The legal position of the legal opinion of the jurists of the Guardian Council regarding the principles of the Constitution and its relationship with the official interpretation of the Constitution

The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, in its most important meta-constitutional principle, i.e. principle 4, has determined the necessity of compliance of all laws and regulations with Islamic standards, the clarification and jurisprudence of the Guardian Council as the exclusive authority for safeguarding this important in the legislative aspect. In this regard, the aforementioned institution is responsible for reviewing all binding legal propositions in terms of compliance or non-contradiction with Islamic standards. An important special task that has been given to the jurisprudence body of the Shura under this principle is called Shariah supervision, and the result of this supervision is the issuance of a Shariah opinion. Regarding the lack of specification of the constitution, especially the Shari'i opinion, contrary to the specification of the official and legal interpretation of the Guardian Council according to principle 98, the present research has tried to answer these questions with the approach of procedural analysis and using library sources; First of all, considering that in principle 98, the authority to interpret the principles of the Constitution is assigned to the Guardian Council, what kind of opinions are based on principle 4 regarding the principles of the Constitution? Secondly, what is the relationship between these opinions and the official interpretations of the Guardian Council in line with principle 98? Thirdly, what is the nature of the views of the jurists of the Guardian Council regarding the principles of the constitution based on principle 4? In view of the validity of Sharia opinions and their connection to Islamic standards and the superiority of these standards over all legal norms, including the Constitution based on Article 4, Sharia opinions that are issued in the positions of conflicting "applicability" or "general" principles of the Constitution. have a superior nature than official interpretations.