نشریه حقوق اداری
پیاپی 30 (بهار 1401)

The protection of immovable cultural heritage in the England legal system is based on several principles. The principle of publicity and Public participation is the most important principle governing the protection of cultural heritage in this country. These two principles state that cultural heritage is a public resource that the public should have access to and be able to participate in the protection and preservation of this heritage. In the Iranian legal system, the protection of cultural heritage is considered as a matter of governance. The sovereignty of this matter indicates the unrestricted enjoyment of cultural heritage by the people. The basis of the England Cultural Heritage Protection System is based on public and voluntary participation and the colorful role of public non-governmental organizations in various aspects of protection is the distinguishing feature of the England Cultural Heritage Protection System compared to the Iranian legal system. In the Iranian legal system, the protection of cultural heritage is the responsibility of government institutions, including the Ministry of Cultural Heritage, Tourism and Handicrafts and its affiliated departments. In general, it can be said that the existence of institutional diversity, professionalism and popular participation in the English model of cultural heritage protection has brought an effective and efficient protection system in order to preserve heritage. The main question of this research is in the light of the principle of publicity and public participation, how is the registration of immovable cultural heritage in the two legal systems of England and Iran and what institutions are involved in the registration process.

Determining the regulatory authority and issuing licenses for audio and video productions in cyberspace has become one of the legal challenges in recent years between the relevant agencies and the plaintiff in this regard. Proponents of the IRIB Supervision, based on the resolution of the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution, the directive of the Head of the Judiciary, the resolution of the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution and the vote of 3148 of the Court of Administrative Justice in2019 and Budget Law 1400, believe that the IRIB Supervision is legal and correct. However, the authors believe that in terms of the position of this agency in the constitution and the powers provided for other agencies in ordinary laws, including Article 1 of the Law on Amending the Press Law, Article 2 of the Law on Objectives and Duties of the Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance, the Law on Duties and Powers of the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology, Article 6 of the Statute of the Radio Regulatory, Authority and the decision of the specialized board of the Court of Administrative Justice have legal objections. The fundamental question is whether the IRIB's oversight of the production of audio and video in cyberspace, which are in fact its competitors, is legally correct? In response, in a descriptive-analytical manner, we examined that the IRIB, despite the task assigned to it in the 1400 budget, can not have a useful regulatory position for freedom of expression in the media. Therefore, it is necessary to introduce a comprehensive law on media rights by the parliament and a competent authority that can, while respecting the right to freedom of expression in all media and the principle of competitiveness, technically and legally regulate.

One of the stages of entering government service is the stage of "selecting" individuals based on various criteria. The selection rules are governed by the country's selection law and its implementing regulations. A look at the elements of the country's electoral law shows that the law is first of all an old law and does not comply with the current requirements of the employment system. Judicial oversight of the Administrative Justice Tribunal is effective as a reference for protecting the rights of the public against abuses by government agencies. In the following article, we examine the nature of selective authorities with regard to Article 63 of the Statute of the Court of Administrative Justice (Appeal of Special Administrative References) and Article 64 of the Law (Appeal to the Diagnostic Authorities), and finally We will examine the violations of selection decisions in the judicial branch of the Court of Administrative Justice.

Reduction of generality and absoluteness competence assignment to the courts of general Jurisdiction, based on the authorization (approval) of the legislature in different laws, led to the establishment of the combined judicial authorities (in the form of council and dispute settlements boards). Regardless of the titles and other prevalent forms, these authorities, sometimes despite the membership of non-judicial members, are eligible to have the judicial member (Judge). In this respect, just those authorities are subject to this text which include a judicial member (introduced by the Judiciary), and two or more non-judicial members as the specialists in the profession of a special guild who referred to as the quasi-judicial members. Therefore, we do not investigate the authorities in charge without judicial member, mutually agreed arbitration board, authorities subject to arbitration agreement or similar titles. Accordingly, in this article, our purpose is to present a clear illustration of the legal Role of non-judicial members in quasi-judicial authorities in accordance with a conceptual investigation to assess the ratio of this position with the related goals and effects to the intended specifications. In order to analyze this Role and level, along with a brief introduction to the concepts and examples of the combined judicial authorities in the trial structure of our country, we will pay attention to the principles which considered for these characters. The result which will finally be specified is that the non-judicial members of the concerned authorities should not be limited to the identities such as the counselor (adviser), expert, arbitrator and other similar positions due to the relevant reasons and requirements of these authorities, each of these members is considered as the equal member (and main element) as the judicial member with this difference that they will have different applications and specifications in comparison with a judge in terms of some aspects and considerations which accordingly manifested in the Procedures Laws of these authorities.

The literal meaning of “discrimination” does not imply whether it is positive concept or not, but in term of law it is a negative concept. “Positive discrimination” as an emerging concept of public law, has entered from comparative studies to the domestic debates. Due to some ambiguities about this concept, the constitutional legislator has used the concept of " legitimateness of discrimination", the theoretical development of which can pave the way for the realization of "justice" in the meaning intended by the constitutional legislator. So, the main question of the present inquiry is “to investigate the theoretical differences between positive discrimination and licit discrimination and the approach of the legal system of Iran to these concepts”, which has been studied by descriptive-analytical method. In the continue the relationship between “indigenous employments” and “licit discrimination” is explored as a case study. The results of this study showed that there is an inseparable relation between “licit discrimination” and “justice” in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The meaning of the “justice” is also close to the “proportionality”. “Positive discrimination” that rooted in “equality”, has no place in the legal system of Iran. In the case of Indigenous employments, each instance of employments should be presented on the concept of “licit discrimination” by considering the distinguish between Indigenous employment in normal and deprived areas. The procedure of the Court of Administrative Justice has also accepted this distinction.

