قانون اساسی

A national referendum on constitutional amendment was held in Kazakhstan on June 5, 2022, with the adoption of 33 proposed constitutional amendments to garner public support for a “New Kazakhstan”. As a result, the Constitutional Court re-established, a seven-year presidential term was approved, the death penalty was abolished and the close relatives of the president were banned from entering politics or holding senior positions in state-owned companies or regional administrations. In addition, the 2000 law that granted legal immunity to Nazarbayev and his family was also repealed. In this article, the authors attempt to examine the Impact of the 2022 Constitutional Referendum on the Political Structure of Kazakhstan. The understanding of the success and effectiveness of some reforms that pursue higher goals such as achieving democracy and reducing the concentration of power is demonstrated in the medium and long-term based on the performance of political elite.The Constitution of Kazakhstan was adopted by referendum on August 30, 1995 with 90.01 % of the vote.  At the meeting of the Assembly of People of Kazakhstan on April 26, 2022, President Tokayev submitted a request to hold a national referendum to revise the Constitution and the referendum was held on June 5, 2022. In fact, as a result of 2022 referendum, 77.18 % of citizens said yes to 56 constitutional amendments in 33 articles of the Constitution; this has changed one-third of the current Constitution.The political structure, reformed  through the referendum, can be examined in three key aspects: Constitutional, Public, and Social Reforms including changes to the ownership of the lands and its subsoil, waters, flora and fauna and other natural resources from the government to the people and re-establishing the Constitutional Court; Presidential System includes changing presidential term to 7 years, banning close relatives of the President of Kazakhstan from holding positions as political civil servants or heading institutions in the quasi-governmental sector, and  removing the President's authority to dismiss Akims (governor) of districts, cities, and rural districts from their positions; and  the Parliament including holding Mazhilis (parliament) elections based on a mixed electoral system, the laws will be passed through the Parliment and the Senate will not approve or disapprove them, reducing the presidential share in appointing deputies in the Senate from 15 to 10 representatives and the appointment of 5 members of the Senate by the Assembly of the People of Kazakhstan.In fact, the main goal of the amendment was to reduce the concentration of power and the authority of the president while increasing the power and the role of the parliament, local representative bodies and the people in Kazakhstan. The only reform to the judicial system is the re-establishment of the Constitutional Court; however, the president still has great influence over the structure of the Constitutional Court as he/she can choose the president of the court and four judges.The aim of this article is to assess the impact of the 2022 Constitutional Referendum on the political structure of Kazakhstan. The main question of this research is how the 2022 constitutional amendment could affect the political structure of Kazakhstan? For this purpose, we collected data from news, articles, reports and analyses in this field. In addition, we have analyzed the latest version of the constitution of Kazakhstan with previous version.Research question: How could the 2022 constitutional amendment affect Kazakhstan's political structure?Research hypothesis: It seems that at the very first moment one can observe the short-term effects of some reforms on the political structure of Kazakhstan. However, the understanding of the success and effectiveness of some reforms that pursue higher goals such as achieving democracy and reducing the concentration of power is demonstrated in the medium and long term based on the performance of political elite. The exploratory method was used in specific content analysis. Data was collected through library sources, official statements, reports, as well as a review of the Constitution of Kazakhstan and the amendment made on June 5, 2022. Kazakh society expressed its desire for fundemental changes in the country's political structure through a referendum held on June 5, 2022. However, it must be acknowledged that reforms alone, such as reforming the presidential term, adjusting the number of representatives in parliament, changing the name of the capital, and re-electing the president, senate, and parliament, cannot guarantee democracy in Kazakhstan. Given the experience of Kazakhstan's first president in maintaining power, there have been concerns and doubts about the effectiveness of Tokayev's reforms. It is still unclear whether Tokayev will implement the approved reforms or prioritize his political survival over them.Over the years, the Constitution of Kazakhstan has undergone numerous revisions and amendments, yet these amendments have not brought about significant changes in the country's political structure or affected the functioning of its political elite. While recent reforms have sparked a glimmer of hope, the actions and intentions of Kazakhstan's political elite still need to be seen moving forward. It is not possible to quickly evaluate and validate all the constitutional amendments of June 5, 2022 through national referendum. These revisions should be monitored and evaluated in three seperate periods: short-term, medium-term, and long-term. Democracy is an ongoing process that requires constant vigilance and commitment. Kazakhstan can achieve its stated goals only if comprehensive reforms continue. The success of these reforms now depends on Kazakhstan’s political elite and future presidents and their response to these changes. To institutionalize a democratic system and change the country’s political structure, Kazakhstan needs the support of its political elite.

