خلاصة:
The effect of transparency of laws and regulations in criminal legislation domain and its relation in respect of its role in good governance has not been dealt with in internal legal literature. This study aimed at investigating optimolog of this principle in criminal legislation domain in three levels (legislative authority, legislation process, and legislative data) and its relation with good governance summarily. This study is a descriptive-analytical one, it should be said that transparency does not have a long history, it has grown alongside growth of individuals’ political and social awareness. Based on findings of this study, in all three levels, concept of transparency has special importance that dealing with demonstrates the position of Iran criminal legislation in observing principles and fundamentals of law; existence of several legislative institutions, confidentiality’s dominance over transparency culture in legislation and indeterminate legal propositions process have made our country encounter serious challenges and problems to observe transparency principle, hence it has affected good governance that transparency is one of its requirements in all aspects and levels except security and military issues in case of having cases. Whilst concentration on of transparency in criminal legislation, we aimed at identifying the relation of this subject with good governance.
ملخص الجهاز:
For this reason, we see that in addition to the Islamic Consultative Assembly in the country, different institutions have granted themselves the right to legislate, and perhaps the rights of the people have been trampled because of this; in the field of criminalization, we also see that the Judiciary, through the interpretation of Article 167 of the Constitution, and sometimes the General Assembly of the Supreme Court through unity of precedent rulings, the Government through the Council of the Revolution of Culture and the Expediency Discernment Council, act as an independent and parallel institution to enact laws, which we will address below in some of the cases where criminalization has been carried out through authorities other than the legislative power.
Members of Parliament, who bear the grave duty of legislation and have placed themselves at the mercy of the people's election, have in fact implicitly waived their privacy and allow voters to investigate various aspects of their lives to ensure that they possess the necessary competence to hold this important position; and this applies to all political officials who, voluntarily or involuntarily, enter the arena of politics and decision-making have become public is true, and people have the right to have sufficient information about the competence and abilities of that individual; unfortunately, in the legal system of Iran, which is dominated by secrecy and perhaps partly due to our history, there is no specific rule or standard regarding the privacy of state officials, including members of Parliament, members of the Guardian Council, and members of the Expediency Discernment Council who deal with legislative matters, and this very issue has made the transparency of their affairs difficult.
(
, 
, 
)
