The legal context of disputes between Government and Parliament in the Iranian constitutional era

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

One of the major issues that have had impact on the collective life of Iran is entrance of modern concept to the politics and society of Iran. One of the fields that we absorb is the appearance of modernism and the transition from autocracy to constitutional government and formation of the National Assembly. But constitutionalism in Iran failed, and was replaced with dictatorship. The key question is why did this happen? In this paper we try to answer this question. Perhaps one of the most important factors in the failure of constitutional was disputes between Parliament and legislative institution. We try to release the context of these disputes. One of the most important reseone for challenge between two institutions was the legal context. The legal context means: both sides had no clear conception of their duties and each side accused the other to involvement in the field of their authorities because when the rules had wrote, the duty of each other wasn’t clear. We classify these problems in seven titles. 1- Separation of powers. 2- Occupation of Ministers and representatives. 3- Removal and installation of Ministers. 4- Undefined political responsibility of ministers. 5- Law enforcement. 6- Dissolution of the National Assembly. 7- Contracts and agreements. In conclusion, it’s very clear that the constitution couldn’t create a balance between powers and due to the weakness and lack of principles integrity, increased conflicts. Besides these problems, the Government and Parliament with non-compliance of legal principles increased the context of the challenges.