جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « رئیس جمهور » در نشریات گروه « فقه و حقوق »

The fundamental rights and freedoms enjoyed by members of society are essentially interpretations of the broader concept of "human rights" at the international level. These rights are enshrined and updated in the constitutions of various countries, reflecting different historical contexts and governing principles. Human rights encompass a set of privileges and entitlements that people inherently possess simply by virtue of being human. To clarify, a right can be understood as a "guaranteed individual preference" mandated and protected by a higher political authority. This guarantee and obligation remain constant regardless of the social status of the individual claiming the right or the moral implications of exercising it. This understanding of rights rests on two fundamental elements: "moral agency" or "being a person," and consequently, "inherent dignity." This necessitates the existence of legal institutions to uphold both the personhood of individuals as conscious agents and the inherent dignity or ultimate value of human beings. According to the key principle of moral actuality, humans, as rational beings, possess the capacity to make valuable decisions and govern their own lives. Consequently, all individuals, regardless of external circumstances like cultural, social, economic, or political conditions, possess equal dignity, value, and rights. Furthermore, based on the principle of individual moral agency and self-regulation, people should have the freedom to determine their own destinies and manage their lives without obstacles to implementing their decisions. Since the concept and institution of rights were created to protect these fundamental aspects of human life, they necessarily possess an "organic and instrumental" character. However, as "individual" preferences, rights can sometimes compete with other normative claims. They are balanced with other value demands, such as public interest and collective existence, by adhering to supporting theories of justice. Consequently, rights constitute a "minimum" domain belonging to justice and cover only a limited part of it. Furthermore, rights are designed to support individuals' sovereignty over their destinies and are "morally neutral," meaning they support individuals' decisions without moral judgment. Human rights view the human moral agent as one who governs their destiny, making choices that should be respected regardless of their moral content. This discussion aims not to impose moral options but to support individuals' chosen options. Hence, rights, in the theory of preference, lack objectives under any condition, solely serving fundamental values like inherent dignity and moral effectiveness. Therefore, if fundamental values could be maintained without the aid of legal institutions throughout the development of collective human life, there would be no need for the concept of rights. This necessitates a continuous process of diagnosing and redefining the concept of rights while considering social transformations and addressing specific societal needs, always within the framework of fundamental values. It's worth mentioning that human rights have many aspects and manifestations, categorizable under different patterns. Accordingly, the Islamic Republic of Iran has enumerated and recognized numerous examples of human rights in the third chapter of its constitution, advancing fundamental rights and freedoms. Furthermore, in addition to strong constitutional provisions, the drafting of the Law on Respect for Legitimate Freedoms and Protection of Citizen Rights, ratified on May 15, 2013, by the Islamic Council, aims to ensure the people's fundamental rights and freedoms.  Despite the emphasis in these laws, debates about protecting fundamental rights and freedoms often arise due to reliance on special methods, potentially conflicting with established legal standards. Ensuring the aforementioned rights and freedoms faces ambiguities, as seen in discussions around drafting a "Citizenship Rights Charter" by the presidency. Here, we will explore the case of the "Citizenship Rights Charter" to illustrate the challenges in upholding fundamental principles like the rule of law, separation of powers, supervision, and accountability.

During the revision of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, due to the developments that took place in the management of the executive branch, article (130) mentioned the issue of the resignation of the president, only in short terms. In this paper, it is stipulated that "the president submits his resignation to the leader and continues to perform his duties until his resignation is accepted." Therefore, there was no specific reference to the terms and procedures for the president's resignation. It was also not mentioned that the law determines the details of this issue. Although there has been no case of the resignation of the president in the Islamic Republic of Iran, we cannot ignore the research on the terms and procedures for the resignation of this political official. Based on this, this paper, using a descriptive-analytical method and adopting a comparative approach, discusses the subject of the terms and procedures for the resignation of the president and, inspired by the constitutions of different countries, triesto present a clear outline regarding the above-mentioned subject.

