جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "administrative contracts" در نشریات گروه "فقه و حقوق"

Administrative contracts are one of the main sources of corruption in public affairs. Due to the financing of administrative contracts from the public budget and the high amount of these contracts, administrative authorities are influenced by personal interests in the relevant administrative decision. Considering the increase of efficiency and productivity of administrative organizations and the necessity of protecting and guaranteeing the rights of citizens against the abuse of public officials, supervision of administrative contracts is mandatory and unavoidable. In this regard, various supervisory authorities exercise supervision over administrative contracts. One of them is the Complaints Board (law on tenders). Now, what are the characteristics of administrative contracts that need to be monitored? To what extent can the Complaints Board, as a dedicated over sight body over see and ministrative contracts? And where are the challenges facing her? These questions are discussed in this article. Findings in the article show that the monitoring of this Board, in addition to its strengths, also has disadvantages, which we will review and make a suggestion.

Supervising administrative contracts is necessary for an administrative system to provide efficient services to the public. It is important to note that administrative contracts are the most significant gate to corruption in governmental administrations. Therefore, controlling this kind of corruption is essential for increasing the efficiency of the government and protecting the rights of the public. Supervising administrative contracts is a legal mechanism which prevents corruption by high-ranking officials and guarantees public rights. In this paper, the characteristics of administrative contracts and the methods and bodies for their oversight within the Iranian legal system will be examined. The findings of the study show that in Iranian legal system, the oversight of administrative contracts is insufficient due to ambiguities in the relevant laws and regulation and the lack or weakness of exclusive supervisory authorities. It seems that the enactment of a specific law on the oversight of administrative contracts will solve this problem.

Administrative Contracts qualify mandatory and warranted legal forms which follow some specific rules and procedures. However, failure to comply with the procedures may cover various performances. The main question which is intended in this paper is that to what extent is the issue of invalidity of administrative contracts in Iran conforms to the general rules of civil contracts, and what are the differences with them? Reflection on legal materials and articles, legal acts and legal doctrine, can lead to the conclusion that administrative contracts in a invalidity state does not merely guarantee void execution, but due to collecting administrations’ interests and individuals’ rights a specific situation which can be correct and void is considered. In some cases, so as to guarantee the rights of individuals, the contract is to the extent that it compensates for damage, has a credit. This claim referring to Article 92 of the Public Calculation Law and Clause 1 of Article 4 of the Regulations on the Implementation of the Statute of the Constitutional Court of the Complaints Board has been proven.

Since 2019, human social life has been confronted with the globalproblem of "Covid 19". This, of course, has led to problems for publicaffairs, including the field of contracts, as part of public affairs has been shutdown or partially shut down as a result. One of the most importantconsequences of such a situation has been the crisis in the relations betweenthe contracting parties, which will undoubtedly increase in the future. Thepresent article, realizing such importance, has discussed this issue in theIranian legal system. In this regard, this article seeks to answer the questionof what the consequences of "Covid-19" are on the administrative contracts.In answer to this question, an attempt has been made to answer it using theresearch method descriptive-analytical. The hypothesis of the presentarticle has been that in the current situation, Coronavirus has faced theexcuse of implementing some administrative contracts: "force majeure" and"unpredictable matters". In the end, it is concluded that, firstly, someadministrative contracts have faced the phenomenon of "force majeure" as aresult of the Covid-19 crisis, and therefore have faced the challenge oftemporary suspension to permanent suspension. Second, some of thesecontracts face the phenomenon of "unpredictability" because of Covid-19and it is worthwhile for the government to make a strategic and fundamentaldecision as soon as possible and without delay as to how to deal with thisdeadly virus, before the Covid-19 crisis triggers other crises.

However, in the Iranian legal system, a legal entity called "administrative contract" has not been identified and despite the efforts of public law jurists, such a path has not gone well. But it seems that in Iran, in the shadow of the requirements of the modern state, some of the administrative contracts here, specifically the mandatory ones, have been in place for decades, and promise to establish a law known in the Roman-German tradition as an "administrative contract." The present article answers this question by understanding such importance: What are the grounds and problems of the birth of administrative contracts through compulsory contracts in the Iranian system? In response to this question, using the research method descriptive-analytical, these results have been obtained. First; Compulsory contracts in Iran are, in many cases, functionally the same as administrative contracts. Second; Due to the occurrence of such a situation, one can hope for the legal recognition and establishment of administrative contracts in Iran and in this way it got rid of the confusion that prevails in the current atmosphere.Third; Despite the legislature's railing for the birth of administrative contracts in Iran, there are many obstacles in front of this legal institution in Iran. Fourth; The focus of these obstacles is in the view of the Guardian Council on the issue of the contract.

