خلاصة:
"Reasonableness and legality of judicial decisions" is one of the most accepted legal principles governing judicial and quasi-judicial institutions and it can be assumed a result of presumption of innocence and a precondition of justice in judicial settlement of disputes. This rule has always not only been part of Iran's Acts of procedure, but principle 78 of amendment to the Constitutionalism Constitution and principle 166 of the Islamic Republic of Iran' Constitution also have emphasized on it. Hence, it is obvious that Administrative Justice Court as a judicial institution established by the Islamic Republic of Iran's Constitution is subject to this rule.In this paper, we study the adherence of the General Board of Administrative Justice Court to this rule and discuss, in an analytical way, some cases of violation of the above rule by General Board of Administrative Justice Court in invoking legislative Acts, and it would be seen that this violation is in three forms: "defects in legal documentation and legal arguments", "failure to invoke a specific Act" and "failure to invoke specific articles of Acts". The study also reveals that two major consequences of this violation is "issuing wrong or doubtful decisions" and "adoption of regulations similar to previous revoked regulations". Hence, given that the General Board of Administrative Justice Court is the unique referee for complaint of regulations and its decisions are not supervised by any other institution, it can rightly be expected that it try harder for precise observance of this rule; in particular, given that the consequences of wrong decisions of it, Contrary to decisions of other judicial bodies, in revocation or not revocation of regulations is not confined to the complainant but can affect a large group of people.
ملخص الجهاز:
" It is worth mentioning that Article 38 of the 2006 Law of the Court also contained provisions similar to Article 80 of the aforementioned law; however, Article 12 of the 1981 Law of the Court only explicitly stated the necessity of including the evidence for proving the claim in the petitions submitted to the Court; of course, for the first time, the amendment to the executive regulations of the latter law under the title "Added Articles and Notes to the Procedure of the Court of Administrative Justice" passed in 2005 deemed it necessary to include the "legal article or Sharia ruling with which the conflict of the resolution is claimed" in the request for annulment of the resolution.
Although the Court in this ruling cited Article 576 of the Islamic Penal Code cited, and this article refers to the necessity of executing "judgments or orders of judicial authorities," and the "temporary injunctions of the Court's branches" can be considered part of the "orders of judicial authorities"; however, the aforementioned citation and argument are incomplete; because, firstly, specific laws and regulations govern the Court, and therefore, in cases where the jurisdiction and procedure of the Court are the subject of the complaint, the Court cannot cite general laws governing other judicial authorities without providing a valid reason.
" Although it can be said with indulgence that the General Board of the Court considered the aforementioned circular to be in violation of the civil and criminal procedure laws, in this case, the rule of reasoned and documented judicial rulings was still not observed in the ruling due to the failure to refer to specific articles of these laws.
(
, 
, 
)
