نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 گروه آموزشی حقوق بین الملل، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه خوارزمی، تهران، ایران
2 قاضی شعبه تجدیدنظر، دیوان عدالت اداری
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
According to the opinions of Guardian Council in controlling the acts of the Islamic Consultative Assembly, in addition to objections to the constitution and sharia, several ambiguities have been raised by the Guardian Council, and the Assembly has often taken action to resolve these ambiguities. It should be noted that the Council has not specified competence about ambiguities in the constitution and other related laws. The main question of this research is that in the face of the Guardian Council with the ambiguity of parliamentary acts, what is the best way forward? In this article, with a descriptive-analytical method, an attempt has been made to explain their advantages and disadvantages by introducing alternative options. Based on the above, the answer of this research is as follows: denying the authority of the council in announcing ambiguous objections and the unreasonable obligation of the parliament to eliminate these objections, considering the legal competencies of these institutions, do not seem to be defensible options. While acknowledging the possibility of ambiguous objections (clearly and precisely) by the Guardian Council, the parliament should also be able to explain its considerations so that if the Guardian Council finds these considerations convincing, it will deviate from its previous view; Otherwise, the parliament is obliged to resolve the ambiguity. In any case, it is necessary to formulate the relevant process in the Act of Procedure of the Islamic Consultative Assembly.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)