1. Introduction
The principle of the rule of law, as one of the fundamental pillars of public law, requires that all acts of sovereignty, including decisions related to foreign policy, be carried out within the framework of predetermined legal rules and defined supervisory mechanisms. However, the security, contingency, and expediency-oriented characteristics of foreign policy provide the basis for the formation of a realm of exceptions that can limit the scope of application of this principle.
2. Theoretical Framework
The present article examines the boundaries of the rule of law in the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran by focusing on the framework stipulated in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran and analyzing the position of effective institutions in decision-making related to foreign policy, especially the Supreme National Security Council.
3. Methodology
Using a descriptive-analytical method and relying on the theoretical literature on the state of exception in public law, the research shows that the exception in the decision-making structure of Iran's foreign policy is reproduced not in the form of a complete suspension of the law, but through the concentration of competencies, limitation of the scope of judicial oversight, and strengthening of the logic of public interest.
4. Results & Discussion
The findings indicate that this structure, while increasing the capacity for responsiveness in sensitive international situations, can have consequences for transparency, institutional accountability, and the balance of power in the governance of diplomacy.
5. Conclusions & Suggestions
The article suggests that a more precise explanation of the limits of the competence of decision-making institutions and a rethinking of the oversight mechanisms can lead to the simultaneous strengthening of the effectiveness of foreign policy and the coherence of the rule of law principle.