1 Assistant Prof., Faculty of Law and Political Science, University of Allameh Tabataba'i, Tehran, Iran

2 MA. Student in Public Law, Faculty of Law and Political Science, University of Allameh Tabataba'i, Tehran, Iran


The necessity of the institution for the protection of the Constitution is based on the adoption of this law at the top of the hierarchy of legal rules so as to have the capacity to review the ordinary law and annul it in the event of conflict. In some countries, this is the responsibility of judicial bodies. One of the important issues is the independence of Constitutional Courts, which is directly related to their correct function. In India, protection of the Constitution is conducted through the two institutions of the Supreme Court at the national level and High Courts in the States. Judicial independence in these Courts has emerged as organizational independence and personal independence. The Constitution of India and the Supreme Court’s opinions in the issue of organizational independence have eliminated the influence of other branches of government and in the issue of personal independence, although not at the level of structural independence, have considerably predicted the mechanisms of using of judicial independence by judges.


  1. . فارسی

    الف) کتاب‌ها

    1. خادمی، مازیار (1396). چارچوب حقوقی و مبانی ساختاری تعیین بودجۀ دستگاه قضا، تهران: انتشارات پژوهشکدۀ برتر.
    2. طباطبایی مؤتمنی، منوچهر (1380). حقوق اساسی-کلیات و رژیم‌های مهم، تهران: میزان.
    3. موسی‌زاده و همکاران، ابراهیم (1389). دادرسی اساسی در جمهوری اسلامی ایران (اصول قانون اساسی در پرتو نظرات شورای نگهبان 1389-1359)، چ اول، معاونت تدوین، تنقیح و انتشار قوانین و مقررات.

    ب) مقالات و گزارش‌های پژوهشی

    1. آجرلو، اسماعیل (1392). دادرسی اساسی تطبیقی؛ وظایف و کار ویژه‌های دیوان قانون اساسی جمهوری اتریش، گزارش پژوهشی، دفتر مطالعات تطبیقی، پژوهشکدۀ شورای نگهبان.
    2. حبیب‌زاده، جعفر؛ کرامت، قاسم؛ شهبازی‌نیا، مرتضی (1389). «استقلال قضایی در نظام حقوقی ایران با مطالعۀ تطبیقی»، پژوهش‌های حقوق تطبیقی، دورۀ 14، ش 4.


    1. کدخدایی، عباسعلی (1382). «ضرورت پاسداری از قانون اساسی و حقوق شهروندان»، کتاب نقد، سال هفتم، ش 22، ص 236-222.


    ج‌)     پایان‌نامه‌ها

    1. امیری، محسن (1390). مطالعۀ سازوکارهای تضمین استقلال قاضی در نظام حقوقی ایران و ایالات متحده، پایان‌نامه برای اخذ مدرک کارشناسی‌ارشد، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس.
    2. خادمی، مازیار (1395). ارزیابی میزان استقلال مالی دستگاه قضا در نظام حقوقی ایران (مطالعۀ موردی بودجۀ سال‌های 1384-1392)، پایان‌نامه برای اخذ مدرک کارشناسی ارشد، دانشکدۀ حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی(ره).
    3. انگلیسی


    A. Books

    1. Barak, Aharon (2006). The Judge in a Democracy, Princeton: Princeton University press.
    2. Bartholomew (1971). The Irish Judiciary,Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press.
    3. Basu, Durga Das (1993). Introduction to the Constitution of India, 15th Ed. New Delhi: Prentice-Hall of India,
    4.  Baxi, Upendra (1985), Courage, Craft, and Contention: The Indian Supreme Court in the Eighties. Bombay
    5. Chakrabarty, Bidyut (2008). Indian Politics and Society Since Independence: Events, Processes and Ideology (First ed.). Oxon(UK), New York (USA).
    6. Dato’ Param Cumaraswamy (2002). Parliamentary Action to Ensure the Independence and Good. Administration of Justice’ The Journal of the Malaysian Bar, xxxi No. 4.
    7. Debeljak Julie (1999). Judicial Independence in the Modern Democratic State», Australian, Reform Issue 74,
    8. Epp, Charles R (1998). The Rights Revolution: Lawyers, Activists and Supreme Courts in Comparative Perspective. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, No 18.
    9. Jain, M.P (2006). Outlines of Indian Legal and Constitutional History, New Delhi: Wadhwa and Company.
    10. Kulshreshtha, V.D (2005). Landmarks in Indian Legal and Constitutional History, 8th ed. Revised by B.M. Gandhi.Lucknow: Eastern Book Company.
    11. Mason, Beaney (1964). American Constitutional Law, Prentice-Hall Inc, 3rd, Ed, new jersey.
    12. Panday, J.N (2004). Constitutional Law of India, 41st ed. Allahabad: Central Law Agency.
    13. Patnaik (2008). Mizoram Dimensions and Perspectives: Society, Economy & Polity. New Delhi: Concept Publishing Co.
    14. Rai, Kailash (2005). Constitutional Law of India, 6th ed. Allahabad: Central Law Publication.
    15. Sathe, S.P (2002). Judicial Activism in India: Transgressing Borders and Enforcing Limits, 2nd ed. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
    16. Satya Brata Sinha, Hon(1997), Judicial Independence, Fiscal Autonomy And Accountability, Supreme Court Of India, Committee Report.
    17. Shukla, V. N (2005). Constitution of India, Eastern Book House.
    18. Thripathi, G.P (2007). Indian Constitution, 1st ed. Allahabad: Allahabad Law Agency.
    19. Ward, Tanya (2008). Independence, accountability and the Irish judiciary, Judicial Studies Institute.Landon.

    B. Articles

    1. Burbank B (1999). The architecture of judicial independence, 72 S. Cal l. review.
    2. Cross, F (2003). Thoughts on goldilocks and judicial independence, OHIO state Law journal, vol.64.
    3. Dash. Abhisek (2014). Review Jurisdiction of Supreme Court of India: Article 137 April. Available at SSRN:
    4. Di Federico, _Giuseppe (1998). _Prosecutorial Independence and the Democratic Italy, Brit. J.Criminal, vol 38.
    5. jmes t. brennn (1971). Judicial fiscal independence, ,university of Florida law review,Vol. xxiii
    6. Roy, Chinmoy (2012). Judicial Review and the Indian Courts, National University of Study and Research in Law (NUSRL), Ranchi, pp 27-38.
    7. Singh, M.P (2000). Securing the independence of thejudiciary- the indian Experience, 10 IND, INT`L & Comp. L. Rew. 245.278.
    8. Stevnes ,Robert (1999). A Loss of Innocence? Judicial Independence and separation of powers, oxford. Journal of Legal Studies, vol.19.


    C. cases

    1. Advocates on Record Association v. Union of India. AIR (1996) SC 925: (1996) 4 SCC 368
    2. Banerjee v. P.R. Mukherjee, (1953) SCR 302
    3. S.P. Gupta v. Union of India .AIR (1982) SC 149a.
    4. thalwal v. high court of himachal Pradesh AIR (2000) SC 2732
    5. Union of India v. SankalchandHimatalSheth. AIR (1991) SC 631, 641

    D. Websites

    1. www.