The comparative assessment of the continuation of the constitutional foundations in the legal systems of Iran, France and the United States

Salary, Osman; Gorji, Ali Akbar; Abbasi Lahiji, Bijan

doi:10.30497/law.2018.2142

The comparative assessment of the continuation of the constitutional foundations in the legal systems of Iran, France and the United States

Type : Research Article

Authors

Osman Salary

Ali Akbar Gorji

Bijan Abbasi Lahiji

10.30497/law.2018.2142

Abstract

The constitution allows the possibility of change and reappearance, albeit with different formalities, and is not fixed or permanent, as in other laws. The basic question is whether the concepts and principles enshrined in the constitution disappear completely with the collapse of the existing regime and the establishment of a new regime, giving rise to entirely new concepts and foundations, or whether this substitution represents a relative transformation of concepts. If the change is relative, what are the implications and roots of this relativity in the course of constitutional transformation? The study of changes in fundamental laws and the continuation of core principles at various times in the U.S. Constitution—which did not experience regime change but evolved under cyclical developments—as well as the French Constitution, which has undergone the most incidents and revisions, and the new Constitution of Iran, compared to the former two countries, leads us to conclude that the fundamental principles and foundations of a constitution are deeply rooted in a country’s political, historical, social, cultural, and ideological processes, as well as in the views of legal philosophers.

Keywords

Continuation of the constitution

Fundamental rights

Constitutional norms

Protecting the Constitution