The definition and significance of “endorsement” in the Islamic Republic

Kheirollah Parvin, Professor of Law at the University of Tehran and legal expert serving in the Guardian Council

Article 110 of the Iranian Constitution designates the signing of the presidential decree for the elected President as one of the duties and authorities of the Leader of the Islamic Revolution. Tanfiz [endorsement] is a well-established and recognized term in Islamic jurisprudence and was introduced into Iran’s legal terminology after the Islamic Revolution. Initially, a brief reference will be made to the concept and legal nature of “tanfiz” and the most important questions related to it will be examined from the perspective of the Iranian Constitution. For example, to what extent and in what manner does the act of endorsement have legal validity? Is the act of endorsement [merely] a ceremonial act carried out by the Wali–e Faqih, or is it a legal act? What legal effects will the endorsement entail?

Before addressing other questions, it is essential to answer the latter query. Every legal system, based on its own customs, social values, traditions, and experiences, establishes a set of principles and norms that may differ from those of other legal systems. Legal systems are not identical or similar to one other. Just as the common law legal system differs from the Romano-Germanic legal system, each legal system may encompass more than a hundred legal subsystems. Moreover, each of these subsystems themselves vary within a single legal system. For instance, a country with a unified legal system might have as many as fifty legal subsystems. Therefore, the procedures and norms may differ. It is the underlying principles that differentiate legal systems from one another. These principles are what make legal rules binding.

Regarding endorsement within the Islamic Republic of Iran’s legal system, it is important to note that this system is fundamentally different from other legal systems. It is based on Islamic principles in general and Shia jurisprudence in particular. Given that the President, as the head of the executive branch, makes decisions and takes actions that fall within the scope of wilayat [guardianship], the President’s decisions or actions as the head of the executive branch are considered to be on behalf of the Wali–e Faqih [Imam Khamenei] and require either “prior permission” or “ongoing permission” from the Wali–e Faqih. Without such authorization, these actions would lack legal validity. What takes place in the endorsement ceremony, in addition to its legal function which is also common practice in other countries, is that it grants legitimacy to the officeholder.

The purpose of endorsement

Endorsement carries considerable legal and religious significance. In jurisprudence and law, it refers to the process of “validating revocable legal act”. In other words, endorsement is an act by which a person can waive their right to revoke a legal act. What is the purpose behind the act of endorsement, and once the people have elected a president, why is the approval of the Leader still necessary?

In response to this question, it should be noted that based on the theory of Wilayat al-Faqih [Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist] during the era of the occultation of the Infallible Imam [Imam Mahdi (pbuh)], the general leadership and authority over affairs reside with a just and capable jurist. Any guardianship outside of this is considered that of the Taghut [domineering evil powers]. According to this theory, the management of societal affairs is in his hands, and government officials gain legitimacy through his permission. Furthermore, the executive affairs of society are also among the responsibilities of this guardianship, which is why the head of the executive branch must be appointed or authorized by him, otherwise, they will lack legitimacy.

Imam Khomeini (ra) repeatedly emphasized the necessity of the president being appointed by the Wali–e Faqih. On October 4, 1979, during a meeting with members of the Assembly of Experts he stated:

If there is no jurist or Wilayat al-Faqih, it becomes [the system of] the Taghut. If these matters are not by the command of God, and if the president is not appointed by a jurist, then his authority lacks legitimacy. When such legitimacy is absent, the governing structure becomes Taghut. Obeying him is like obeying the Taghut.

In a meeting with members of the Assembly of Experts on October 4, 1979, he emphasized the significant role of the Wilayat al-Faqih, stating:

Signing the presidential decree is certainly part of the authority vested in the Wilayat al-Faqih. It is obvious that if, hypothetically, it was proven that an individual without the requisite qualifications had reached the final stage by deceiving the supervisory body, the Leader would have the authority to withhold endorsement of their decree. However, this possibility is highly unlikely and far-fetched.

Reasons for the endorsement of the presidential decree

Firstly, the detailed discussions of the Assembly of Experts regarding the Constitution: During the final review of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, some members of the Assembly expressed the view that the signature of the Leader of the Islamic Revolution served as a means of legitimization. During the examination of the draft of Article 110 of the Constitution, Mr. Fatehi, a member of the Assembly, stated, “It was not clear to me whether the signature of the presidential decree is merely ceremonial or what implications might arise if it were not signed?”

In response to this, the Deputy Speaker of the Assembly, Ayatollah Martyr Beheshti asserted, “No, sir, this is endorsement.” Prior to these talks, Ayatollah Montazeri spoke about the interconnectedness of the Islamic and republic nature of the system, stating, “If a president is elected by the entire nation, but the Wilayat al-Faqih and the Jurist do not endorse his presidency, then in my view, his presidency has no executive legitimacy and resembles an oppressive government.”

Secondly, regarding the law on presidential elections: The legislation governing presidential elections (ratified on June 26, 1985) clearly stipulates that the Leader’s signature on the presidential decree serves an endorsing function. Article 1 of this law states, “The presidential term in the Islamic Republic of Iran is four years. The term begins with the approval of the accreditation letter from the Leader.” This law has been reviewed and amended several times; however, the aforementioned text has remained unchanged in all amendments. Therefore, even from the perspective of ordinary legislators, the Leader’s signature on a presidential decree is viewed as an endorsement.

Is endorsement merely a ceremonial act?

What the law implies regarding the Leader’s endorsement of the presidential decree is not merely a formality or an additional ceremony among others. It signifies that without the Leader’s signature, the presidency does not become official and the individual cannot engage in presidential affairs according to Islamic law. Both our religious beliefs and our jurisprudential foundations, as well as our Constitution — which assumes that no principle is written solely for ceremonial purposes — support this assertion.

To consider a signature as merely ceremonial is a common and unscientific understanding of a signature, one that is in no way intended by the Constitution. Therefore, this signature is a fundamental and essential step in the process of becoming president. Even if we want to be legally precise, we cannot refer to an elected individual as president until their decree is endorsed by the Leader and the swearing-in ceremony has occurred, because the actions of the president interfere with the rights and duties of the people, and this requires the authorization of the Leader, which is emphasized in the Constitution under the term “signature.”

The temporal scope of endorsement and its continuity

As mentioned, the president not only requires legitimacy for their decisions and actions at the inception and commencement of their duties, but also throughout their entire tenure. This means that just because someone wins the majority vote and the Leader signs their decree, it does not guarantee that they will remain president for the full four years. No; the Leader’s endorsement must continually support the president, and if at any point the Leader withdraws their endorsement, the president will lose their legal and jurisprudential legitimacy.

This is why the late Imam Khomeini (may God be pleased with him) emphasized in all the decrees he issued for the presidents during his tenure, after the endorsement of the nation’s vote, that my endorsement is conditional and limited to your adherence to Islamic principles, compliance with the legal principles of the system, and, in a nutshell, not losing the qualifications of a president.

During his leadership, the Leader of the Islamic Revolution has also continued this same tradition and the same correct Islamic method in all his decrees. He has also utilized the terms “endorsement” and “conditions,” stating that his approval and endorsement remains steadfast as long as individuals adhere to the legal and Islamic principles.

Therefore, the religious authorization and appointment of the president are conditional and not permanent. This means that the aforementioned decree and the legitimacy of the president’s actions in the country’s executive affairs are both contingent and limited.

(The views expressed in this article are author’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of Khamenei.ir.)