نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسنده
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسنده [English]
Although the interpretation of constitutional law is not an exception to the general interpretation of law, it is of high significance and prominence due to its equal value to the constitution and its interrelation with socio-political problems. These features have given rise to a variety of authorities for its interpretation in different political systems. On the other hand, the two principal legal systems in the world have proposed different methods for the description and classification of interpretive approaches in this field. Interpretive approaches of the Romano-Germanic legal system—based on the historical and scientific development of the interpretation of civil law in France—are as follows: literal approach, historical approach, and free scientific approach. Interpretive approaches of the common law system—based on practical experience and philosophical as well as linguistic studies—are textualism, originalism, and pragmatism. Although, in terms of the method of selecting members, the U.S. Supreme Court is considered a politico-judicial authority, and the Guardians Council of the Islamic Republic of Iran is an authority with jurisprudential and legal tendencies, both benefit from various interpretive approaches. The interpretive literature of the common law system is more qualified than the interpretive approaches available in the written legal system to describe the approaches of the two authorities.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)
