Conflicts on the Implication of Constitutional Command

Although issuing the command for the foundation of national parliament resulted in the opponents’ satisfaction and the refuge had ended, the issue which had increased the ambiguities was the content and main implication of this command. Due to the speed of the evolution of revolution, this issue remained unsolved. In that agitated atmosphere, reaching a temporary understanding between the Shah and the opponents was a must for ending the ban and refuge crisis as soon as possible. Therefore, the main conflict on the understanding and interpretation of the implication of Constitutional Command was transferred to the period of institutionalization and it appeared in the form of political conflicts from the early days after the victory of the revolution. These disagreements out broke in the codification of election’s code of conduct, the constitution and the coronation of Shah. The question was that Mozaffar ad-Din Shah’s Constitutional Command was based on what political system and what kind of parliament? A constitutional assembly or a consultative assembly was meant? Implementing a descriptive and an explanatory method, this article tried to show how different perceptions regarding the modality and content of the Constitutional Command ended. The findings revealed that the discourse of the constitutionalists and their perceptions of this command, after a series of conflicts in the process of transition to a constitutional system from the constitutional Movement, eventually dominated the government and the court. The Shah’s command was regarded as the Constitutional assembly rather than a governmental or advisory assembly.