A Comparative Study of Trial of Administrative Offences of the Staff in Iran and England from the Perspective of Principles of Fair Trial

Disciplinary proceedings are one of the new areas of proceedings that, like other areas of proceedings, the fairness is important, requiring special standards of conduct in accordance with the principles of fair trial derived from the Instrument of Human Rights. These principles govern the four stages of litigation/disciplinary litigation, namely Initiating the Case, Processing the Case, Deciding the Case, and the post-judgment stage (to pass a judgment). Accordingly, this article seeks to answer the question of the extent to which the principles of fair trial have been observed in the regulations for dealing with administrative violations in Iran and Britain? For this purpose, the substantive aspect (regulations) of handling administrative violations of Iranian and British employees is studied from the perspective of the principles of a fair trial as of special standards of fair trial governing the above-mentioned four steps, using the method of content analysis and inference from relevant legal texts. The findings of the study indicate the fact that the mentioned principles in the field of administrative violations regulations of the two countries have been provided in different forms; in a way that the British legal system is more developed than Iran in the realm of principles and guarantees of procedural rights of the accused employee due to the elements of Modern life, and in Iran, unlike the United Kingdom, the mechanism for dealing with administrative violations, although in some cases it complies with the principles of a fair trial, human rights instruments containing these principles have not been cited and are not based on the action of the relevant regulatory authorities.