Although criminal laws have strong enforcement instruments, in order According to Article 113 of the Constitution, after the Supreme Leader, the president is the highest official in the country. He is responsible for the implementation of the Constitution and the head of the executive branch, except in matters which are directly related to the Supreme Leader. The rationale of the aforementioned principle is that the president is the highest executive authority. According to Article 114 of the Constitution, he is elected by direct vote of the people. Therefore, considering that the president is elected by the people and takes over the implementation of affairs that are the affairs of the absolute authority of the jurist, it seems necessary to examine the nature of his decisions, in such a way that the president is the lawyer of the people and the validity of his decisions as the decisions of the lawyer is limited to the limits set in the constitution or that he has authority through the implementation of the leader in the determinate compass and whether can act absolutely according to the interests of the wards or is his choice a sign of allegiance and the effects related to it are current? Among these effects, we can mention people's loyalty to all the decisions made.Therefore, an attempt has been made to explain the concepts of "province", "representation" and "allegiance" with a descriptive-analytical and library method and by adapting them to the limits of the president's powers in the Constitution, the juridical nature of these decisions has been clarified.Considering these concepts and examining the necessary conditions for the president and the limits of his possessions in the constitution, the president’s privilege of the title of authority will be given. Because legislation, judiciary and implementation of laws are the affairs of the absolute authority of the jurist and considering that these affairs are delegated to triple forces in the system of the Islamic Republic of Iran, political representatives, who are called people's lawyers, as well as the president, have the title of authority, that this province is during the absolute jurisprudence of the jurist and it is obtained by means of tacit (representatives of parliament) and official (president) confirmation. It goes without saying that the nature of elections in the process of electing parliament members and the president is allegiance to the Islamic government because, as mentioned, the works of the triple forces are the affairs of the absolute authority of the jurist, whose implementation has been entrusted to the aforementioned forces.

Constitutional law is one of the most important fields of legal knowledge and its close connection with political science has led thinkers in the other fields of humanities to discuss the concepts and principles of this knowledge. Max Weber, one of the most important thinkers of recent centuries, has carefully reflected upon the knowledge of law, especially Constitutional law. He lived in a turbulent time and witnessed the rise of Germany as well as its decline. In the midst of World War I, Weber addressed Constitutional law issues and provided analyses in this regard and later played a vital role in drafting the Weimar Constitution. He was a supporter of the presidentialism and the extraordinary powers of the president, which were enshrined in the Weimar Constitution and later created many problems. This article aims to examine Weber's theory of Constitutional law and to explain his outlook and interpretation towards issues such as the president, parliament, and democracy

The ICC jurisdiction in pursuit of Omar Al-Bashir, deposed President, and cooperation necessity of new Sudanese state in this regard are preceded by a record issue in the Security Council Resolution. The Resolution on the new Sudanese state after Al-Bashir’s depose is still binding to surrender him to the ICC instead of being tried in domestic courts. The comparative feasibility study of this theory, considering the situation of Al-Bashir’s removal from power and the non-membership of the Sudan in the ICC is one of the aims and topics of this paper. The study method is descriptive-analytical and relies on requirements of the Resolution and the ICC Statute. The main question of the research is what the effect of the Resolution components and the Statute on obligation of the new Sudanese state to hand over the deposed president instead of domestic trials are.  The findings of research show that Omar Al-Bashir’s removal from power does not only affect the requirements of the Resolution and the provisions of the Statute, but it also facilitates the handing over and initiation of his trials in the ICC. Therefore, the new Sudanese state, as a successor continues to address the requirements of the Resolution and the Statute to hand over Al-Bashir to the ICC

According to Article 124 of the Constitution, the president can delegate some of his legal duties. Deputies of the president are divided into two categories according to the nature of their duties and powers: Deputies who are solely responsible for the affairs of the deputies, whose authority is delegated by nature, and deputies who are also in charge of the apparatus or organizations under the supervision of the President, whose nature of duties is inherent. The main question of this research is: ”Which duties of the vice-presidents can be performed by the deputies and what are the legal requirements governing this issue?” This is the main challenge that the present article seeks to resolve with a descriptive-analytical approach and by focusing on the opinions of the Guardian Council. The findings indicate that the President can delegate his duties in addition to the main and vertical duties of a person by observing the conditions of delegation. The president has the exclusive authority to determine the duties and powers of the vice-presidents. Political responsibility does not include vice presidents, but parliament can oversee vice-presidents in other ways, while vice-presidents have administrative and judicial responsibilities.

According to the first part of Article 115 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the President must be elected from among the qualified religious and political figures (Rijal). The question that arises when interpreting this principle is, firstly: does the word man mean only the masculine gender or both sexes? According to the second possibility, the figures (Rijal) will be religious and political, not necessarily male. But according to the first one, which is also confirmed by the principle of Haghighat, we believe that the meaning of this word is relates to current adjective, therefore, it has no effect on the necessity of being a presidential candidate. Finally, assuming that the meaning of the word man remains obscure, in more than one definite case, the practical principle prevails, the result of which is the license of the women's presidency. This article, while studying the process of approving of this principle, by analyzing the current adjective and matching it with the words in the phrase "religious and political man", has analyzed the meaning of this principle from the perspective of knowledge of the principles of jurisprudence.

