Judicial Immunity of Defense Attorneys in International Instruments and the Legal-Judicial System of Iran

Abstract

The right to legal representation, as enshrined in Article 35 of the Constitution, affirms that in all courts of law, the parties involved have the right to select an attorney for themselves, and if they are unable to do so, facilities must be provided to ensure legal representation. This provision aligns with the principles established in international legal instruments. However, the realization of this right is not feasible without safeguarding the professional position of the defense attorney. Although Iranian legislation does not explicitly employ the legal term “judicial immunity of the attorney,” the underlying meaning and implications are implicitly present, and any violation thereof by official authorities is classified as misconduct and criminalized. Despite Iran’s accession to conventions and treaties that encompass judicial or defense immunity—and their ratification by legislative bodies both before and after the Islamic Revolution—a clear and defined concept of this principle has yet to be established in the Iranian legal and judicial system. Furthermore, its boundaries and limitations remain undefined. This study aims to examine the attorney's immunity in international legal instruments and compare and align it with the framework of Iran’s legal and judicial system.