislative approach mentioned in this article showed that although the standardization of the court's decisions may have merits, the obligation of judicial and administrative bodies and authorities to follow the decisions of the general board in handling complaints against government regulations, with fundamental issues various, including the jurisdiction of judicial interpretation (subject of Article 73), the supervision of the speaker of the parliament over government regulations (subject of Article 138), the substantive dimension of the principle of judicial independence and the statistics of the sources of issuing a decision (subject of Article 167) and The jurisdiction of court judges in reviewing government regulations (the subject of Article 170) is not harmonized.

In the 7th principle of the Constitution, local councils are considered at the level of Islamic Consultative Assembly as one of the main decision-making bodies of the country. Participating in decision-making and running the country requires authority and power. Since local councils are actually local parliaments, have the local councils like the parliament enough authority and power to fulfill this fundamental role and how to obtain a suitable model from the parliament for better governance of councils. In order to clarify the issue, it’s necessary to consider the similarities and differences of the local councils and Islamic assembly. They are similar in terms of the legal regulations that are enforceable, the bounding of all approvals on the Islamic laws, being directly selected by people, the consultative and supervisory aspect and the membership of minorities. However, the local councils differ in terms of the limits of legislation, competency, publicity, cancellation of membership and dissolution. Therefore, the local councils are considered as the entity with just consultative and cooperative nature and without the least supervisory or decision making and governance power.

Expressing loyalty to the Constitution, especially its immutable and key principles, is a public commitment. However, this commitment is more sensitively addressed for individuals who are government officials, depending on their level and position within the governance structure. For this reason, one of the general conditions stated in the regulations governing the employment and entry of individuals into government agencies and sensitive positions, including membership in the Islamic Consultative Assembly, is loyalty to the Constitution and its most fundamental principle, namely the absolute guardianship of the jurist. In this context, Clause 4 of Article 28 of the Election Law of the Islamic Consultative Assembly, enacted in 1999 with subsequent amendments, stipulates that one of the conditions for candidates for representation is "expressing loyalty to the Constitution and the progressive principle of the guardianship of the jurist." The main question of this article is how this condition is established. The answer to this question, derived through a descriptive-analytical method and preliminary examination of the concept of loyalty and the basis of this condition, is that loyalty to the Constitution is among the natural rights of governance and is a commitment of the nation, especially in the capacity of government officials. It is expressed both verbally and practically, and it has degrees that must be established through common knowledge (ordinary knowledge or confident suspicion).

Economic development is a key concept and a primary factor in good governance and national progress. However, true economic transformation and progress depends on sustainable development. A crucial aspect of sustainable economic development is the integration of economic advancement with environmental protection. Article 50 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran addresses environmental protection and the concept of sustainable economic development. This descriptive-analytical research examines the relationship between the environment and development, as well as the indicators and requirements for sustainable economic development as outlined in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran. It analyzes governance approaches in various sectors in achieving this goal and identifies the challenges and solutions for realizing the sustainable development envisioned by the Constitution. The findings of this research show that while sustainable development and environmental concerns have received significant attention in policymaking, the legislative and implementation phases face numerous challenges. Furthermore, constitutional oversight and judicial review have taken a minimalist approach to environmental restrictions. Key challenges identified include structural weakness of the Environmental Protection Organization, personality-driven environmental management, air pollution, weak monitoring and control mechanisms, and the lack of a comprehensive environment impact assessment legislation. To address these challenges, the research proposes solutions such as reducing government involvement in large industries, implementing environmentally conscious strategic management, introducing green taxes, and enacting comprehensive environmental impact assessment legislation.

Although oaths have been more prominently considered in the context of relationships between natural persons, we also witness the use of this ethical-legal tool in the realm of public law, particularly in the process of holding public offices and positions. This research seeks to answer the question of whether the oath taken by political officials in the Islamic Republic of Iran at the beginning of their activities is merely a moral and ceremonial matter, or if it also carries legal obligations. From one perspective, the oath has only an ethical description and serves to ensure the individual's inner conscience for fulfilling their duties and responsibilities appropriately. However, this article aims to demonstrate that, in addition to its ethical implications, the oath in public law serves both as a cause for the establishment of public positions and as a cause for their continuation. In such a way that without taking an oath in certain sensitive positions, the legitimacy of that person's actions is negated. Similarly, if an individual deliberately and intentionally violates the terms of the oath during their tenure, it will create grounds for their removal from public office, or at least it should. Although the second approach is valid based on the principles of the constitutional law of the Islamic Republic of Iran, there is still no specific legal mechanism provided for this important issue. This research is conducted with a descriptive-analytical approach, and the materials are gathered using library research methods.

