Journal of Islamic Law Research

Journal of Islamic Law Research

Legal Challenges in the Regulatory Framework for Emerging Virtual Technologies in Iran

Type : Research Article

Authors
1 PhD Student in Public Law, Faculty of Islamic Studies and Law, Imam Sadiq University, Tehran, Iran.
2 Associate Professor, Department of Public and International Law, Faculty of Islamic Studies and Law, Imam Sadiq University, Tehran, Iran.
Abstract
∴ Introduction ∴ ‌
The rapid advancement of technology in the 21st century has brought forth profound transformations in social, economic, and governance structures globally. Iran has not been immune to these changes, experiencing significant shifts within its societal and governmental frameworks due to technological progress, especially in cyberspace and its associated branches. Emerging technologies—ranging from artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) to blockchain, virtual reality, and quantum computing—exhibit an inherently dynamic, flexible, and indeterminate nature. These characteristics distinguish them markedly from traditional sectors governed by centuries-old legal paradigms. As such, regulation in the field of emerging technologies requires rethinking traditional approaches, emphasizing the protection of privacy, the creation of safe digital environments, the management of content, and the promotion of ethical standards.
Globally, various regulatory trends are evident: many countries are moving towards risk-based frameworks that seek not to restrict innovation but to manage technological risks responsibly. Concurrently, there is an increasing emphasis on international collaboration, ethical oversight, and multistakeholder engagement in shaping technology governance. Institutions such as the European Union and the United Nations have advanced initiatives aiming to harmonize regulatory standards for emerging technologies.
However, Iran faces unique challenges in this regulatory context, rooted in its centralized governmental structure, socio-cultural diversity, economic limitations induced by international sanctions, and traditionalist legal theories. These challenges contribute to regulatory fragmentation, lack of coherence, and slow adaptation to technological advances. Consequently, there is a pressing need to develop a transparent, robust, and adaptive regulatory framework capable of fostering innovation while safeguarding public interests and aligning with global standards.
This article seeks to identify and analyze the key legal and institutional obstacles impeding Iran’s regulatory effectiveness in the domain of emerging technologies, aiming to contribute to both scholarly discussions and practical reforms in the Iranian legal system.

‌ ∴ Research Question ∴ ‌
The central research question guiding this study is:
"What are the legal challenges facing the regulatory system for emerging technologies in Iran?"
This core inquiry will be broken down into several sub-questions throughout the study, including:
To what extent does the current Iranian legal framework address the regulation of emerging technologies?
What structural, cultural, and political factors contribute to the challenges in regulating new technologies within Iran?
How does Iran’s regulatory approach compare with international best practices?
What reforms could strengthen Iran’s regulatory system to promote innovation while ensuring public welfare?

‌ ∴ Research Hypothesis ∴ ‌
This research operates under the following primary hypothesis:
"Iran’s regulatory system for emerging technologies is fragmented and lacks coherence, resulting in ineffective governance that hampers technological innovation and fails to adequately address societal risks associated with digital transformation."

‌ ∴ Methodology & Framework, if Applicable ∴ ‌
The research adopts a doctrinal legal research method complemented by comparative analysis and qualitative content analysis.
The study will employ theories of regulatory governance, risk regulation, and legal responsiveness to frame its analysis. Concepts such as "adaptive regulation," "sandbox regulation" (as used in fintech industries), and "ethical technology governance" will guide the exploration of innovative legal frameworks suitable for emerging technologies.
Stakeholder Analysis: Attention will be given to the roles of different actors—government bodies, private sector innovators, academia, civil society organizations—in shaping and influencing regulatory development. Interviews or secondary analysis of statements, policy papers, and media coverage will be used to gauge stakeholder perspectives when applicable.

