Presumption of Correctness in Qualification Assessment of Election Candidates in the Islamic Republic of Iran

The right to vote and the right to be elected are two fundamental human rights. From the Islamic point of view, these are the significant examples of rights of the people (hagh al-nas) in the public sphere. Restriction of these rights in terms of legislation and interpretation should be justified. Guardian Council of the Iranian constitution, however, sees official positions as religious trust that must be given only to the just people. It presumes that in any kind of doubt, the lack of legal qualifications of nominees should be applied. This has resulted in the disqualification of a considerable number of nominees in different elections. This article seeks to provide a solution to guarantee and expand electoral rights based on jurisprudential principles. According to the findings of this article, the Principle of Correctness and the Presumption of Correctness could be applied during the process of qualification assessment of candidates. This, in its turn, would support nominees against different accusations and result in the limitation of subjective assessments and consequently guaranteed monitoring. Also, the article suggests a strict interpretation of legal qualifications to expand the rights and freedoms of voters and nominees and make considerable changes in the current Iranian election system. For this purpose, the article first explains the presumption of correctness and its application in the process of qualification assessment and presents the proper interpretation of candidates’ legal qualifications. The article insists, in particular, the application of trust principle and presumption of correctness in subjective conditions, such as belief in and practical commitment to Islam, political regime, and the constitution.