Jurisdiction of the judicial organization of the armed forces in Iran's legal system, based on the three periods of permission to develop the jurisdiction by the leadership in 1987, 1994 and 2020, is no longer limited to crimes related to the specific military and disciplinary duties of the armed forces employees. Examining the position and identifying the executive territory of the permissions based on the additional jurisdictions of the military courts in time are the issues that the present research is responsible for describing and analyzing with a library study. The aforementioned permissions according to the theory of the absolute authority in the hierarchy of laws are placed in a position beyond Article 172 of the Constitution. The approach of the legislator in the provision of Note 1 of Article 597 of the Criminal Procedure Law in resolving the objection of the Guardian Council, while not referring to the permissions after the date of approval of the law in 2013, clearly emphasizes the high status of the permissions of the development of the jurisdiction of the judicial organization of the armed forces.

Legitimacy theories describe and analyze how a system of governance is entitled to government with the acceptance and consent of the subjects. These theories explain how a crisis in the legitimacy of a political system can lead to change and transformation of governance. From this perspective, the Iranian Constitutional Revolution indicates a crisis in the legitimacy of the Qajar absolute and patriarchal rule. The main question of this article is what was the theory of legitimacy on which the Iranian constitutionalists based the new political system? Therefore, it seeks to examine this category in the constitutional law. An examination of the constitution and the constitutional amendment shows that legitimacy in the constitutional system of governance in Iran, in accordance with the theories of legitimacy, is consistent with the theories of legal and democratic legitimacy due to its reliance on the law and the will of the people. However, by recognizing the absolute monarchy, it also confirms the idea of ​​traditional legitimacy within the framework of legal legitimacy.

It is generally assumed that the judiciary, as one of the three branches of government, only has a reactive function. That is, events must occur within society and a dispute must arise before the parties involved can approach the judiciary to seek justice and resolution. It is from this point onward that the role of the judiciary begins. However, beyond resolving disputes between parties, it seems that the judiciary can—and indeed should—also play a proactive role. In other words, there are duties for the judiciary that are conceivable before a crime is committed or a dispute arises. Therefore, the main question of this paper is: What is the role of the judiciary in crime prevention in the Islamic Republic of Iran? The hypothesis of the paper is that, according to the role assigned to the judiciary by the Constitution, its functions can be divided into two categories: reactive (administering justice) and proactive (preventing crime and resolving disputes before they occur). Based on this, the judiciary's proactive functions can be identified. The findings of the research show that, despite the fact that the judiciary has a range of preventive duties that are essential for achieving a healthy and just society, the lack of a cohesive approach on one hand, and parallel efforts and institutional disorganization on the other hand, have prevented the achievement of desirable results. The research approach is descriptive-analytical, and the data collection method is library-based and documentary.

Social relations are often complex, tense, and conflictual, which is why in most societies, law is established as the final arbiter of disputes, providing a standard for behavior and resolving conflicts when they arise. Although it is universally accepted that the law should be applied consistently and without exception, there are instances where exceptions apply. Force majeure in private law and the state of exception in public law are examples where the rule of law is suspended. In this context, the main question of this article addresses the necessity and state of exception in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The hypothesis of the article is that Iran's current Constitution, as a modern legal structure, possesses significant governing capacities, one of which is the application of necessity and the establishment of a state of exception. The research findings suggest that public law in Iran can benefit from three categories of necessity: legislative, executive, and specific, which provide significant governmental tools. The approach of the article is analytical-descriptive, and the data collection method is library-based and document-based.