Article 166 of the Constitution requires the courts to issue reasoned and documented decisions based on the laws and principles underlying the verdict. The importance of interpretative principles in labor law is widely recognized due to its protective nature. In cases of ambiguity, vagueness, or lack of legal texts, the aforementioned protective principles for the weaker party (the worker) are upheld. The current research was conducted using a descriptive-analytical method, supported by the library data and judicial opinions, to identify the substantive principles in labor law that protect workers. Initially, it was assumed that various principles could be identified within legislative texts, judicial opinions and legal doctrine. However, this research revealed that, firstly, many principles of worker protection, despite their implicit existence, have not been recognized; and secondly, in addition to the known principles mentioned above, other principles such as the broad interpretation in favor of the worker, the principle of limiting the will of the worker, the principle of minimum benefits in labor law, the principle of maximum obligations in labor law, the principle of prioritizing workers’ rights, the principle of valuing workers’ labor, and  the principle of continuity of the workplace were raised and examined.

History is full of popular struggles against oppression and tyranny. When a government undermines the existing democratic regime and jeopardizes the constitutional order, there is a need for a mechanism to safeguard the rule of the Constitution. To address this, democratic systems worldwide have long recognized the concept of the Right to Resistance (RtR) within their constitutional laws. However, this issue has been overlooked in Iran, leading to a dearth of legal research in this area. This theoretical gap necessitates comprehensive research to advance the public law literature. This article adopts a descriptive-analytical approach to answer this question: What is the position of the RtR IN the international legal system and constitutions, particularly in the Iranian Constitution? The research findings reveal that the RtR is regarded as a fundamental human right within the international legal system. Additionally, this right has been enshrined in numerous constitutional laws due to its dual function (both forward-looking and backward-looking). In the Constitution of Iran, the right to resist can be inferred from the affirmation of "the right to sovereignty and self-determination of the people" or "enjoining the good and forbidding the evil of the people towards the government". Resistance can also be justified as a "non-peaceful assembly" and as a "guarantee of popular implementation of deprivation of rights and freedoms".

In the Iranian legal system, use of legislative history (including parliamentary materials) in legal interpretation is quite prevalent. Judges and jurists always try to remain faithful to the legislative history and refrain from giving any interpretation contrary to it. Despite the role of legislative history in interpretation, it’s been widely neglected in our legal literature. The following paper explores this matter with regard to Iranian law. It develops arguments based on legal theory, constitutional law, and thus affords deeper insight into the current discussion on legal methods. Despite the role of legislative history in legal interpretations, its nature, types and criteria are unclear and unresolved. In this paper, first a precise definition of legislative history and its types is provided, and then the validity of legislative history is discussed , and explained how legal schools can invoke legislative history based on the assumptions they have previously accepted. In the second part, the main criteria for applying legislative history in legal interpretation is stated. Finally, (Part 3), it has been tried to identify the main applications of legislative history in legal interpretation along with real examples in the Iranian legal system.

The JCPOA is one of the agreements where the competence of the authorities involved in it is questionable. Therefore, with this approach, the aim of the current research is to study the common chapter of the competences of the Islamic Council and the Supreme National Security Council on the issue of JCPOA by using analytical -descriptive method and using library resources. The findings of the research show that the origin of the joint powers of the Islamic Council and the Supreme National Security Council is the two special tasks of legislation and policy-making. Contrary to popular belief, the competencies of the Islamic Council are not only legislative but also a set of legislative bodies and subordinate institutions. The functions of the Islamic Council are exclusively for the three functions of legislation, supervision, and interpretation of ordinary laws. In addition to the Islamic Council, the Supreme National Security Council, which is responsible for the regulation and implementation of the national security strategy in the country, in fact, the entire mechanisms for regulation and follow-up of national security, especially Iran's peaceful nuclear program, which is one of the most important topics of Iran's foreign policy in three It is the last decade After the leadership body. The Supreme National Security Council is the highest body whose rulings are in force. That is, the approvals of the Supreme National Security Council are valid for all executive bodies of the country with the approval of the leadership and there is no need to go through.

