جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "anti-corruption" در نشریات گروه "فقه و حقوق"

State-owned enterprises established to facilitate the proper provision of public services by governments have become one of the ambiguities in the geometry of public law in the country due to the lack of a coherent and precise legal system that regulates their activities. One of the most important shortcomings of the domestic public law system in this regard is the lack of effective monitoring methods on the performance of these enterprises, which has increased the incidence of corruption in them. "Creating transparency" as a way to prevent corruption while developing and strengthening their accountability and oversight is one of the most basic solutions to this problem that the present article seeks to find a suitable mechanism to ensure it. The present study utilizes library studies and adopts a descriptive-analytical approach, while enumerating the principles governing the realization of administrative and financial transparency of these companies, including "establishing the most appropriate methods of accountability", "applying organizational transparency", "participation with stakeholders in programs to combat "Corruption" and "Ensuring transparency in corporate ownership", its practical realization in countries around the world under the four models of "submitting a comprehensive annual report", "creating an internal audit process", "disseminating information" and "inserting the budget of state-owned companies in the budget law" Has examined and highlighted the gaps in the domestic legal system in this regard

Conflict of interest is one of the situations that can lead to corruption. In order to manage these situations and deal with its adverse effects, several strategies have been used in various fields. This study is trying to answer these main questions: does managing conflict of interest situations require independent legislation? And how can the law help manage these situations? The present study is analytical in nature and, by collecting the required information through the library method and examining the experiences of other countries and legal doctrine, has reached the conclusion that situations of conflict of interest have grounds for the emergence of person-centered and structure-oriented. Person-centered contexts are largely similar, with the adoption of general and comprehensive laws that can help control this part of the conflict of interest. On the other hand, the areas of conflict-oriented structure due to the structural differences of each institution with each other, require special attention and the adoption of case-specific laws. Adoption of the bill "How to manage conflicts of interest in performing legal duties and providing public services" can largely cover person-centered issues of conflict of interest. It can almost respond to the need to manage conflict of interest situations in Iran but in specific areas, special attention and the adoption of special laws is necessary.

By joining to “UN Convention against Corruption”, Iran has obliged to improve the competition in the government procurement regulations. Nonetheless, the Iranian regulations on government procurement have not yet been challenged.
In the current essay, first, researcher through the competitive study of “UNCITRAL Model Law on Public Procurement (2011)” and “WTO Agreement on Government Procurement (2012)” which are significant samples of international practices in public procurement, presents the factual global standards for government procurements. Then, after comparing them with “Iranian Tendering Act” and relevant directives, the researcher has gotten the point that Iranian regulations require improvements although there are some positive aspects. These modifications consist of some literal changes on the titles, subjective attitude to government procurements, inclusion of service purchases, considering the intellectual property rights and excluding continues and previous purchases from the procedures aiming to increase the competition grounds and harmonise with international standards while giving a solution to the current necessities of the country.

This article examines and compares the role of constitutional courts in limiting executive power in France and Brazil. It analyzes the structure, jurisdiction, and powers of the French Constitutional Court and the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court, exploring the political and social impacts of their decisions. The comparative study reveals that both courts, despite their structural and jurisdictional differences, have effectively maintained the balance of power and prevented the concentration of executive authority. In France, the Constitutional Court primarily focuses on reviewing laws and international agreements, upholding human rights and democratic principles, while the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court is recognized as an active institution in combating corruption and overseeing executive actions. By analyzing key decisions of these courts, the article assesses their social and political effects and concludes that both courts have effectively contributed to limiting executive power and preserving democracy in their respective countries, considering their unique political and social contexts.

Prevention and management of conflict of interest in the judicial system is one of the ways to reduce corruption in it and in the whole of the political-administrative system. Often, different countries anticipate and control conflicts of interest in the justice system. The countries of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the United States and the United Kingdom each have some laws and regulations in place in their legal system. By comparing the three countries above, it can be concluded that given the early identification of the concept of conflict of interest in the United States and Britain, and as a consequence of the drafting, adoption and enforcement of these laws against Iran, the conflict of interest in the judicial system of these countries has been decreasing and Judicial and public officials have also had a great deal of interest in managing conflicts of interest by knowing and understanding this issue. But in our legal system, an independent concept of conflict of interest has not yet succeeded in finding its proper place in the laws, and as a result we have not witnessed a significant process of managing conflicts of interest in the judicial system. Nonetheless, disparate laws and regulations that involve preventing and combating conflicts of interest have failed to provide effective management of conflicts of interest in the absence of some of the key elements in managing conflicts of interest, such as declaring assets or supporting effective disclosures. The lack of comprehensive legislation and the effective and transparent implementation of existing laws also add to the problems of conflict management in the justice system.