Manifestations of Judicial Oversight on Administrative Acts in the Legal Systems of Iran and the United States

Abstract

Judicial oversight of administrative bodies is one of the most important mechanisms for ensuring the rule of law and protecting citizens' rights against unlawful or unjustified actions by public institutions. This form of oversight, developed to promote public accountability and ensure justice, has gained significant attention in many countries in recent decades. In the Iranian legal system, judicial oversight over administrative decisions and actions is primarily exercised through the Administrative Court of Justice and the General Inspection Organization. The Administrative Court of Justice serves as the specialized authority for handling citizens' complaints against administrative decisions and actions, playing a crucial role in safeguarding individual rights. The General Inspection Organization, on the other hand, is responsible for supervising the proper implementation of laws within governmental agencies. In the U.S. legal system, judicial oversight of administrative bodies is carried out through four main institutions. Federal courts, the U.S. Supreme Court, independent regulatory commissions, and quasi-judicial bodies each have specific roles in ensuring the legitimacy of administrative decisions. Judicial oversight in the United States is exercised through constitutional interpretation, legal constraints on administrative powers, and the protection of fundamental rights. This study aims to conduct a comparative analysis of the judicial oversight mechanisms in Iran and the United States by examining their functions, jurisdiction, and effectiveness in ensuring due process and administrative justice.