The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran institutionalized the principle of Guardianship of the Jurist (Velayat-e Faqih) in the country and extended its influence over all aspects of the lives of the Iranian people. Ayatollah Hussein-Ali Montazeri and Ayatollah Seyyed Mohammad Hosseini Beheshti played an irreplaceable role in formulating the Constitution due to their positions in the parliament. Each of these two eminent figures had significant differences in their understanding of the Constitution and its concepts. This article, from the perspective of Skinner's hermeneutic method, delves into analyzing the prominent roles of these two figures in the Islamic Revolution in the drafting of the Constitution. What were their intentions and practical actions within the political system established by the Constitution? During a time when Islam was severely threatened by Western thought, they aimed to establish an Islamic political system. Montazeri believed that the principles and rules of fiqh concerning the concept of Guardianship of the Jurist were sufficient for governing Islamic society, while Beheshti viewed Islamic principles and standards around the axis of Guardianship of the Jurist as a framework that could selectively incorporate modern democratic, Marxist, and human rights concepts to be responsive to the current Iranian Islamic society. In the final analysis, Beheshti's theory prevailed in drafting the Constitution, bringing about an Islamic government through a constructed customary process.

The existence of legislative needs and necessities is an undeniable reality that, according to Article 71 of the Constitution, the Islamic Consultative Assembly (Majlis) is responsible for addressing and fulfilling. In such a case, the jurisdiction to enact laws by the Assembly is not optional but mandatory; because the prevention of significant harm resulting from legal vacuums can only be achieved through the exclusive channel of the legislative power. Based on the constitutional law system of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the exercise of the legislative jurisdiction of the mentioned power can be evaluated in four exclusive domains: the preparation of legislative proposals, the approval of bills or drafts, the amendment, completion, and repeal of existing laws, and the revision or insistence after approval and objections from the Guardian Council. Assuming a genuine necessity for legislation, the obligatory jurisdiction of the Islamic Consultative Assembly in the aforementioned four domains, due to the presumption of public interest, will not face the three limitations of non-contradiction with the primary ordinances of the Law (Sharia), the Constitution, and the general policies of the Islamic system. This research draws upon a descriptive-analytical method to elaborate on these discussions.

In a nation-state, the constitution is often viewed as the most direct embodiment of the social contract. Legislators regard its amendment as a means to accommodate evolving needs and demands. While the 1979/1358 Constitution of the Islamic of Iran did not acknowledge revisions, the 1989/1368 version introduced the principle of revision under Article 177. However, despite over three decades passing and the rapid societal and global changes, this constitution remains unamended. The apparent disinterest in revision seems to stem more from the inherent challenges associated with the principle of revision itself, rather than a lack of changing circumstances. Previous studies have not thoroughly detailed the process of revision and the subsequent steps. Recognizing this gap, this paper identifies the challenges inherent in the constitution and proposes solutions to overcome the difficulties.

This study employs an ‘Exploratory Research’ methodology, transforming seemingly ordinary issues into a central ‘problem’ that becomes the focus of subsequent investigations. The methodology of this research emphasizes a ‘thick description’ as a crucial initial step. Such a description aims to examine the context of events and interpret their significance. In describing the 'problem' of revising Iran's constitution, the researcher engages in discerning layers of meaning, reinterpreting them, as well as analyzing actions and dialogues that held significance for all individuals involved in the process of ratifying the Constitution.The primary question of this study is: What problems impede the revision of the Iran constitution? Given the historical perspective and the nature of the question posed, a ‘thick description’ is employed to identify problems. By analyzing diverse data, the study aims to elucidate certain ‘problems’ encountered in the revision of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