‌ ∴ Results & Discussion ∴ ‌
The findings of this research reveal significant structural and substantive challenges within Iran’s regulatory system concerning emerging virtual technologies. The most salient result is the fragmented and incoherent regulatory landscape, characterized by the isolated establishment of multiple regulatory bodies without a structured delineation of their interrelationships or their integration into the broader governance framework. This disjointed regulatory structure has produced ambiguity, jurisdictional conflicts, and inefficiencies that undermine both private sector innovation and the safeguarding of public interests.
In practice, numerous governmental and supra-governmental bodies—including the Islamic Consultative Assembly, the Cabinet, the Supreme Council of Cyberspace, the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution, the Communications Regulatory Authority, and others—exercise overlapping or conflicting authority over cyberspace-related matters. These institutions often operate in silos, with minimal coordination and an absence of clear legal mandates defining their competencies, resulting in regulatory duplication, gaps, and inconsistent policy implementation.
Furthermore, the regulatory mechanisms lack a networked model that connects sectoral regulators with the country's main branches of government—the executive, legislative, and judiciary. Without formalized channels for inter-regulatory dialogue and coordinated decision-making, regulatory bodies act independently, leading to a disjointed legal environment that hinders coherent policymaking, strategic planning, and effective enforcement.
An additional result concerns the absence of complementary regulatory institutions that could support a more robust governance framework. Specifically, the Iranian system lacks:
Oversight regulators to ensure compliance and accountability across sectors.
Diverse regulatory tools to tailor regulatory interventions appropriately to different technological fields.
Intermediary regulatory bodies that could mediate conflicts between agencies.
Scientific and research institutions specialized in technology law and policy to inform evidence-based regulation.
Barriers to innovation and private sector development are further exacerbated by deficiencies in critical legal protections. The absence of comprehensive data protection legislation, limited safeguards for intellectual property rights in the digital realm, and restricted access to public information all contribute to a regulatory environment that is perceived as unpredictable and hostile to technological entrepreneurship.
Moreover, Iranian regulatory policy does not sufficiently engage with stakeholder participation from the technology sector, civil society, or academia. In contrast to global trends that emphasize multistakeholder governance, Iran’s regulatory model remains largely top-down and state-centric, which limits the inclusion of valuable insights from non-governmental actors and diminishes regulatory legitimacy and effectiveness.

‌ ∴ Conclusion ∴ ‌
This study demonstrates that the current Iranian regulatory structure for governing emerging virtual technologies is deeply fragmented, incoherent, and inefficient. The proliferation of isolated regulatory bodies, unclear institutional mandates, and the absence of structured relationships between regulators and the main branches of government have created an environment marked by confusion, jurisdictional conflict, and regulatory inertia.
Fundamentally, the Iranian legal system has yet to establish a coherent vision for the regulation of cyberspace that aligns with contemporary global practices emphasizing coordination, transparency, accountability, and stakeholder engagement. Without a comprehensive regulatory architecture, the grand function of regulation—the balancing of private innovation with public welfare—cannot be achieved.
The research underscores that meaningful regulation of emerging technologies must be rooted in an interdisciplinary public law framework that integrates policymaking, ethics, scientific expertise, and participatory governance. Regulatory success depends not merely on the formation of isolated bodies but on the systematic design of rules, institutions, procedures, and tools that can respond flexibly to technological evolution.
Among the most critical legal reforms needed are:
The clear legal definition of regulatory mandates and competencies;
The establishment of complementary institutions such as oversight regulators and intermediary bodies;
The development of a diverse toolkit of regulatory instruments;
The promotion of scientific, research, and educational infrastructure in technology law;
The adoption of comprehensive data protection and intellectual property laws;
And the institutionalization of stakeholder participation mechanisms.
A reorganized and restructured regulatory system is not only vital for protecting public interests but also for supporting domestic innovation, attracting investment, and ensuring Iran’s competitiveness in the global technological ecosystem.
Keywords
Subjects

