The Possibility of Judicial Oversight of Elections and Its Advantages Over Other Oversight Models

Abstract

The necessity of overseeing elections is an inevitable and indisputable matter, and it serves as a crucial mechanism, authorization, and determining factor in the electoral process and the acceptance of election results. Given Article 99 of the Constitution, and considering the interpretations and methods of oversight by the Guardian Council, particularly the supervisory authority which leads to the expenditure of system resources to justify arbitrary and often political behaviors, there is a clear need for reform and review in this regard. In light of the shortcomings and issues present in the electoral process, and in order to improve the country's electoral system to protect the people's votes, an optimal oversight model is deemed necessary. Regarding oversight models for elections, it should be noted that, based on the experiences of other countries, supervisory bodies such as the legislature, executive, judiciary, electoral commissions, and supreme courts vary. In many democratic countries around the world, election oversight is carried out by judicial bodies, typically entrusted to institutions such as constitutional courts and supreme courts. Therefore, if the conditions allow for a constitutional revision in the Islamic Republic of Iran, judicial oversight could be proposed as the most appropriate model for election oversight in Iran among the various political systems. Judicial oversight refers to the involvement of institutions such as the Supreme Election Court, the Supreme Court, the High Council of Justice, or specialized courts with specific duties, powers, jurisdictions, and membership structures overseeing elections.