Written by Hujjat-ul-Islam wa al-Muslimeen Farajollah Hedayat Nia, a member of the Faculty of Jurisprudence and Law at IICT, published on khamenei.ir
Article 110 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran places the signature of the elected president among the duties and powers of the Supreme Leader. The signing of the presidential decree in the constitutional law of the Islamic Republic of Iran is referred to as ” Validation ” (Tanfeedh). Although confirmation is a well-established and known term in jurisprudence, it entered the legal literature of our country only after the Islamic Revolution. For this reason, there are significant legal questions about it. After a brief reference to the concept and legal nature of “confirmation,” the most important questions regarding it from the perspective of the constitutional law of the Islamic Republic of Iran will be examined.
- The Concept and Nature of Validation
Confirmation (Validation) in jurisprudence and private law means “validating a revocable legal act.” In other words, confirmation is an action through which a person can waive the annulment of a legal act. Confirmationson, the act of validation is also referred to as endorsement or signature. It is clear that a revocable legal act is different from an invalid act. The applications of this term in private law illustrate this meaning well, such as the confirmation of a speculative contract by the owner, and the confirmation of a will exceeding one-third of the deceased’s estate by the heirs. Apparently, the confirmation of a decree also, as used in the words of jurists, is from this category.
In the Islamic Republic of Iran, the “people’s election” and the “appointment of the Supreme Leader” are beautifully combined, and the Supreme Leader appoints the person to the presidency who has previously been validated through elections. Therefore, the elected president, approved by the Supreme Leader, will have both “religious” and “political” legitimacy.
The validation of the presidential decree by the Supreme Leader is essentially about validating or legitimizing the president’s position over the executive branch. The president, in the position of head of the executive branch, makes decisions and takes actions that fall within the domain of leadership. The decisions or actions of the president, in the role of head of the executive branch, are fundamentally delegable and require the “prior consent” or “subsequent permission” of the Supreme Leader and without it, they will not have legal validity.
Regarding whether confirmation is essentially “delegation” or “authorization,” the Constitution does not provide a clear indication. There are differences between delegation and authorization in their specific sense: a delegate acts according to the will of the principal and on their behalf, while an authorized person acts according to their own will. A delegate can be dismissed, while an authorized person cannot. In delegation, the principal’s right concerning the subject of delegation remains, while when someone transfers a right to another, they will no longer have that right.
The final part of Article 110 of the Constitution might be an indication of the authorization nature of the presidential decree confirmation. The final part of Article 110 states: “The Leader can delegate some of his duties and powers to another person.” However, it is unlikely that the Constitutional Revision Council intended a specific meaning and implications from the term confirmation in the text above. It seems that confirmation is essentially delegation.
- The Philosophy of Validation of the Presidential Decree
The first important question that arises in the discussion of the confirmation of the presidential decree is: What is the philosophy behind the validation of the presidential decree, and why is it necessary for the Supreme Leader to approve the president after the people’s election? In response to this question, it should be noted that based on the theory of the Guardianship of the Jurist, in the era of the occultation of the infallible Imam, the general presidency and governance are the responsibility of a just and competent jurist, and any governance other than this is considered tyrannical. The foundations of this theory have been detailed elsewhere, and this text does not have the scope to delve into this discussion. According to this theory, the management of societal affairs is in his hands, and government officials gain legitimacy through his authorization. On the other hand, executive affairs of society are also part of the domain of leadership, and for this reason, the head of the executive branch must be appointed or authorized by him; otherwise, they will lack legitimacy. Imam Khomeini (may God be pleased with him) repeatedly emphasized the necessity of appointing the president by the jurist. A sample of his statements is as follows. He expressed the special importance of the Guardianship of the Jurist to the Assembly of Experts on 4 October 1979:
“The signing of the presidential decree is essentially within the powers of the Supreme Leader, and it is evident that if it is established that a person, through deception, has reached the final stage while lacking the required qualifications, the Supreme Leader can choose not to confirm their decree. However, this possibility is highly unlikely. ”
“…A president who is not appointed by the jurist is illegitimate. When it is illegitimate, it is considered tyrannical; obedience to him is obedience to a tyrant; entering his domain is entering the domain of tyranny. Tyranny is abolished when someone is appointed by the command of Almighty God…”
- The Relationship Between Validation and Appointment
In all the confirmation decrees issued by Imam Khomeini (may Allah have mercy on him) or Ayatollah Khamenei for the Presidents of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the phrase “confirmation of the people’s vote” is seen first, followed by “appointment to the presidency.” For example, in Imam Khomeini’s validation decree for President Banisadr, it is stated: “I, by this decree, confirm the people’s vote and appoint him to this position.” Similarly, in Ayatollah Khamenei’s confirmation decree for President Hashemi Rafsanjani, it is stated: “I, by this decree, confirm the people’s vote and appoint him as President of the Islamic Republic of Iran.” This phrase or a similar one is also observed in other confirmation decrees.
The language used in these decrees meaningfully connects the election of the president by the people with their appointment by the Supreme Leader and provides a clear response to those who believe that the appointment of an individual to the presidency by the Supreme Leader is incompatible with national sovereignty. In the Islamic Republic of Iran, “the election of the people” and “the appointment of the jurist” are beautifully integrated, and the Supreme Leader appoints to the presidency the person whose popular acceptance and social base have previously been established through elections. Thus, the elected president, approved by the Supreme Leader, will have both “religious” and “political” legitimacy.