  1. Amin, M., & Aghaei, M. (2017). Internet regulation and governance in Iran: The challenges of implementing a national intranet. In Internet policy in Iran (pp. 91–119). Palgrave Macmillan.
  2. Baldwin, R., & Cave, M. (1999). Understanding regulation: Theory, strategy, and practice. Oxford University Press.
  3. Bardach, E., & Patashnik, E. M. (2015). A practical guide for policy analysis: The eightfold path to more effective problem solving. CQ Press.
  4. Binns, R. (2018). Fairness in machine learning: Lessons from political philosophy. Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAT), 149–159.
  5. Chesbrough, H. (2003). Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Harvard Business Review Press.
  6. De Filippi, P., & Wright, A. (2018). Blockchain and the law: The rule of code. Harvard University Press.
  7. DeNardis, L. (2014). The global war for Internet governance. Yale University Press.
  8. European Commission. (2020). White paper on artificial intelligence: A European approach to excellence and trust.
  9. Fadavi, Ahmad, & Laʿl Alizadeh, Mohsen (1403 SH/2024). Mālekīyat-e āfarīdehā-ye hūš-e maṣnūʿī; morūrī bar čāleš-e novīn-e ḥoqūq-e mālekīyat-e fekrī dar ʿaṣr-e fanāvarī [Ownership of Artificial Intelligence-Generated Works: An Overview of the Emerging Intellectual Property Challenges in the Technology Era]. Pažūhešnāme-ye Ḥoqūq-e Eslāmī [Journal of Islamic Law Research], 25(4), 949–976. https://doi.org/10.30497/law.2024.245828.3492 [in Persian].
  10. Farahani, Mohammadsadeq, Kadkhodaei, Abbasali, & Rostami, Vali (1402 SH/2023). Ḥoqūq-e reqābat dar platformhā-ye dījītāl; żarūrat-e bāznegārī dar qavāʿed-e sonnatī [Competition Law in Digital Platforms; The Necessity of Revising Traditional Rules]. Pažūheš-e Ḥoqūq-e ʿOmūmī [Public Law Research], 25(79), 7– https://doi.org/10.22054/qjpl.2023.63811.2683 [in Persian].
  11. Farazmand, A. (2013). The institutional context of e-government: The case of Iran. International Journal of Public Administration, 36(11), 789–800.
  12. Floridi, L. (2014). The fourth revolution: How the infosphere is reshaping human reality. Oxford University Press.
  13. Fung, A. (2006). Empowered participation: Reinventing urban democracy. Princeton University Press.
  14. Garfinkel, S. (2015). Digital forensics: An overview. Digital Forensics Magazine, 1(1), 10–14.
  15. Ghazinour, K., & Nematollahi, H. (2016). Internet governance in Iran: A critical discourse analysis. Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society, 14(1), 2–17.
  16. Grabosky, P. N. (1995). Countering regulatory capture. Public Administration Review, 55(2), 89–97.
  17. Hajer, M. A., & Wagenaar, H. (2003). Deliberative policy analysis: Understanding governance in the network society. Cambridge University Press.
  18. Hashemi, Seyyed Hossein (1403 SH/2024). Kontrol yā nowāvarī; elzāmāt-e ḥoqūqī-ye sīyāsathā-ye tanẓīmī dar zamīne-ye hūš-e maṣnūʿī [Control or Innovation; Legal Requirements of Regulatory Policies in the Field of Artificial Intelligence]. Našrīye-ye ʿElmī-ye Dowlat va Ḥoqūq [Scientific Journal of State and Law], 5(1), 9–30 [in Persian].
  19. Hosseini, M., Majidi, H., & Ahmadi, F. (1400 SH/2021). Čahārčūb-e ḥokmrānī-ye hūš-e maṣnūʿī; čālešhā va rāhkārhā [Artificial Intelligence Governance Framework; Challenges and Solutions]. Faṣlnāme-ye Moṭāleʿāt-e Modīrīyat-e Fanāvarī-ye Eṭṭelāʿāt [Quarterly Journal of Information Technology Management Studies], 13(52), 79–98 [in Persian].
  20. Hosseini, Seyyed Ali (1403 SH/2024). Ḥoqūq-e ḥefāẓat az dādehā-ye shakhṣī dar pardāzeš-e algūrītmī; čālešhā va rāhkārhā [Personal Data Protection Law in Algorithmic Processing; Challenges and Solutions]. Našrīye-ye ʿElmī-ye Dowlat va Ḥoqūq [Scientific Journal of State and Law], 5(1), 99–122 [in Persian].
  21. Iran Acting President (1403 SH/2024). Mādde-vāḥede-ye taškīl-e Šūrā-ye Mellī-ye Rāhbarī va taʾsīs-e Sāzmān-e Mellī-ye Hūš-e Maṣnūʿī eblāghī-ye sarparast-e rīyāsat-jomhūrī morakh-e 10/4/1403 [Single-Article Act on the Formation of the National Steering Council and the Establishment of the National Artificial Intelligence Organization communicated by the Acting President dated 10/4/1403] [in Persian].
