عنوان مقاله [English]
According to Article 163 of the Constitution, the qualities and conditions of a judge are determined by law according to jurisprudential standards. In the written jurisprudential heritage, in order to obtain the ruling of the judiciary, the fulfillment of conditions such as "born purity" has been considered necessary, and this is reflected in the regulations for the recruitment and employment of judges (approved in 1392). The implication of this statement is only that persons born out of wedlock (natural children) are deprived of this social right and cannot be placed in this position. Needless to say, such an attitude stems from the generalization of natural parental error behavior to the individual; This is apparently not in line with the principles of justice. Considering the importance of the discussion, the Considering the importance of the discussion, the present article has criticized such a view based on jurisprudential documents. It is clear that the result of the research, in addition to correcting the jurisprudential view, is to answer some theological questions and doctrinal doubts. The findings of the research show that the documents provided by the jurists are not sufficient to prove their claim and as a result, the validity of such a condition lacks the necessary legal validity.