- Reasons for the Confirmatory Nature of the Presidential Decree Signature
The term ” validation ” is not mentioned in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran. What exists in this regard is the phrase “signing of the presidential decree” in Article 110, Clause 9 of the Constitution, listed among the duties and powers of the Supreme Leader.
The following reasons support the confirmatory nature of the presidential decree signature in Iran:
- Detailed Discussions in the Assembly of Experts:
From the remarks of some members of the Assembly reviewing the final draft of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, it appears that they viewed the Supreme Leader’s signature as conferring legitimacy. Mr. Fatehi, a member of the Assembly during the review of Article 110 of the Constitution, states: “I am not clear whether the signing of the presidential decree is merely ceremonial or what happens if it is not signed.” The Deputy Speaker, Ayatollah Martyr Beheshti, responds: “No, this is confirmation.” Previously, Ayatollah Montazeri, regarding the connection between the Islamic and republican aspects of the system, said: “If a president, even with the votes of the entire nation, does not have the endorsement of the jurist, it has no executive guarantee for me and becomes one of the oppressive governments…”
From the detailed discussions, it seems that the reliance on the Supreme Leader’s signature for presidential legitimacy was accepted, and their discussion focused on how to frame the law to reconcile this with national sovereignty. Supporting this is the fact that some members of the Assembly had proposed that to ensure the religious legitimacy of the presidency, the Supreme Leader select a number of qualified individuals and present them to the people for voting.
However, this proposal was rejected to prevent the restriction of the people’s right to choose, and the law was structured to allow those who consider themselves qualified to register. The Guardian Council reviews their qualifications for meeting legal requirements and oversees the election process, and finally, the Supreme Leader grants legitimacy by signing the decree of the elected president.
- Presidential Election Law:
The Presidential Election Law (approved on 26 June 1985) explicitly states the confirmatory nature of the Supreme Leader’s signature on the presidential decree. Article 1 of this law states: “The term of the presidency of the Islamic Republic of Iran is four years and begins from the date of confirmation of the credentials by the Supreme Leader.” This law has been reviewed and amended several times, but the text has remained unchanged in all amendments. Therefore, according to ordinary legislation as well, the Supreme Leader’s signature on the presidential decree is confirmatory.
- The Legal Status of the Validation of the Presidential Decree
The question concerning the legal status of the confirmation of the presidential decree is whether the Supreme Leader’s signature is a legal obligation and part of their duties or falls under their powers. In the latter case, they could withhold the signing of the presidential decree after the legal process. This question arises because Article 110 of the Constitution uses the term “duties and powers of the Leader,” listing various matters in eleven clauses without distinguishing between duties and powers. Therefore, the text of Article 110 does not clearly reveal the legislator’s intent.
“The validation of the presidential decree by the Supreme Leader essentially involves validating or legitimizing the president’s position over the executive branch. The president, in their role as head of the executive branch, makes decisions and takes actions that are part of the scope of authority and require the “prior permission” or “subsequent approval” of the Supreme Leader. Without this, their actions lack legal validity.”
During the final review of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, this issue was addressed, and some questioned it. From the questions posed by Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi and the responses from the Vice President of the Assembly, Ayatollah Martyr Beheshti, it appears that they considered the signing of the presidential decree as part of the Supreme Leader’s duties. Mr. Makarem Shirazi asked: “…Is signing within the Leader’s powers? Because as discussed this morning, the assumption is that if a candidate’s qualifications are confirmed and the people elect them, the Leader will certainly sign…” Martyr Beheshti, as the session chair, replied: “This discussion is essentially about whether some clauses include the term powers. Since everything is considered as duties, it is not problematic to omit the term powers at the end.”
Another important point is that, based on previous discussions, the signing of the presidential decree is indeed part of the Supreme Leader’s powers. However, if it is proven that an individual has reached the final stage through deception, the Supreme Leader can choose not to confirm their decree. This scenario is highly unlikely. According to the law, the qualifications of the elected president are confirmed by the Guardian Council before the election. Additionally, the Guardian Council oversees the election process and confirms its validity. Thus, the likelihood that an elected individual lacks legal qualifications is very remote. Therefore, although the confirmation of the presidential decree is part of the Supreme Leader’s powers, the law is structured in a way that leaves no room for the exercise of this right. It is similar to a traveler who will reach their destination if they choose the right path.
Of course, it is possible that after the validation of the presidential decree and during its term, the president may violate their duties. This issue can be explored under the topic “Conditional Validation of the Presidential Decree and Its Implications” in another note.
Footnotes:
- A group of researchers, *Culture of Jurisprudence According to the School of the Ahl al-Bayt (a.s.)*, vol. 2, p. 643.
- The term “Fiduciary Contract” refers to a transaction with another’s property without the owner’s permission. Such a transaction is voidable and subject to confirmation or nullification.
- According to jurisprudence, a will exceeding one-third is valid only if the excess is confirmed or signed by the heirs.
- See: Sayyid Ruhollah Musavi Khomeini, *Wilayat al-Faqih*, Institute for the Compilation and Publication of Imam Khomeini’s Works; Abdullah Javadi Amoli, *Wilayat al-Faqih (The Juridical Authority and Justice)*, Isra Publication Center.
- *Sahifa Imam*, vol. 10, p. 221.
- See: Sayyid Mohammad Hashemi, *Constitutional Law of the Islamic Republic of Iran*, Qom Higher Education Complex, 2nd edition, 1996, p. 93.
- *Detailed Records of the Final Review of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran*, vol. 2, p. 1189.
- Ibid., p. 1182.
- Ibid.
- *Detailed Records of the Final Review of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran*, vol. 2, p. 1191.
- Ibid.