  22. Iran Competition Council (1402 SH/2023). Dastūr al-ʿamal-e taškīl-e kārgorūh-e takhaṣṣoṣī-ye eqteṣād-e dījītāl moṣavvab-e jalse-ye šomāre-ye 590-e Šūrā-ye Reqābat dar tārīkh-e 10/5/1402 [Directive on the Formation of the Specialized Working Group on the Digital Economy enacted at meeting no. 590 of the Competition Council on 10/5/1402] [in Persian].
  23. Iran Council of Ministers (1400 SH/2021). Taṣvīb-nāme dar khoṣūṣ-e taškīl-e kārgorūh-e vīže-ye eqteṣād-e dījītāl moṣavvab-e 8/10/1400-e Heyʾat-e Vazīrān [Cabinet approval concerning the establishment of the Special Working Group on the Digital Economy enacted on 8/10/1400 by the Council of Ministers] [in Persian].
  24. Iran Guardian Council (1379 SH/2000). Naẓarīye-ye tafsīrī-ye šomāre-ye 979/21/79 morakh-e 10/7/1379-e Šūrā-ye Negahbān [Interpretive opinion no. 979/21/79 dated 10/7/1379 of the Guardian Council] [in Persian].
  25. Iran High Commission for Regulation of the National Cyberspace (1403 SH/2025). Neẓām-nāme-ye ramz-arz aʿamm az ījād-e ramz-arz-e mellī va sāmāndehī-ye kārbarī-ye ramz-arzhā-ye jahān-ravā moṣavvab-e Komīsīyūn-e ʿĀlī-ye Tanẓīm-e Moqarrarāt-e Fażā-ye Majāzī-ye Kešvar morakh-e 19/10/1403 [Cryptocurrency Regulation, including the creation of a national cryptocurrency and the organization of the use of global cryptocurrencies, enacted by the High Commission for Regulation of the National Cyberspace dated 19/10/1403] [in Persian].
  26. Iran Information Technology and Communication Research Institute, Iranian Research Institute for Information Science and Technology (1401 SH/2022). Gozāreš-e vażʿīyat va češmandāz-e hūš-e maṣnūʿī dar Īrān [Report on the Status and Outlook of Artificial Intelligence in Iran] [in Persian].
  27. Iran Islamic Consultative Assembly (1382 SH/2003). Qānūn-e vaẓāyef va ekhtīyārāt-e Vezārat-e Ertebāṭāt va Fanāvarī-ye Eṭṭelāʿāt moṣavvab-e 19/9/1382 [Law on the Duties and Powers of the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology enacted on 19/9/1382] [in Persian].
  28. Iran Islamic Consultative Assembly (1386 SH/2008). Qānūn-e ejrā-ye sīyāsathā-ye kollī-ye aṣl-e 44-e Qānūn-e Asāsī moṣavvab-e 8/11/1386 [Law on the Implementation of the General Policies of Article 44 of the Constitution enacted on 8/11/1386] [in Persian].
  29. Iran Islamic Consultative Assembly (1387 SH/2009). Qānūn-e entešār va dastrēsī-ye āzād be eṭṭelāʿāt moṣavvab-e 6/11/1387 [Law on Publication and Free Access to Information enacted on 6/11/1387] [in Persian].
  30. Iran Islamic Consultative Assembly (1388 SH/2009). Qānūn-e jarāʾem-e rāyāneʾī moṣavvab-e 5/3/1388 [Computer Crimes Law enacted on 5/3/1388] [in Persian].
  31. Iran Islamic Consultative Assembly (1392 SH/2013). Qānūn-e taškīlāt va āʾīn-e dādrasī-ye Dīvān-e ʿEdālat-e Edārī moṣavvab-e 25/3/1392 bā eṣlāḥāt va elḥāqāt-e baʿdī [Law on the Organization and Procedure of the Administrative Justice Court enacted on 25/3/1392 with subsequent amendments and additions] [in Persian].
  32. Iran Islamic Consultative Assembly (1402 SH/2023). Qānūn-e Bānk-e Markazī-ye Jomhūrī-ye Eslāmī-ye Īrān dar tārīkh-e 30/3/1402 [Law of the Central Bank of the Islamic Republic of Iran dated 30/3/1402] [in Persian].
  33. Iran Islamic Consultative Assembly (1402 SH/2023). Qānūn-e Dīvān-e ʿEdālat-e Edārī moṣavvab-e 10/2/1402 [Administrative Justice Court Law enacted on 10/2/1402] [in Persian].
  34. Iran Islamic Parliament Research Center (1400 SH/2021). Gozāreš-e barrasī-ye čālešhā va rāhkārhā-ye akhlāq dar hūš-e maṣnūʿī [Report on Examining the Challenges and Solutions of Ethics in Artificial Intelligence] [in Persian].
  35. Iran National Cyberspace Center (1401 SH/2022). Gozāreš-e čālešhā-ye akhlāqī va ḥoqūqī-ye hūš-e maṣnūʿī [Report on the Ethical and Legal Challenges of Artificial Intelligence] [in Persian].
  36. Iran Office of the Supreme Leader (1384 SH/2005). Sīyāsathā-ye kollī-ye aṣl-e 44-e Qānūn-e Asāsī eblāghī-ye maqām-e rahbarī morakh-e 1/3/1384 [General Policies of Article 44 of the Constitution communicated by the Leadership dated 1/3/1384] [in Persian].