Understanding efficient management in the modern sense and distinguishing it from its classical meaning, on the one hand, and trying to find related components in line with citizenship rights, on the other hand, deserve theoretical reflection and elaboration on its justifications. Accordingly, the main purpose of this article is to explain the impact of efficient management and citizenship rights by reflecting on the administrative laws of Iran. The leading article, based on the legal-managerial interdisciplinary approach, uses the library and documentation method and the elaboration of internal laws and regulations for data collection and the descriptive-analytical method for the analysis of the collected data. Findings show that based on the variables of public trust and globalization, the theory of justice in the organization as well as behavioral approach and two-dimensional human theory on the one hand and the task of guiding the client by the administrative official, providing information and transparency in administrative relations, applying honesty and fairness. Employees with citizens and, finally, the prohibition of disregard for clients on the other hand, modern efficient management and citizenship rights have an interaction with each other. Also, the application of progressive principles of civil rights in domestic legal documents, despite some shortcomings, has provided a favorable ground for a theoretical approximation of the two concepts of efficient management and civil rights, which requires a clear understanding of the relationship and their practical application.

In the comprehensive Plan for Prevention and fighting against administrative corruption, comprehensive definition of administrative corruption must be foundation of the plan. We can say administrative corruption is the corruption of administrative system. Administrative organizations are subsystems of administrative system of the country. Administrative corruption is a complex, multidimensional phenomenon and has several levels. Nevertheless, the basic description in plans and statutes for prevention and fighting against administrative corruption in Iran, is individual – oriented and the principal approach is behavioral - on the level of person and not completely. The approach is not system – oriented and is not on the interaction between structural – behavioral –environmental dimensions. This paper, based on the theoretical necessity of comprehensive definition for administrative corruption, analyzed and evaluated the definition of most important statutes and statutory rules of fighting against administrative corruption. The result is that this definition are not comprehensive. This description leads us to basic prescriptions.

Combating financial corruption of officials is one of the important legal issues, parts of which are discussed in administrative law. According to Article 142 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the head of the judiciary oversees the property of some officials. As experience has shown that corruption is more prevalent among lower-ranking officials, members of the Islamic Consultative Assembly have struggled four times to extend the oversight referred to in Article 142 of the Constitution to other state and military officials and managers, but they were confronted with the objection of the Guardian Council that the mentioned authorities are in principle 142 restricted. Finally, the Islamic Consultative Assembly sent this law to the Expediency Discernment Council, and that Council, with general amendments, approved the Assembly's opinion. This descriptive-analytical study seeks to examine the possibility or impossibility of regulating the Islamic Consultative Assembly regarding the development of the authorities mentioned in Article 142 of the Constitution. In this study, the reasons for the opposition to the development of the above-mentioned authorities are answered in Article 142 of the Constitution We conclude that for legal and religious reasons and the use of the Purposive interpretation method of the Islamic Consultative Assembly has the authority to pass a law to increase the number of officials mentioned in Article 142 of the Constitution.

According to human rights obligations of states and with respect to one of the missions of International Labour Organization that was mentioned in the introduction of Convention No.122 concerning Employment Policies, this Organization is required to review Employment Policies of member states regarding items such as prohibition of discrimination, free choice of employment and equal opportunities in employment. Article 1 (3) of Convention No. 122 refers to the adoption of employment policy with regard to the specific circumstances of each country, so the question is, what is the Iranʼs government duty as the object of supervision of this organization in relation to the convention and where is the position of Fundamental Rights at Work in employment policies of our country? Attention to this matter is essential because Iran joining the Convention No. 122 and some conventions relating to the Fundamental Rights at Work and interpolation of this Rights in the Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and Statute of the International Labour Organization, Iran is obliged to uphold the mentioned Rights in its Employment Policies. Thus in this essay, we review the position of these Rights in Iran´s Employment Policies with analytical method.

The success of any organization depends primarily on its human resources. So, in public organizations reform, “employment” is of primary importance. The good employment system also has the minimum that is referred to as employment justice or the legal principles governing public employment. Employment justice is in fact the criteria for assessing the public administration of each country. Therefore, the comparison of our country's status to the modern British administrative system can reflect the strengths and weaknesses of the public employment system and, consequently, the public administration. The study of the principles governing public employment in Iran shows that its main weakness is in the arbitrary application of the employment rules and as a result of violating the rule of law. Also, meritocracy there isn’t in our administrative system for that reason. From the human rights perspective, the lack of attention to the principle of equal opportunity for women and ethnic and religious minorities and lack of policies and supportive policies towards them is one of the major weaknesses of our administrative system. In contrast, in the United Kingdom, meritocracy is entirely systematically governed by the administrative system and has been formed on the same basis from the outset. In the field of equality and non-discrimination, various laws and policies have been adopted and implemented, and even the Equality and Human Rights Commission has been established to oversee the implementation of these laws.