Document Type : Original Article
Highlights
The right of ownership is one of the rights that has absolute respect according to the Shari'a and has been discussed in jurisprudential books under the title of "Rule of Respect" with reference to the verses of the Holy Quran, narrations and manners. In addition, this right has a high status in the constitution and ordinary laws. However, the necessities of social life have led the legislature to limit and even deprive private property in some cases due to its ruling power (public power) and in order to protect the collective interests and interests and to facilitate the possibility of governing society. . In the meantime, considering that the study of authorities and acquiring organizations in other legal systems as well as the comparative study of the administrative and legal process related to it can have legal and structural achievements for the Iranian legal system and provide a platform for legal pathology in this regard. Accordingly, the purpose of writing the article is an approach to the competent authorities as well as the legal process of expropriation in the light of the principles governing the public interest in French and Iranian law. In this regard, the main question of the present article is what are the competent authorities in the process of expropriation in the law of Iran and France and what is the process of expropriation in these two countries in terms of public interest? The authors hypothesize that in France, expropriation operations are carried out by dual administrative and judicial institutions in two stages: administrative and judicial. Accordingly, the conclusion of the article is that property in the two legal regimes of Iran and France is an inviolable, honorable, absolute and permanent right. Property rights in the face of public power deserve the greatest and strongest legal protections. Iran and France use legal means to achieve such a goal. Including securing the rights of stakeholders in the administrative and judicial process and giving them fair compensation and concessions. Although the status of property is prominent in the constitutions of both countries, but for the public interest its territory is limited. Expropriation operations are a battleground for the public interest and private property. Public necessity and concepts such as national interests, public interest, public order, national and public security have affected private property and from this point of view have limited its territory. Under French law, bureaucrats are not allowed to expropriate property. The administrative judge evaluates their performance and prevents them from deviating from power. The judge has the important responsibility of transferring ownership from a natural person to a legal entity. It also evaluates properties located within the project area and requires the government to pay all compensation. Litigation is properly guaranteed with the intervention of two groups of administrative and judicial judges. The French judiciary, under the influence of the European Court of Human Rights, which influences the views of the Supreme Court and the Council of State, has taken steps to strengthen private property. However, the powers of administrative officials in the Iranian legal system are very wide and not so extensive in contrast to the powers of court judges, and the prosecutor is called as the guardian of public interests in special stages of expropriation operations. In addition, the current system of the Islamic Republic of Iran due to insufficient judicial protection of private property vis-ق-vis the public, the secondary role of the judge in determining compensation and transfer of property rights, extraordinary power of experts, irregular decisions and alienation from the concept of public interest. It is inefficient that this situation needs to be reviewed and corrected. In the meantime, French laws, jurisprudence and doctrine can be used to improve Iran's legal system and its richness. Acceptance of the duality theory of the stages of expropriation and local democracy, as has been done in France, will increase public confidence in the ruling power and strengthen individual and social rights. Therefore, it is time to review the property review procedure in Iran and to satisfy the public opinion in the implementation of major national and local projects. In order to strengthen urban rights, the legislature can build urban planning on the basis of ethnography and replace "authority" with "dialogue".