As per Article 177 of the Constitution, amendments are made in necessary instances following specific procedures. As inferred from this article, the review process itself, along with the institutions and authorities involved in it, constitute some of the factors that pose challenges and complications in its implementation: The authority initiating the constitutional revision process: As per the stipulations of the Iranian Constitution, a comprehensive revision cannot occur without the directive of the Supreme Leader. Essentially, without his consent, partial amendments are only possible in instances explicitly stated as exceptions by the law. Furthermore, while the Supreme Leader is obliged to seek the advisory opinion of the Expediency Council, he retains the discretion to either accept or dismiss their suggestions.Establishing the terms for Constitutional revision: The designation of certain provisions and issues as ‘non-revisable’ in Article 177 of the Constitution, when viewed broadly, may pose challenges for future generations in addressing societal needs. Concurrently, several principles, as per this article and subject to diverse and conflicting interpretations, could be deemed non-revisable, thereby rendering any form of revision seemingly impractical and superficial.The composition of the Constitutional Revision Council and the problem of power centralization: At present, the Revision Council is projected to have around 87 members, with 17 of them being directly elected by the people.The procedure of constitutional revision and the problem of ambiguity: The primary issue with the implementation of the constitutional revision procedure is the ambiguity stemming from the lack of clear guidelines in the law.The process of approving constitutional amendments and the problem of public participation: Given that the Supreme Leader appoints nearly two-thirds of the Constitutional Revision Council members, it’s crucial to ensure diversity and consider various perspectives in their selection. This approach should reflect the opinions of the Iranian people, which is particularly important for the successful revision of the constitution.In general, the primary objective of constitutional revision is to ensure the continuity of law and safeguard citizens’ rights across different periods. While Article 177 of the Constitution addresses this, several obstacles hinder the revision process. These include ambiguity in initiating the revision process, unclear guidelines on which articles can be revised, a structure that potentially centralizes power, limited circulation of elites, and minimal citizen participation in legal processes. These problems pose significant hurdles to the process. In fact, the magnitude of these legal and customary issues and ambiguities has made updating the Constitution a daunting task.

There have been extensive studies on the sources of soft power and the indicators and criteria for measuring these sources, but a fundamental questions surrounding the concept of soft power is the problem of the processes of converting "potential soft power" into "actual soft power", which has not been independently researched. The answers to the questions can fill the holes that exist in the process of the formation of soft power resources until the application of these resources. For the actual application of soft power in a country, it is necessary to integrate the mentioned resource and politics. Explaining the process by which some resources become the soft power of a country is a fundamental challenge. In order to present a clear view of this process by using the method of case studies, the question of the current study is set as follows: how ideology in Iran as a content for the three sources of soft power is integrated with politics and subsequently becomes the actual source of soft power. In the process of integration of ideology and politics, despite numerous political elements, the most important political element is the constitution. Iran's Constitution redefines ideology in the context of politics. Ideology plays a role in the form of three sources of soft power and a source of imposing will on another.Based on this, Iran's Constitution is considered the most important political element in the process of convergence and integration of ideology with politics and turning it into "actual soft power

The articulation of the bond between the individual and society, the government and its citizens, and the guarantee of liberty and justice within a political community are among the fundamental principles of constitutional law and their guardianship. However, the existence of emergencies led to the temporary suspension of the law, a concept accepted in most legal traditions worldwide. Yet, recent scientific research suggests that modern governments increasingly create state of necessity to justify this suspension. An analysis of this issue within the Islamic Republic of Iran highlights a different narrative compared to the global perspective, which can be conceptualized as a “state of sensitive” This is a dual state where politicians never place themselves in a position to suspend the law but legally pursue such suspension. This study aims to answer the question of “how the Iranian political system legally suspends and collapses law and decision-making in ‘ state of sensitive” Employing a hermeneutic approach, the findings of this study show that the Iranian constitutional tradition has anticipated certain principles, employed specific language, and established institutions that can lead to a state of perpetual suspension, or even collapse of the law, without the formal declaration of a state of necessity and is viewed as a strict enforcement of the law.

Historians and political scientists have long debated the key influences of the Founding Fathers of the United States in establishing the government and drafting the Constitution. Thinkers like John Locke, Montesquieu, Algernon Sidney, and James Harrington are frequently cited, yet the influence of Machiavelli’s ideas has often been overlooked. Only a few scholars, such as Walter McDougall and John Pocock, have briefly suggested the possibility that the Founding Fathers were influenced by Machiavelli’s ideas, while others, like Anthony DiMaggio, have approached the topic solely from the perspective of foreign policy and empire. Given Machiavelli’s significance as a political theorist, it is crucial to explore his potential influence on the Founding Fathers’ thoughts in establishing the American Republic. Such an examination is important because it reveals how Machiavellian principles may have shaped state-building efforts and contributed to the stability and longevity of the U.S. government and constitution.

