Enforcement Mechanisms of Judicial Assistance (Right to Access Counsel and Interpreter Services) in Iranian Criminal Procedure and Regional Human Rights Instruments

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to conduct a comparative analysis of the enforcement guarantees related to the right to free access to legal counsel and interpreter services within Iranian criminal procedure, in comparison with regional human rights standards, including the jurisprudence of the European system, the Inter-American system, the African Commission framework, and Islamic human rights instruments. The central research question examines the extent to which mechanisms addressing violations of these rights in Iran correspond with established international models. Using an analytical–comparative methodology, the study examines provisions of the Iranian Code of Criminal Procedure alongside leading decisions issued by regional human rights bodies and classifies enforcement mechanisms according to their preventive, remedial, or corrective nature. The findings indicate that although, at the normative level, both the right to legal counsel and the right to an interpreter are formally recognized in Iran and broadly aligned with global standards, significant differences exist at the level of enforcement guarantees. Following the 2015 amendment, the sanction for violation of the right to counsel has been limited primarily to disciplinary liability imposed upon the judicial authority. In contrast, within the European and Inter-American systems, violation of this right results in the automatic invalidation of the proceedings and necessitates the adoption of structural remedial measures. Conversely, the right to an interpreter in Iran continues to benefit from comparatively stronger enforcement mechanisms, whereby violations may lead to the exclusion of statements and the potential annulment of judicial decisions, a position more closely aligned with the jurisprudential approach of the European Court of Human Rights. Within the African regional system and Islamic human rights instruments, enforcement measures tend to assume primarily declaratory or corrective characteristics rather than strict invalidating consequences. Overall, the Iranian legal system should move beyond a purely administrative sanctioning model concerning violations of the right to counsel and transition toward a framework in which infringement of the right of access to legal representation directly and automatically undermines the validity of affected procedural stages, allowing restoration through annulment or retrial mechanisms.