The Iran judiciary is an independent branch of government that resolves disputes, prosecutes crimes, and oversees enforcement of the law under principles rooted in Sharia. It operates through parallel court systems, is led by a cleric appointed directly by the Supreme Leader, and applies both codified statutes and Islamic jurisprudence. Article 156 of the Constitution assigns it five core duties: resolving legal disputes and complaints, promoting legitimate freedoms, supervising law enforcement, prosecuting and punishing criminals, and preventing crime and rehabilitating offenders.1Constitute Project. Iran Constitution
Where no statute directly addresses a question, judges are directed by Article 167 of the Constitution to consult authoritative Islamic sources and recognized religious rulings. The Islamic Penal Code reinforces that duty for discretionary punishments not expressly set out in statute.2UNODC. Islamic Penal Code That gives individual judges substantial interpretive power, bounded largely by their religious training and the rulings of senior clerics.
Who Runs the Iranian Judiciary
The entire branch sits under a single appointed leader. Article 157 directs the Supreme Leader to select a “just Mujtahid well versed in judiciary affairs and possessing prudence and administrative abilities” to serve as head of the judiciary for a five-year term.1Constitute Project. Iran Constitution A mujtahid is a cleric qualified to exercise independent reasoning on Islamic law. No parliamentary confirmation is required, which makes the role one of the most powerful unelected positions in the country.
The head of the judiciary creates and restructures judicial organizations, appoints and dismisses judges nationwide, and drafts judicial legislation for submission to parliament. Reappointments are common in practice. The officeholder also nominates candidates for Minister of Justice; the President then selects one, under Article 160.3International Commission of Jurists. Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran The minister handles the judiciary’s relationships with parliament and the executive and may be delegated financial and administrative management, but does not control judges or rulings.
The Court Systems a Case Can Land In
Iran does not run a single unified court. Depending on the charge or the parties involved, a case moves through one of several parallel systems with different rules, different judges, and in some instances no outside review at all.
Public Courts
Ordinary civil and criminal matters move through the public courts. Article 159 designates the courts of justice as the official venue for grievances and complaints, with their composition and jurisdiction set by statute.4ECNL. Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran They handle contract disputes, family law, property claims, theft, assault, and other common offenses. Cases begin before a presiding judge who reviews the evidence and issues a ruling; trial courts generally operate without juries. A party that disagrees can appeal to the Courts of Appeal, which review both factual findings and legal reasoning, checking procedure and the application of statutes and religious codes.
Revolutionary Courts
Running parallel to the public courts is a separate system of Islamic Revolutionary Courts with their own procedural rules and a much more severe caseload. These tribunals were created after the 1979 revolution and were intended to be temporary, but they became permanent. Their jurisdiction covers crimes against national security, espionage, drug trafficking, large-scale smuggling, and offenses against the Islamic order.5ecoi.net. Iran – The Revolutionary Court System, Including Procedures and Documents Issued by the Courts (2017-March 2020)
Among the most consequential charges handled by Revolutionary Courts are moharebeh (enmity against God) and efsad-e-fel-arz (spreading corruption on earth). Both can carry the death penalty. Human rights organizations have documented their use against political dissidents, journalists, and members of ethnic and religious minorities on grounds that critics describe as vague or politically motivated. Religious judges preside, and rulings are appealed through a separate appellate process within the Revolutionary Court system itself rather than through the public courts.
The Supreme Court
The Supreme Court sits at the top of the hierarchy as a supervisory body, not a trial court. Article 161 charges it with ensuring the correct implementation of laws across lower courts and maintaining uniformity in judicial procedure.6University of Minnesota Human Rights Library. The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran It does not retry cases or hear new evidence; it reviews whether lower courts applied Sharia and statutory law correctly.
When different courts reach conflicting interpretations of the same law, the Supreme Court’s General Board can issue a “vote of judicial precedent” that carries the force of law and binds judges going forward. When it vacates a lower court ruling, it sends the case back with guidance rather than substituting its own judgment on the facts. The Chief of the Supreme Court and the Prosecutor-General must be “just scholars of jurisprudence and knowledgeable of judicial matters” under Article 162, appointed by the head of the judiciary in consultation with Supreme Court judges and serving five-year terms.4ECNL. Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran
Court of Administrative Justice
Article 173 establishes a specialized Court of Administrative Justice to handle complaints from citizens about government officials, agencies, and regulations.7Embassy of the Islamic Republic of Iran, London. Constitution It operates under the supervision of the head of the judiciary and consists of multiple chambers, with decisions published in the Official Gazette of the Islamic Republic. For anyone dealing with a grievance against a government body rather than a private party, this is the designated forum. Its jurisdiction and procedures are set by statute, so parliament can adjust its scope.
