Judicial Oversight of the Guardian Council from the Perspective of Legal Standards

Among the essential components of human rights within any administrative and political system is the guarantee of human dignity and respect in interactions with governmental institutions. In this regard, the protection of citizens' rights necessitates the moderation of power, accountability and responsibility of the government and state authorities, and their subjection to the rule of law. Therefore, the incorporation of various oversight mechanisms, such as judicial supervision through ordinary or administrative courts, is foreseen in statutory law. In the Romano-Germanic legal system, or countries inclined toward this model, the High Administrative Court bears the responsibility of judicial review over the enactments and decisions of governmental bodies. The legal system of Iran has likewise followed this approach; however, certain institutions, such as the Guardian Council, have been excluded from the judicial oversight of the Administrative Justice Court. In light of the current legal framework, statutory law provides explicit and unequivocal provisions that allow no room for interpretation. Specifically, according to the note of Article 12 of the Law on the Administrative Justice Court, the enactments and decisions of the Guardian Council are not subject to judicial review. Nevertheless, any statutory provision is open to free legal interpretation, and legal doctrine can serve as a catalyst for transformation in this regard. This implies that the reasons for the Guardian Council’s immunity from oversight, as well as the necessities and requirements for its accountability, must be clarified. In this article, the authors adopt a descriptive-analytical method to examine the issue. As a conclusion, it may be stated that the rule of law, the principle of separation of powers, and the principle of legitimate expectation constitute the foundational justifications for the necessity of subjecting the Guardian Council to judicial review. Preventing the abuse of power, avoiding judicial error, curbing unreasonable decisions, adhering to the principle of proportionality, and prohibiting conduct based on ill intent are all cases that may render oversight over this institution necessary.