The present study used a qualitative, text-based documentary approach and analyzed library–documentary sources to demonstrate how Machiavelli’s ideas had influenced the views of the Founding Fathers. A close examination of Chapters 2–8 of The Discourses: Book 1 was conducted to reveal Machiavelli’s influence. These chapters are considered essential because they focus on the organization of political regimes. Four of these chapters are particularly significant, as they directly address the prudent establishment of a regime and constitution, offering guidance to future founders.

The analysis revealed that the Founding Fathers were significantly influenced by Machiavelli in their understanding of human nature and the formulation of the constitution. They drew on his ideas to create a mixed regime. The Founding Fathers were also guided by Machiavelli in their approach to foreign policy, their pursuit of empire, and their definition of the role of the people as defenders of freedom and guardians of the constitution. Consequently, some of the most fundamental aspects of the United States of American were rooted in Machiavelli’s theories and perspectives, even if they were not openly acknowledged. The durability and stability of the U.S. Constitution, in contrast to the instability and variability of the French Constitution, can be attributed to the Founding Fathers’ reliance on the insights of a thinker who had gained his wisdom through “long experience of modern things and the continuous readings of ancient [things]” (Machiavelli, 1989, p. 1); who had opposed fictitious principalities and republics that existed only in theory (Ibid, p. 93). In contrast, the French pursued abstract concepts and implemented purely theoretical ideas, guided by a philosopher whose “true masterpiece” was referred to as “Reveries of the Solitary Walker” (Rousseau, 1782, p. 12). The utopian republic they aimed to establish had to remain a mere figment of the imagination. According to the findings,  

According to the results, the Founding Fathers’ views aligned with and were shaped by Machiavelli’s theories. The findings can provide a new foundation for American studies and Machiavelli studies, and pave the way for further research. Given that the theoretical foundations underlying the establishment of the United States of America have been neglected in academic discussions in Iran, the present study can be considered a pioneering effort to address the Founding Fathers’ thoughts and the influence of other philosophers on the establishment of the U.S. government. Furthermore, by focusing on the founding principles of America, the results of the study can lead to a more realistic approach toward the U.S. and the adoption of more thoughtful strategies in foreign policy. This study does not claim that the Founding Fathers relied solely on Machiavellian theories while disregarding other intellectuals. Rather, it aimed to demonstrate that dismissing or denying Machiavelli’s influence on the establishment of the United States is both unjustified and unwise, despite the Founding Fathers not explicitly referencing his ideas. Nevertheless, by focusing on two fundamental texts, the present inquiry sought to provide meaningful insights without undermining the results. A more precise and detailed understanding of the topic requires an examination of numerous documents and extensive debates that took place during the Constitutional Convention until the adoption of the Constitution in the thirteen state assemblies.

Today, the institution of political representation is accepted as one of the most important theoretical and fundamental foundations in the field of public law in all systems based on democracy. with the introduction of this modern concept in Iran's public law which coincided with the constitutional era, there have been many debates about what is this modern institution that the result of such approaches, most of which have been based on the acceptance or non-acceptance of the modern institution of representation based on the principles and criteria of figh. In a different perspective, the authors of this article have sought to answer this question by considering the specific characteristics of the institution of representation in the field of public law, what has been the attitude of Iranian public law towards this modern institution in the constitutional era? This research intends to answer this question by descriptive-analytical research method and using library resources. The findings of this study indicate that the issue of the concept of representation as a modern legal establishment in Iranian public law and the theories presented about it has various objections and ambiguities. Therefore, what seems to be a hypothesis in the minds of the authors of this article, is the lack of legal analysis of the institution of representation and the dispersion of related issues, especially the adaptation of this modern institution to the concept of advocacy. Therefore, this study, while taking a brief look at the concept of representation in Iran, has explained and examined the background of formation and contexts of the development of this modern institution from the perspective of public law.