The Article 157 of the Constitution places the responsibility for all "judicial", "administrative" and "executive" affairs of the judiciary on the head of the judiciary. According to the Article 160 of the Constitution, "full financial and administrative powers as well as employment powers [of the judiciary]" are provided for the head of the judiciary. In addition to the mentioned Articles, according to the Articles 126 and 52 of the Constitution, the President is "directly" introduced as the person in charge of program and budget affairs and administrative and employment affairs of the "country", and on the other hand preparing the "annual budget of the whole country" is vested in the government (the executive branch). Therefore, resolving the existing ambiguities regarding the limits of the administrative and financial competence of the head of the judiciary and explaining the manner in which it relates to the administrative and financial competencies of the president has been the mission of this research. Examining this issue in a descriptive-analytical format showed that according to the interpretation of the Articles of the Constitution, although the administrative and employment competence of the judiciary is with the head of that body, but due to coordination of affairs and suitable distribution of financial and administrative resources, this competence should be exercised with the coordination and approval of the president.

The US Constitution mandates the President to sign the bills approved by the Congress. The president can, within a deadline of ten days, sign a bill approved by the Congress, which will result to a law. If the President rejects the bill within that deadline for any reason and returns to the House which it was originated, the President's action shall be considered as a regular veto. After reconsideration, the Houses may, with two-thirds of the votes of their members, insist on its previous resolution, in which case the president's veto will be ineffective and the congressional resolution becomes a law without President's sign. If the ten-day deadline passes and the president does not announce his signature or veto, while the congress is at a session, the bill becomes a law; however, if the congress is not in session, the bill will not become a law. In this case, the pocket veto has been taken. Therefore, a pocket veto is possible at the time of the intersession and final session closurs of congress, but it is not feasible and is contrary to the constitution at the time of intrasession closurs of congress. The Supreme Court has unequivocally proclaimed the partial veto of the approved bills as a constitutional violation.

From the perspective of the history of the constitutional law of the Islamic Republic of Iran, negotiations in the Assembly of Experts for Constitution can clarify questions or ambiguities surrounding the constitutional law issues. In light of this, the present paper has investigated one of the main issues of the Islamic Republic of Iran's constitutional law – "the head of government" – and has addressed questions on the opinion of the MPs about the head of government. The paper uses a critical, descriptive-analytic research method, and the findings indicate that the representatives refer to the contrast between “Imamiyeh jurisprudence" and "modern conception" of the constitutional law. Here we can witness some kind of conflict of thought which has not only resulted in the "make - Jurisprudence of the text of the constitution" but it also creates a kind of imbalance between the "principle of proportionality of duties and powers". Such discrepancy between authority and responsibility leads to a conflict of practice regarding the constitution. Furthermore, observers to the constitution have to convey a different conception of "president" in the context of the Iranian constitutional law.

First Vice President was predicted with the revision of the constitution in 1368 and this position chosen by the President and in this regard does not need to be approved by the Parliament. Actually there has discretionary power. There are predicted duties in the constitution for him, such as participating in the open session of the parliament, Cabinet Office, coordination vice president and, most importantly acting president in the absence or illness, more than two months, dismissal, resignation and his death. With a tendency towards of the constitution 1368 to the semipresidential system, the position of First Vice President was predicted to fill the vacuum of prime minister created by the removal of the structure of the executive branch. The official appellation of this position would return to Article 131 of the constitution and acting president. On the other hand, apply surveillance on First Vice-President including financial and judicial supervision as well as duties as having no two state jobs. This position is faced with some legal ambiguities and shortcomings during the bail that in this article are checked controversial issues.

A “signing statement” is a written pronouncement issued by the President of the United States upon the signing of a bill into law. The signing statement has a particular importance in the US constitutional order because the Supreme Court and Federal Courts have useditasa source to issue judicial verdicts. Signing statements are grouped into three categories: Rhetorical, Interpretive and Constitutional statements. The signing statement can be used as a subsidiary and helpful tool for other powers and relative bodies for a valid understanding of ordinary law and protect the Constitution. There are debates about whether a signing statement is lawful and in compliance with the Constitution; however, the Presidents have used it as rhetorical, interpretive and constitutional tools, due to the lack of clear reference in the Constitution about the impossibility of applying it.