The right to a healthy environment reflects fundamental values such as the right to life, the right to health, and the right to a standard and quality of life that belongs to different generations of humans in the present and future. Trawel net fishing has been carried out in the Persian Gulf for some time, which, according to experts, violates the right to a healthy environment and its fundamental values. In trawel net fishing, a large fish trapping net in the shape of a bag is used, which is attached to the back of a floating vessel and catches marine organisms at different depths with a coverage coefficient of 90%, causing serious damage to the marine ecosystem. Preservation of the environment is done by supporting the protection and improvement of the environment and preventing and preventing any kind of pollution and destructive actions that cause the balance and suitability of the environment to be disturbed. Preservation of various animal species, including aquatic animals, is an example of environmental protection.In this research, we aim to answer the question through a descriptive and library method of investigation, whether it is possible to impose restrictions or prohibitions on this type of fishing in the Iranian legal system. Which laws and regulations can be relied upon to address the damage caused by trammel net fishing to the environment and natural resources? To this end, the constitution, ordinary laws, and regulations are first examined, followed by the general policies of the Islamic Republic of Iran,

According to paragraph 15 of the general policies of the legislative system announced by the Supreme Leader on 7/6/2018, one of the axes of determining the country's legislative priorities is the implemented principles of the Constitution. In the current situation of the country, the economy is one of the most important priorities of the country. As a result, it is necessary to evaluate the economic principles of the Constitution from this point of view. In addition to sub-paragraph 12 of article 3, the head of article 43 and the sub-section of article 44 of the constitution, the objectives of the economic system have been stated. The forty-third article of the constitution has stated the rules of the economic system of the Islamic Republic of Iran in nine clauses, which are the basic elements of a correct and fair economy. Considering the legal requirement and the necessity of fulfilling these criteria, the basic question is which one of them has been neglected. It is also necessary to look at these rules as a single set so that the system of economic rules of the Islamic Republic of Iran can be evaluated in terms of the level of realization as a coherent package. The results of this research show that due to the lack of a unified and coherent look at the set of rules of the economy of the Islamic Republic of Iran stipulated in Article 43 of the Constitution, some of these rules have been neglected at times, and the implementation of one rule has led to the neglect of another rule.

The Iranian Constitutional Revolution was a pivotal event in the country's history, its effects still evident today. The movement aimed to replace the absolute monarchy with a constitutional government, ultimately succeeding in establishing a constitution that sought to lay the legal foundation for a parliamentary system with democratic principles. A comparison of the Constitutional Revolution with other contemporary European constitutional movements reveals that its ideals were more closely aligned with the German constitutional movement, with an emphasis on limiting the absolute political power of the monarch and, consequently, the executive branch. The cornerstone of our discussion in this essay is first to recognize the understanding of the "rule of law" among constitutionalist thinkers, its elements, and its manifestation in the Constitutional Constitution and its supplement. The findings of this study show that the ideal of the "rule of law" cannot be found in a coherent way in the opinions of the thinkers of the Constitutional Movement. Therefore, it seems that the authors of the Constitutional Constitution and its supplement were not very successful in institutionalizing the concepts of the rule of law for various reasons. In addition, theoretically, there is also a break from the foundations in the realization of its important indicators.

International treaties are recognized as important elements in establishing connections between different legal systems, and they have also been endorsed by the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran and Article 9 of the Civil Code. The fundamental issue related to the position of international treaties within the Iranian legal system requires the recognition of the various classifications of international treaties based on criteria such as form, substance, and the formalities of their conclusion. This is necessary to determine how the institutions and authorities involved in the treaty-making process, under the provisions of the Constitution. This research examines the concept of a treaty from various perspectives, as well as the definition provided by Article 77 of the Constitution, and the treaty-making process outlined in the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, concerning the Iranian Constitution. It identifies the duties and responsibilities of each of the relevant branches of power and authorities to prevent any potential liabilities for Iran. While Article 125 of the Constitution outlines the process for approving treaties and the roles of the Parliament and the President, the significant involvement of other institutions necessitates a precise determination of the position and responsibilities of the executive, legislative, and judicial branches based on the principles of the Constitution and its authoritative interpretations. Additionally, the scope of authority of other entities, such as the Guardian Council, the Expediency Discernment Council, and the Supreme National Security Council, which may have an impact on this process depending on the subject matter, should be clearly defined. Despite the clarity of some of the duties and responsibilities of the branches of power and sovereign institutions, there is still ambiguity and inconsistency in certain areas. This underscores the need for a comprehensive law regarding the conclusion and implementation of treaties, and even the potential necessity of amending the Constitution.