In recent years, non-performing loans (NPLs) have brought economic, social, and security crises in the Islamic Republic of Iran. This research provides an ABC strategic analysis of the NPLs’ consequences on Iran’s economic security. This research has a qualitative content analysis method and its data is triangulated from the supreme leadership, the forces of the government, and Iranian pundits for the period from 1961 to 2023. The findings show that at the first level, the NPLs by destroying the economic strategies of the government, deeply penetrate the economic pressure into the country's social system and lead to the destruction of social structures and values. With the loss of the social base of the government, the ground is prepared for the threat of the political system, and its final result is the destruction of the legitimacy of the government and the collapse of the country's national and international security. The results show that the most destructive consequences of the NPLs come from economic indiscipline and monetary mismanagement of the government, this level of consequences has secondary consequences on the social welfare and capital that are more difficult to control. The consequences of the third level, which themselves originate from the second level, impose the most extensive and uncontrollable consequences on the legitimacy of the country's sovereignty, national security, and international authority. Therefore, reforming and rationalizing the economic policies of the government is the most fundamental act to protect the country's economic security from the consequences of the NPLs.

Adherence to the obligations resulting from international treaties such as the United Nations Charter and the obligations arising from it, including the Security Council resolutions in the legal system of the Islamic Republic of Iran, which is influenced by the powers of the legal guardian, has different theoretical foundations from other states. Although Article 25 of the United Nations Charter obliges the member states to accept and implement the decisions of the Security Council, and the organization's practice considers at least the resolutions issued based on the seventh chapter of the Charter to be binding, however, the Islamic Republic of Iran has always been critical of the actions of this organ due to the fact that it sees most of the Security Council's decisions as detrimental to itself. Resolutions 598 and 2231 of the Security Council, the first of which ended the war and the second of which temporarily ended the nuclear conflict between Iran and the West, although it has finally been approved by the highest political authority in Iran (supreme leader), this acceptance was not done out of commitment to international obligations and requirements arising from the Charter, but simply by adhering to and appealing to political-jurisprudential standards. The investigation of this research is analytical-descriptive and the method of collecting information is library. The question of this article is about the position of the resolutions of the Security Council in the fundamental rights of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and the hypothesis that is raised is that since the system governing the Security Council is unfair, oppressive and a reflection of the system of domination in the eyes of the leaders of the Islamic Republic, therefore, the possible acceptance of the aforementioned resolutions is not based on international obligations and its norms, but on the basis of politics.

The intellectual and ideological foundations of the nation's rights in the constitutional law and the constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran is one of the topics that is the subject of debate and disagreement and has received little attention. Therefore, this is the basis for writing the present study. The aim of this paper is to examine the question of what are the ideological foundations of the nation's rights in the constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the constitution from the perspective of political sociology. The hypothesis of the article is: Internal socio-political developments, such as interaction with the outside world and European countries as well as external events, such as the defeat of Russia against Japan are the foundations of the political sociology of the nation's rights in the constitutional law. The continuation of the libertarian approach in the Islamic Revolution of 1979 is also the basis of the political sociology of the nation's rights in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The present study is descriptive and analytical, and the library method was employed to explore the mentioned topic. The findings indicate that various events, such as the defeat of Iran by Russia, industrialization developments and revolutions, such as the French Revolution as a foreign factor and the sending of Iranian students abroad and their interaction with the world outside of Iran, the inability of the Qajars to manage the affairs of the country properly and the dissatisfaction of various classes,.

One of the important categories in Iran is cultural diversity. The purpose of this article is to examine the question of what place cultural diversity has in the constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran and what are the solutions for cultural diversity in the Islamic Republic of Iran from the perspective of political sociology? This article is descriptive and analytical, and data collection has been used in data collection. The findings indicate that cultural diversity is formed in appropriate political and social contexts. Cultural diversity is recognized in Iran's constitution. Several principles of the constitution deal with the issue of culture and cultural rights, such as the right to free education, the right to freedom of communication and information, and the right to equality in enjoying all cultural rights. Cultural diversity in Iran's constitution includes three cultural elements, namely, language, religion and way of life. It seems that one of the challenges and problems facing cultural diversity is the non-recognition of cultural rights in an independent form and the non-allocation of a specific annual cultural budget from the government. The opportunity to consider cultural diversity, view cultural diversity as the foundation of security, adopt multicultural policies in general and multicultural education policies in particular, pay attention to social realities and intercultural sensitivities, intercultural communication, intercultural education and intercultural dialogue are among the most important It is a solution to strengthen cultural diversity in the Islamic Republic of Iran from the perspective of political sociology.

