characteristics of an ideal judicial award in Iranian legal system under international principles of human rights

The transformation of the international legal system from state-centered to humanist has led to the increasing attention of the international community to human rights principles, and it is believed that some of these principles are jus cogens or customary international law and are beyond satisfaction. Therefore, it is necessary for the domestic law of countries to comply with the requirements of these norms.In the process of observing the performance of the government by international observer bodies, one of the important criteria in assessing the human rights behavior of the government is the judgments of the courts that if they do not comply with international human rights principles, they will cause the government international responsibility.

The present study, assuming the existence of two authoritarian and human rights approaches among judges, intends to explain the characteristics of ideal judgement conform to human rights principles through an analytical-descriptive method.

Despite the high status of human rights principles in the international legal system and government’s liability for observing them, these norms are not considered in national courts in the litigation process and there is no effective planning to promote this approach in the judiciary. Whereas from the perspective of international human rights bodies and observers, the judgments of the courts are very important in evaluating the country's legal system, as a result, the above approach causes the country's judicial system not to have a proper position in the viewpoint of these observers and to face challenges to the country. The characteristics presented in this study reduce these challenges and align the approach of judges with the international human rights system.