Military Courts
Military courts handle crimes committed by members of the armed forces, including the regular army, the police, the gendarmerie, and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, but only when the offense relates to military or security duties. Article 172 specifies that service members accused of ordinary crimes unrelated to their duties are tried in the regular public courts.8Embassy of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Canberra. Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran The Constitution places the military prosecutor’s office and the military courts within the judiciary and subject to the same principles that regulate it.
The Special Clerical Court
The Special Clerical Court stands apart from every other judicial body in Iran. It does not answer to the head of the judiciary, and the Supreme Court has no power to review its decisions. It is accountable only to the Supreme Leader, who appoints both its prosecutor and its senior judge. The court was formally established by order of Ayatollah Khamenei in 1990, shortly after his assumption of the Supreme Leader’s office, through a directive that defined its structure, procedures, and organizational framework.
Its jurisdiction covers offenses by members of the clergy, including actions deemed harmful to the reputation of the religious establishment, ideological deviations, and conduct considered unbecoming of a religious figure. Proceedings are generally conducted in secret, and the court maintains its own security apparatus and detention facilities. Because no external body can review its rulings, its decisions are effectively final.
Who Can Be a Judge
Article 163 states that the qualifications for judges are “determined by law, in accordance with Islamic criteria.”1Constitute Project. Iran Constitution In practice, expertise in Islamic jurisprudence dominates. Senior judicial positions require ijtihad, the ability to exercise independent reasoning on questions of religious law. Only clerics trained in Islamic jurisprudence or holders of degrees from religious law schools become judges. Candidates undergo background screening to confirm ideological alignment with the principles of the Islamic Republic, and the head of the judiciary controls their appointment and dismissal nationwide.
The Constitution does not explicitly state that judges must be male, but the judiciary has enforced a gender barrier in practice. As of recent reporting, approximately 121 women serve as judges in Iran, primarily in family courts, but they are not authorized to sign final verdicts. A female judge may preside over a case and draft the ruling, but a male judge must sign it for the decision to take legal effect. This restriction is maintained through statutory and regulatory interpretation rather than an explicit constitutional prohibition.
Rights of the Accused
Iranian law provides defendants with certain procedural rights, but those rights are significantly curtailed in practice, especially in politically sensitive cases. Under a 2015 amendment to Article 48 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a suspect may request an attorney upon arrest. Attorney-client meetings are limited to one hour and are subject to the “secret nature of the investigation,” meaning authorities can restrict what the lawyer sees and does.
The most consequential restriction applies in national security cases and other serious charges commonly used against political prisoners. During the pretrial investigation phase, defendants in these cases may only select a lawyer from a list approved by the head of the judiciary. Most attorneys on that list are not members of the independent Iranian Bar Association. The practical effect is that defendants in the most serious cases cannot choose their own counsel during the critical early stages of prosecution, when the factual record is being built.
The Iranian Bar Association itself operates in a semi-independent capacity. Since approximately 2002, the judiciary has maintained a parallel licensing system, sometimes called the “Article 187” system, that produces lawyers who answer to the judiciary’s own Center for Lawyers, Official Experts, and Family Counselors rather than to the bar association. That dual structure gives the judiciary direct control over a significant portion of the legal profession.
International Findings on Due Process
International human rights bodies have raised persistent concerns about the Iranian judiciary’s adherence to fair trial standards. A 2025 report by the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights documented “serious concerns over the adherence to the right to a fair trial, including the use of torture tainted confessions, and due process violations.”9OHCHR. Iran – Government Continues Systematic Repression and Escalates Surveillance The same report found that Iran’s judicial system “lacks basic independence” and that victims seeking accountability are “not only denied justice, but are also continuously intimidated, threatened, arrested, and subjected to criminal prosecution.”
The report acknowledged that some prosecutions of law enforcement officials for unlawful use of force have occurred, along with isolated instances of compensation paid to victims. The UN Fact-Finding Mission characterized these measures as “sporadic and inadequate,” concluding that the state has largely denied responsibility for gross human rights violations, some of which the Mission found to amount to crimes against humanity.9OHCHR. Iran – Government Continues Systematic Repression and Escalates Surveillance