The freedom to form political parties is one of the widely accepted freedoms in societies whose legal system considers the possibility of party activities for members of the society to be valid and official according to its high-level laws. After the formation of the Assembly of Constitutional Law Experts, this freedom was ratified by the nation’s parliament representatives as stipulated in Article 26 of the Constitution. Shahid Beheshti is one of those people who had a great influence on the process of ratifying this article. Drawing upon descriptive-analytical method and  making use of Ayatullah Beheshti’s works, the following article seeks to answer the question of what is the role of the party and the freedom to form parties in the eyes of Shahid Beheshti in the Islamic government? The findings of this research show that Shahid Beheshti considers the party to be a gathering of people who believe in Islam and the Islamic Revolution, who have come together to settle public (Muslim community) affairs and help the position of leadership, and the necessity of forming the party is due to the need of the Islamic system to executive staff. From his point of view, the parties can be divided into three categories: Islamic, non-Islamic and anti-Islamic, and the parties must meet certain specifications such as following the guardian jurist (as a religious leader), being widely accepted by people (enjoying enormous popularity), maintaining values, and declaring transparency as regards to positions.

Foreign policy can be considered as a set of goals, plans, and actions aimed at safeguarding a country’s survival and enhancing its position in the international system. However, the concept of survival extends beyond mere physical existence; it encompasses other critical factors such as economic development, political security, and social stability. The key question is: What factors influence a country’s foreign policy decisions and how do these policies manifest themselves?
There are generally different approaches to answering this question. The first approach is related to structural realists, who assert that the factors influencing foreign policy are rooted in the macro levels and structures of the international system. In contrast to this view, another group of theories—regardless of the role of structural components—believes that internal factors within countries play a more decisive role in shaping foreign policy than structural factors. Finally, some other theories, instead of strictly separating the influence of structural (exogenous) and internal factors, emphasize the interaction between these two groups of factors and the impact of the structure through internal (endogenous) level factors.
Influential factors operate at two levels within the international system and geopolitics, ultimately shaping a country’s foreign policy. At the innermost layer, decision-makers play a pivotal role. Much of this layer operates through the constitutional mechanisms of countries. Notably, the constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran contains several principles and clauses that delineate the goals and priorities of its foreign policy.
 
Clause C of the second constitutional principle emphasizes the rejection of tyranny, oppression, and domination—a critical indicator within Iran’s system. Substantively, the constitution outlines rules governing the government, addressing the relationship between the government and the people. It emphasizes comprehensive public supervision over government affairs and regulates crucial matters within the political society. From the constitution’s content, we deduce its complete supremacy over all subjects, authorities, and laws. Given that this law establishes qualifications, it inherently surpasses all institutions and authorities listed therein. Consequently, no authority or institution should act contrary to the Constitution, as doing so would compromise its competence.
Foreign policy consists of four principles (principles 152 to 155). Even though foreign policy measures fall under the duties of the executive branch, their importance warrants an independent chapter. The constitution unequivocally rejects any form of hegemony in foreign policy, emphasizing the preservation of all-round independence and territorial integrity. It prioritizes defending the rights of all Muslims and maintaining non-commitment to hegemonic powers, promoting mutual peaceful relations. Additionally, the constitution designates non-belligerent countries as a crucial foreign policy goal. To this end, it prohibits any contract that would result in foreign domination over natural and economic resources or other national affairs.
 
