«A Critique of the Guardian Council's Interpretive Theory Regarding the Limits of Parliamentary Immunity in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran» مقاله

خلاصه ماشینی:

Now that the esteemed Guardian Council, with its interpretation of Article 86 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, has announced its view regarding the judicial immunity of representatives, as reflected in the collective media on December 25th and 26th, 1380 (Iranian calendar), the time has come to review the understanding I, as a jurist, presented of Article 86 of the Constitution in a closed session of the Islamic Consultative Assembly, and to compare that view with the view of the esteemed Guardian Council as the official authority for interpreting the Constitution, as follows: First Discussion - Parliamentary Immunity in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran Since parliamentary immunity 1 is foreseen in various political systems to guarantee the performance of representative duties, and through this means, an attempt has been made to protect members of parliament from prosecution by private individuals or by the government, so that they can act with courage and enthusiasm in performing their representative duties, and this immunity is presented in two different forms in the constitutional law of various countries, therefore, both aspects of this immunity will be examined in order: Non- (1)les immunites parlementaires. In Iranian law, considering the text of Article 86 regarding the actions of representatives and their acts and statements that may have a criminal description, we can make the following distinction: 1- In relation to common crimes that have no connection with their representative duties, immunity definitely does not exist.