  37. Iran Office of the Supreme Leader (1390 SH/2012). Ḥokm-e taškīl va enteṣāb-e aʿżā-ye Šūrā-ye ʿĀlī-ye Fażā-ye Majāzī eblāghī-ye maqām-e rahbarī morakh-e 17/12/1390 [Order establishing and appointing members of the Supreme Council of Cyberspace communicated by the Leadership dated 17/12/1390] [in Persian].
  38. Iran Office of the Supreme Leader (1394 SH/2015). Eblāghīye-ye maqām-e moʿaẓẓam-e rahbarī morakh-e 22/6/1394 kheṭāb be raʾīs-jomhūrī [Directive of the Supreme Leader dated 22/6/1394 addressed to the President] [in Persian].
  39. Iran Office of the Supreme Leader (1398 SH/2019). Sīyāsathā-ye kollī-ye neẓām-e qānūngoḏārī eblāghī-ye maqām-e rahbarī morakh-e 6/7/1398 [General Policies of the Legislative System communicated by the Leadership dated 6/7/1398] [in Persian].
  40. Iran Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution (1385 SH/2006). Asās-nāme-ye Bonyād-e Mellī-ye Bāzīhā-ye Rāyāneʾī moṣavvab-e 9/3/1385-e Šūrā-ye ʿĀlī-ye Enqelāb-e Farhangī bā eṣlāḥāt va elḥāqāt-e baʿdī [Statute of the National Foundation for Computer Games enacted on 9/3/1385 by the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution with subsequent amendments and additions] [in Persian].
  41. Iran Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution (1402 SH/2023). Moṣavvabe-ye Šūrā-ye ʿĀlī-ye Enqelāb-e Farhangī dar khoṣūṣ-e “taʿyīn-e elzāmāt-e sāmāndehī-ye ḥowze-ye ṣowt va taṣvīr-e farāgīr” eblāghī-ye rīyāsat-jomhūrī morakh-e 30/3/1402 [Approval of the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution concerning “determining the requirements for organizing the field of universal audio and video” communicated by the Presidency dated 30/3/1402] [in Persian].
  42. Islamic Republic of Iran (1358 SH/1979; amendments 1368 SH/1989). Qānūn-e asāsī-ye Jomhūrī-ye Eslāmī-ye Īrān moṣavvab-e 1358 va moṣavvabāt-e Šūrā-ye Bāznegārī-ye 1368 [Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran enacted in 1358 and the approvals of the 1368 Revision Council] [in Persian].
  43. Jones, H. (2024). The impact of emerging technologies on privacy rights. American Journal of Law and Policy, 1(1), 25–34.
  44. Kettl, D. F. (2000). The global revolution in public management: Driving themes, missing links. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 19(2), 255–262.
  45. Khoshnezhad, Mohammadreza (1400 SH/2021). Żarūrathā-ye ḥokmrānī-ye hūš-e maṣnūʿī dar Īrān [Necessities of Artificial Intelligence Governance in Iran]. Faṣlnāme-ye Pažūhešhā-ye Modīrīyat-e ʿOmūmī [Quarterly Journal of Public Management Research], 12(54), 1–24 [in Persian].
  46. Knill, C. (2020). Public policy: A new introduction. Cambridge University Press.
  47. Lerner, J. (2009). The empirical impact of intellectual property law on innovation: A survey. American Economic Review, 99(2), 343–348.
  48. Lessig, L. (2006). Code: And other laws of cyberspace. Basic Books.
  49. Majone, G. (1997). The regulatory state. Journal of European Public Policy, 4(1), 1–21.
  50. (2015). Innovation policies: A systematic review.
  51. (2021). Artificial intelligence in society. OECD Publishing.
  52. Renn, O. (2008). Risk governance: Coping with uncertainty in a complex world. Earthscan.
  53. Smith, J., & Johnson, L. (2022). The ethical implications of emerging technologies. Journal of Technology and Society, 15(3), 45–67.
  54. Stigler, G. J. (1971). The theory of economic regulation. The Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science, 2(1), 3–21.
  55. Support to effective regulatory systems for procurement and supply management of health products. (2019).
  56. Varieties of regulatory regimes and their effect on public trust in market actors. (n.d.).
  57. What regulatory system governance is and why it’s important: Principles and guidance. (2021).
  58. Zarei, Mohammadhossein, & Azizmohammadi, Fatemeh (1396 SH/2017). Taḥavvolāt-e tafkīk-e qovā dar partow-e ḥokmrānī-ye tanẓīmī [Developments in the Separation of Powers in Light of Regulatory Governance]. Faṣlnāme-ye Taḥqīqāt-e Ḥoqūqī [Legal Research Quarterly], 79, 213–237. https://doi.org/10.22034/jlr.2017.54394 [in Persian].
  59. Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. PublicAffairs.
Volume 26, Issue 4 - Serial Number 70
Autumn 2025
Pages 1373-1408

  • Received 20 January 2025
  • Accepted 07 April 2025