نشریه دانش حقوق عمومی
سال سوم شماره 4 (پیاپی 10، زمستان 1393)

In the legal documents, Introduction is responsible for introducing the subject, formation context, mission and purpose of the document. Although these components are mentioned in the preamble of the constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Most approaches to this preamble, are Focused on its historical value and less attention is paid to its legal worth and tremendous impact on the proper interpretation of the constitution principles.
The claim of this article is that one of the requirements of correct interpretation of a legal document is attention to its preamble. The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran is not an exception and in order to interpret it correctly it is essential to pay attention to its preamble which contains the principles governing the provisions of the constitution and is as a pillar and foundation of constitution.

In the hadith books, the issue of Nasihat(admonition) for Islamic Ruler by the people is refered to as a right-duty and also has been common in the legal-jurisprudential literature of our country. But non-specification of the principle "al-nasiha le aemate-l moslemin" and its dimensions and its exercising method in the constitution of Islamic Republic of Iran causes disagreements on possibility of using its capacities in interpretation of principles of constitution inter alia possibility or method of supervising the leader by the Assembly of Experts.
This article answers the question that whether it is possible to find a basis in the constitution for "al-nasiha le aemate-l moslemin"? And in this case, how would be the dimensions, scope and mechanisms for its application in the legal system of the Islamic Republic of Iran, especially regarding the Imam ul Muslemin? This article, for this pupose’ through religious-jurisprudential investigations and comparing the principles of the constitution with them, and studying the proceedings of the House of final review and revision of the constitution and reviewing previous research, introduces principle 8 of the constitution (invitation to the good) as the basis for this issue in legal system of our country and claims that applying it regarding the Leader by the Assembly of Experts is possible and justifiable.

The dichotomy of agency and structure is one of the most challenging and controversial topics in the field of social sciences. The Contrast and the interaction between the structure and substance of government are critical and complex issues in constitutional law. This article seeks to examine one aspect of the effect of government’s structure on the nature of the political system from the perspective of agency and structure. However, this dichotomy is not unprecedented in other sciences, it may be argued that the basis of all these discussions have a common root source but the consequences are evident in various areas.
The main purpose of this paper is to investigate that why any substance, content and goal needs its own suit structure and also, why legal structures and governmental systems are not resembling neutral and ineffective containers and must be formed appropriately to their content. Through analysis of this major issue, some of the demands and requirements of the desired governmental structure of the Islamic Republic of Iran will be examined.

One of the limitations of the Parliament in initiating laws in legal system of Iran is the limitation mentioned in principle (75) of the Constitution about prohibition of proposing bills leading to increase in public expense or reduction in public income. That principle is one of the most important principles which Guardian Council has invoked it regularly in reviewing the legislations of the parliament.
According to principle (75) of the constitution of Iran, that limitation imposes on the all of legislations, budgetary one or others. We know executing many of laws is dependent to financial resources. In this essay, we are going to analyzing decisions of Guardian Council about notion of public income, public expense, and ways of countervailing it. This essay has investigated the decisions of Guardian Council in several periods of the Iranian parliament.
Declaration of inconsistency of representative’s propositions which leads to increase in public expenses or reduction in public incomes; are not only about that cases, but also that inconsistency has been announced about propositions that haven’t had sufficient remedial ways for their financial effects. With attention to this reality some statutes didn’t implement perfectly, because in the time of passing them, their financial effects were not prepared. Guardian Council with declaring inconsistency of some of remedial ways which were not sufficient financial means in some proposals and were not real ways, has tried To maintain consistency of legislative processes with relative principles of constitution of Islamic Republic of Iran and its theoretical bases.
This essay, with descriptive-analytical method, investigates opinions (interpretative and consultative) of Guardian Council about statutes which were related to principle (75) of constitution until eighth period of Islamic Majlis (parliament) of Iran.

The principle of obligation to state reasons of the Administrative decisions is one of the modern principles of administrative law that is recognized in the important legal systems. The object of this paper is to determine the scope and Foundations of the Principle and Then, to compare its place in Europe and Iran's legal system in order to use the experiences of the international organization and to understand the strengths and weaknesses of laws, regulations and precedent of Iran.
Result of investigations carried out on the two legal systems shows that principle of Obligation to state reasons of the Administrative decisions is one of the characteristics of good administration and Government officials are obliged to state the reasons for their decisions. This principle have been mentioned in some of the laws and regulations and precedent of the legal system of Iran and some of the administrative officials are obliged to state their decisions’ reasons in some specific cases, But it should be extended to all administrative decisions.

Studying an important subject of the American constitutional law, this article attempts to answer the question that how the judicial review body can contribute by means of forward-looking interpretation, to enhancement of the capacity and the dynamism of the Constitution in order to satisfy the political and social evolutions; such as the role played by the Supreme court on alteration in the American political system and it is perhaps because of this fact that the Constitution of this country has not been necessitous of the structural and serious revision.
In this article, therefore, the nature of judicial review, its domain and also the competence of judicial review body in American constitutional law will be briefly presented (1). The principles invoked and the interpretative approaches of the American Supreme Court will be studied (2) and finally on the base of these approaches, it will be analyzed that how the Supreme Court interprets the Constitution in the light of the political and social evolutions (3). This research will be done with a practical and theoretical approach and can be useful in constitutional law studies, in particular, the interpretation of the Constitution; in the meantime it attempts to describe one of the comparative constitutional subjects.