The entry of foreign private individuals into the contract with the Administration is always accompanied by this concern that the Administration by using its instruments of governance, violates the terms of equality of the parties at the time of concluding the contract and will do such acts like the unilateral change and termination of the contract. To overcome this concern, the types of stabilization clauses in foreign investment contracts are inserted, which seek to preserve the terms of the contract in time of concluding and to prohibit the Administration from changing the terms after the conclusion of the contract. This article by using a descriptive and analytical method seeks to answer the correctness of the inclusion of stabilization clauses in foreign investment contracts in light of administrative rules and principles. Findings show that the inclusion of the conditions of stability in particular types of words, freezing, non-interference and non-compliance with the principle of rule of law, the principle of competence and the principle of equal alignment of public interest and public authority are in contrary with the administrative contracts and the principle of compatibility and non-violation of the stabilization clauses in terms of economic equilibrium with principles governing administrative contracts.

Abstract The existence of a state in oil contracts and its specific requirements has raised disagreements on the nature of oil contracts in terms of administrative and non-administrative considerations. Experts like “Professor Doge” believed there’s no difference between administrative or non-administrative consideration of oil contracts. The other group believed that oil contracts are deemed to be administrative as non-administrative contracts are distinguished in terms of observation of legal obligations. With regard to the emphasis on governance principles, the existence of particular commandments and privileges, public person element, and its direct relationship with public interests, oil contracts are generally subjected to administrative contracts. The current study aims at expressing the comments as well as explaining administrative and non-administrative parameters and their compliance with oil contracts .

Handling lawsuits regarding administrative contracts is important, due to specialization and special administrative requirements. Therefore, in many countries, judicial review of these contracts has been entrusted to a special judicial authority. In the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Court of Administrative Justice is envisaged as the judicial authority in charge of administrative matters, but the Court has deny itself jurisdiction over litigation concerning administrative contracts. In the present study, with a descriptive-analytical method, after criticizing the existing judicial procedure and showing the lack of a valid legal and legal basis for its arguments, by analyzing the arguments of the proponents and opponents of the jurisdiction of the court and analyzing the elements and types of administrative, civil and criminal lawsuits, we concluded that not only is it legally possible for the Court of Administrative Justice to accept the general jurisdiction in handling lawsuits regarding administrative contracts, but it can be argued that the procedure is inconsistent with the relevant laws.

Today, governments bind contracts with private legal persons in order to fulfill their obligations in various fields. Since the government’s goal of binding such contracts is to provide public interest, so there are certain circumstances that are not common in usual agreements among ordinary people. Equality of parties in rights and privileges has been accepted as a pivotal principle in private law, but the exploitation of public power in administrative contracts makes these contracts in favor of governments. Exceptional terms such as unilateral termination of contract or price changes based on administrative exemptions, raises the question whether such agreements are approved by jurisprudence of Islamic denominations or not? Contrary to the common attitude that considers administrative contract as the offspring of the modern world, jurists of Islamic schools of thought were not unfamiliar with the concept of administrative contracts and referred to this concept in their books. With the emergence of a welfare state and a highlight of the role of the state in people's lives, the importance of administrative contracts has been clear more than before, since without them, it is not possible for states to serve citizens. Islamic Government, from the beginning of its establishment in Medina, and later in the time of Khulafa’ Rashidin, needed a formal legal framework for conducting its affairs. The Prophet's tradition and his successors in dealing with the issues that the Islamic Government resolved through its cooperation with its citizens is a valuable resource in this regard. Evaluating each contract with the general rules of proper contracts is something that should not be easily overlooked.

As one of the fundamental concepts of administrative law, public service has always exerted a significant impact on different spheres , especially in France. The constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, as the supreme legal document of the country, has pointed to some clear instances of public service in different Articles and has assigned the duty of their provision to the government indicating, in the view of some, acceptance of this concept as a philosophy of government and administrative agencies. Thus, it is particularly important to study public service and its impacts on different spheres. To this end, in this article, the concept was addressed in four spheres and through scrutiny of provisions and legal analyses, this result was obtained :Public service in organizational sphere is the criterion for detection and separation of public agencies from the other agencies as well as the public sector employees from non-public employees. In jurisdictional sphere, the government’s extensive decision-making authority at individual and public levels, and in financial sphere, concessions such as a ban on state-owned property seizure and tax exemptions is justified by resorting to public service concept. In civil liability sphere, poor or incomplete providing of public service is considered as one of the causes of government liability.