Fundamentals and legal-political solutions to the accusation of violating conventions International by the Islamic Republic of Iran

The present study with the application of qualitative method based on collection of data from library sources (documents)and analytical - descriptive method are about to answer the question of which the accusations made by the west that " violates" the human rights conventions of the Islamic Republic of Iran are based on? The hypothesis of this study is that these accusations are based on dual principles including legal and political principles; The findings of the study, proving the hypothesis, indicate that these allegations are based on legal grounds (Including, non-acceptance and accession to some human rights conventions due to legal conflicts between Iranian law and conventions, differences in interpretations, as well as the existence of some legal ambiguities, etc.) and There are also political bases (including the political and selective approach to human rights in Iran, the security of human rights and international relations, anti-Islamism and the West's stubbornness with Iran). According to the above-mentioned dual principles, accession to the Convention on Human Rights, revision of some amendments to Iran's legal laws, use of the jurisprudence-legal capacities of Islam, as well as the use of the right to bet, appeal to international courts and the realization of the right are among the solutions. Legal and aggressive treatment of allegations, participation in international forums and the issuance of statements, and the increasing supervision of government officials over the functioning of the state body are among the proposed political solutions.