Observance and protection of civil rights along with human rights is one of the most important duties of the government, which is specified in paragraphs (7), (8), (12) and (14) of Article 3 of the Constitution. These duties are distributed among the three powers according to the powers of each, but in the meantime the President, according to the oath mentioned in Article (121) of the Constitution and declares that "the freedom and dignity of persons and rights that the law "It is well-known for the nation to support me." One of the legal tools for identifying and establishing citizenship rights is to include the provisions of citizenship rights in legal documents. The issuance of the Charter of Citizenship Rights in December 2016 by the President of the Republic in the Eleventh Government provoked discussions on the competence of the executive branch and the position of the President in the field of formulating and communicating citizenship rights in legal circles. Apart from examining the "nature" of the provisions of the Charter of Citizenship, the present article seeks to answer the question by descriptive-analytical method, taking into account Articles (58), (156) and (158) that "the competent authority "From the perspective of the constitution and the principles of public law, what is the institution for drafting the Charter of Citizenship Rights?" After stating and assessing the reasons of each of the parties to this legal dispute, at the end, suggestions in this regard are presented.

Despite the recognition of part of the rights of the nation in Chapter 3 of theConstitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the relevant ordinary laws,the "Charter of Citizenship Rights" -2016 - is one of the most important legaldocuments after the Islamic Revolution Which has officially recognizedlegal rights under the title of citizenship rights. In the present study, in adescriptive-analytical format, the possibility of invoking the Charter ofCitizenship Rights in the Administrative Justice Court was examined. Thefindings of this study showed that considering the role of the President in thepolitical and administrative system of the Islamic Republic of Iran andproving the legislative authority for this authority, the Charter of CitizenshipRights should be considered as government regulations and in terms ofnormative hierarchy under ordinary laws. Therefore, considering that inaccordance with Articles 167 and 170 of the Constitution and also theprocedure of the Administrative Justice Court, it is possible for judges of theCourt to invoke government regulations, this charter can be invoked in thecourt proceedings within the limits of the law.

From the perspective of legal status, public law is based on the concept of competence. Accordingly, the incapability of the political and executive officials is the principle unless it is stipulated in the letter of the law or is essential to exercise the competence. The Constitution, as a national covenant and legal document, is the origin of all the competences. The Article 138 of the Constitution expressively restricts the competence of rule-making into three officials; the council of ministers, each of ministers and the commissions composed of some ministers, and therefore the president isn’t mentioned in this Article. Beside this, the other Articles of the Constitution like 113, 126 and 134 do not prove the president's competence implicitly. The president is not competent in framing regulation individually in the legal system of the Islamic Republic of Iran, hence. He can just reflect his opinions and approaches in the format of the decisions of the council of ministers. This research, first examines the concept of competence and rule-making and then, scrutinizes the issue of the incapability of the President for Rule-Making in accordance with the aforesaid Articles in the format of implicit and explicit competence.

One of the Legislative's informative tools is questioning which provides the opportunity for people's representatives to be informed of the performance of the executive branch. In the Parliamentary and the semi-presidential system, representative's questioning from higher authorities of the executive branch is tangible in comparison to other monitoring tools. In the UK -as the origin of the parliamentary systemsthe House of Commons has an important function in questioning the ministers and the prime minister. In Iran, the Islamic consultative assembly has also anticipated the possibility of representative's questioning ministers and the president in the Constitution and in the parliamentary procedure. The process of questioning and responsiveness of higher authorities and its effects are different in the two legal systems. While representative's questioning and responsiveness of higher authorities of the executive branch in the UK House of Commons has a significant effect in terms of quantity, in Iran different legal effects are expected from questioning in terms of quality: questioning the president could result in referring to the judiciary and questioning the ministers may ultimately lead to the interpellation plan. Developing a comparative approach and an analytical method, this article has paid attention to different aspects of representative's questioning the higher authorities of the executive branch in Iran's Islamic consultative assembly and the UK's House of Commons. Using the results of comparative studies, some recommendations have been provided for Iranian legal system.

The legal acts according to a popular view are of two types: Contract and Unilateral Act. The nature of many of legal acts is obvious, but there are still some differences of opinion on whether some of them such as absolute legacy and wages are contracts or unilateral acts. The origin of these differences of opinion is the plurality and differences of criteria to differentiate the contract from unilateral act. Generally, to distinguish these, four criteria can be found: (a) a legal act which is formed by two wills (which are dependent on the legal decree and the parties’ intent), and the contract or a legal act which is formed by an independent determination is called the unilateral act; (b) the transaction being signed by the proposing and accepting parties is called the contract, and if it is constituted only by the proposing party, it would be called the unilateral act; (c) if a legal act is related to the dignity of two people, it is the contract; otherwise, it is the unilateral act; (d) a legal act comprising all elements of the contract is called the contract, and if it is authorized only legally, it is called the unilateral act. The writer seek to prove the following points:(1) The legal acts are unique to contract and unilateral act, and there can be expected no third nature; (2) citing numerous arguments to show that the first criterion is the criterion for distinguishing contract from unilateral act.