نقش پادشاه در نصب و عزل رئیس الوزرا و وزرا در حقوق اساسی مشروطه (مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)
درجه علمی: نشریه علمی (وزارت علوم)
آرشیو
چکیده
از سال های پیش از پیروزی مشروطیت شاه در انتخاب صدراعظم و وزرای دولت نقش داشت و آن نقش در قوانین اساسی مشروطیت نیز بازتاب یافت. در حکومت مشروطه که پارلمان به عنوان نهادی که می بایست بر کارهای قوه مجریه نظارت کند نقش فعالی داشت و از سوی دیگر در حکومت مشروطه پادشاه غیرمسئول بود که می بایست از حکومت کردن فاصله می گرفت و به سلطنت کردن قناعت می کرد. با وجود این، نهاد سلطنت با پیشینه ای که در ایران داشت به سادگی تن به چنین وضعی نمی داد و می کوشید تا با تفسیر متفاوتی از قانون اساسی تفوق سیاسی خود را حفظ کند. این موضوع از دوره قاجار تا پهلوی اول و سپس در پهلوی دوم و حتی پس از آن تحولاتی را از سر گذراند. هدف این مقاله نشان دادن وجود چنین سابقه ای در حقوق اساسی ایران است و پرسش محوری آن، نشان دادن موارد و مصادیق نقش شخص اول مملکت در انتخاب مقام های قوه مجریه است. یافته های اسنادی این مقاله نقش شخص اول مملکت را در انتخاب وزرا و رئیس الوزرا ثابت می کند. دشواری مواجهه با چنین موضوعی در نظام حقوق موضوعه آنگاه معلوم می شود که در عمل سیاسی از چنین رویه هایی آثاری منتج می شود. هر یک از این دوره ها در این مقاله بحث و بررسی خواهد شد.Role of the King in Selecting the Prime Minister and Ministers in the Iranian Constitution of 1906-1907
The role of the King in selecting the Prime Minister and ministers in the Iranian Constitution of 1906-1907 is the focus of this study. Prior to the victory of constitutionalism and the formulation of the Constitution, efforts were made to establish a cabinet, with chancellors appointed by Naser al-Din Shah Qajar and subsequent rulers to govern the country. The King's involvement in choosing the chancellor and ministers had a significant impact, as reflected in the constitutional law. However, the constitutionalist government, with the Parliament as its main institution, played an active role in overseeing the executive branch. Conversely, the King, as a non-responsible body in the constitutionalist government, had to distance himself from governance and restrain his authority. Given its historical background in Iran, the monarchy sought to maintain its political superiority by interpreting the constitution differently and exerting influential interference in the selection of ministers. This dynamic has undergone changes from the Qajar period to the Pahlavi era and beyond.This article aims to demonstrate the existence of such precedents in Iran's constitutional rights and to provide real cases and examples of the role played by the country's leader in appointing officials in the executive branch, even if not explicitly stated in the laws. The documentary evidence presented in this article substantiates the role of the country's leader in the selection of ministers and prime ministers. The challenges associated with this issue within the legal system become apparent when examining the political practices resulting from such procedures. The study delves into each period, exploring the role of the Parliament in ministerial selection during the Qajar era, the King's personal decision-making in the first Pahlavi era, and the diminishing role of the Parliament in the second Pahlavi era, when constitutional governance rules were observed from August 1941 to July 1953.The tradition of kings choosing chancellors and ministers in pre-constitutional systems influenced the inclusion of such decision-making powers in the constitutional laws. In the establishment of the Supreme Court during the reign of Mirza Husayn Khan, it was stated that the appointment and dismissal of the chancellor was solely at the discretion of the King, and the appointment of ministers was subject to the chancellor's appointment by the decree of the King. This distinction between the monarchy and the government was highlighted in the Supreme Court Bill, emphasizing the role of the chancellor as the head of the government responsible for all government departments. Early treatises promoting constitutionalism also recognized the king's power in appointing and dismissing government officials. However, in the constitutional monarchy, this role was redefined in relation to other principles and underwent significant changes.The establishment of the Grand Court aimed to separate the monarchy from the government, with "consultation of ministers" being a prerequisite. The Prime Minister was to oversee the entirety of the government in the presence of the King, while ministers held responsibility in their respective branches under the chancellor. These provisions sought to delineate the authority and competence of each entity, although some brevity and ambiguity remain. Nevertheless, the intention behind these provisions is discernible.
تبلیغات