Furthermore, within this chapter, the Islamic Republic of Iran upholds the ideal of human happiness across the global human society. It recognizes independence, freedom, and the rule of truth and justice as fundamental rights for all people worldwide. Despite avoiding interference in the internal affairs of other nations, Iran actively supports the rights-seeking struggles of the oppressed against arrogance wherever they occur.
Accordingly, fundamentalization is one of the most effective approaches in shaping and advancing the movement to safeguard the fundamental rights and freedoms of citizens against governmental authority. This issue has garnered significant attention within the realm of public law. One of the primary functions of public law is precisely to protect citizens’ rights and freedoms from government intervention.
 
Basicization, as defined and operationalized, involves elevating the value and status of laws and regulations—commonly referred to as “normal norms”—to align with the principles and validity of the constitution. Essentially, basicization grants these normal norms the same value and legal standing as constitutional norms. This process occurs through judicial proceedings and the application of legal interpretation tools.
The foundation and keyword of the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran originate from Islamic beliefs and values, verses, narrations, valuable views of Imam Rahal (RA), and the leaders of the system. These principles align with the Constitution and emphasize preserving human dignity, realizing happiness, and promoting human well-being within the global community under the umbrella of peace. The foreign policy encompasses interactions with the world, security considerations, human freedom, and equality. It also underscores maintaining independence while rejecting domination.
 
Given the significance of this subject, the constitution of each country outlines and elucidates the foundational principles and strategic directions of foreign policy. Consequently, a clear vision and roadmap are established for various nations in this regard.
In the end, it should be pointed out that the Islamic Republic of Iran has made all efforts to secure national interests, prosperity, and security within the turbulent international system. This endeavor is pursued with a hopeful approach, aiming to achieve the lofty goals of the Islamic Revolution—a vision derived from the profound teachings of Imam Rahal (peace be upon him). The country’s foreign policy aligns with the deep insights of the great leader of the Islamic Revolution, Imam Khamenei Dam Zaleh Al-Ali.
“In this direction, the diplomatic system warmly welcomes the companionship, participation, and critical perspectives of society’s elites. Their collaboration contributes to achieving the country’s foreign policy objectives within a broad and consensus-based framework. The foreign policy apparatus remains committed to addressing issues closely tied to national interests and security at both macro and national levels. It actively seeks to prevent internal political disputes from encroaching upon foreign policy matters and emphasizes the importance of diplomacy in navigating these complex challenges.”
In particular, the provisions contained in the principles of the constitution have had a significant impact. Over the past four decades, different governments have employed various strategies to achieve the constitution’s stated goals, particularly in securing and guaranteeing national interests, including national security. They have embraced a comprehensive approach.
 
However, an important consideration for future researchers is to what extent the Islamic Republic of Iran’s system exemplifies the goal of promoting human happiness within the global human society—a society of which Iran is undeniably a part. Is this achievement fully realized? Reflecting on this matter may even prompt a reevaluation of certain constitutional principles related to Iran’s foreign policy.

The right to self-determination is one of the most important human "rights" that is considered in international documents and agreements and domestic documents of different countries and has different dimensions such as voting in elections, determining the new political system, Establishing an autocratic government or trying for a new constitution. Therefore, the right to self-determination means accepting the right of citizens in a collective sense to create a new political order, which also entails a significant political strain. In this way, the right to self-determination does not necessarily have a positive aspect and can be manifested by identifying the tasks of citizens and participating in things such as elections or monitoring and interfering in legislation or monitoring its implementation. Therefore, the political task is another aspect of the right to self-determination, which is discussed in the present study from the perspective of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran. In other words, in what ways and in what manner can the political task lead to the realization of the right to self-determination? Based on the findings of the research, public supervision and the possibility of space for criticism and criticism, effective participation such as voting and attending assemblies, associations and parties, although it is considered a kind of duty for citizens, but it is necessarily in opposition to "rights". Citizens are not supposed to and can be the guarantors of achieving the right to self-determination. Also, the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, while accepting the nation's sovereignty over its own destiny in various ways, provides the platforms for exercising the right to self-determination in various ways, including voting, participation in civil and political institutions, recognition of ethnic groups and religious groups, and The right to have a representative has been provided by them. Descriptive and analytical methods and library tools are used in this article.