According to the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Islamic Consultative Assembly (Parliament) is the primary body responsible for legislating laws. Alongside it, there exists another institution called the Expediency Discernment Council, which also plays a role in legislation. Under the Constitution, the Council has tasks such as solving systemic problems, resolving conflicts between the Parliament and the Guardian Council in cases of disagreement, and advising the Supreme Leader on formulating the general policies of the system. This study explores the concept of expediency within the framework of Islamic jurisprudence and the views of Western thinkers. It then compares this concept’s role with the duties of the Expediency Discernment Council. The study of the Council’s duties reveals that it is not primarily a legislative body and, consequently, is not directly involved in formulating a legislative criminal policy. The findings indicate that the concept of expediency in Shia jurisprudence, alongside discussions on priorities (important vs. less important), fixed vs. variable laws, and the ruler’s decree (Hokm Hokoomati), is not considered an independent source of legislation. This concept of expediency, based on Shia jurisprudential foundations, governs the structure and activities of the Expediency Discernment Council.
Introduction
The concept of expediency, which refers to the discretion in legal and political decisions to serve the best interests of the state or society, plays a crucial role in Iran's legislative process, especially in the realm of criminal law. This study delves into how the Expediency Discernment Council utilizes this concept to guide criminal policy formulation, ensuring alignment with societal needs and state security.
Main Body
Theoretical Framework: The research outlines the theoretical basis of expediency within Iranian governance, linking it to both traditional Islamic jurisprudence and modern political theory. The study provides a historical context of how expediency has been integral to Iran's political system post-Revolution, especially in balancing various power dynamics within the government.
Expediency in Criminal Law: The paper examines specific cases and legislative changes where expediency has played a decisive role in criminal policy. These include reforms in punitive measures, adjustments in laws concerning social behavior, and the introduction of new laws in response to technological advancements and international pressures.
Impact on Justice and Public Order: A significant focus of the study is the impact of expediency on justice and public order. It critiques whether the application of expediency has always met the high standards of justice expected in a legal system or if it has sometimes led to compromises that challenge the notion of fairness.
Societal and Political Implications: The analysis extends to the societal and political implications of using expediency as a tool for legislative decision-making. This includes the reaction of the public and the legal community to laws perceived as expedient but potentially controversial.
Conclusion
The study concludes that while expediency is a necessary aspect of legislative governance, particularly in a complex society like Iran, its application must be carefully managed to avoid undermining the principles of justice and transparency. Recommendations for future policy-making stress the need for a more structured approach to implementing expediency, one that includes greater public consultation and transparency.
Overall, this detailed examination of expediency in legislative criminal policy provides insights into the complexities of law-making in Iran, offering perspectives on how legal and moral considerations are balanced in the face of national and international challenges.