One of the fundamental principles in the human rights system is the principle of non-discrimination, so that the United Nations Charter in Article 1 of its statement of goals for the formation of the United Nations, promotes and encourages respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without discrimination based on sex, race, language, or religion, as well as other human rights documents such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Covenants in Article 2 emphasize adherence to this fundamental principle. The principle of non-discrimination, which is derived from the principle of equality of all human beings, is one of the cornerstones of the international human rights system.

In the dominant view of classical international law, there is a clear negative attitude towards the principle of non-discrimination (negative discrimination). However, in recent years, there has been a trend towards a positive approach to this principle, which is interpreted as positive discrimination. Today, positive discrimination, which has become a common term in Persian political and legal literature, is equivalent to affirmative action in American literature, positive discrimination in European literature, and reservation in Indian laws. It refers to a set of programs and policies implemented by constitutional or ordinary laws in the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of a country with the aim of achieving real equality in society by compensating for past discrimination, eliminating existing discrimination, and providing future support for vulnerable human groups who are subject to discrimination, such as minorities, women, people with disabilities, and others. Although these actions may seem inconsistent with the principle of equality, they are in fact just and in line with the principles of human rights.

According to Aristotle’s definition, justice means treating equal individuals equally and unequal individuals unequally. This definition justifies unequal treatment of unequal human groups, such as slaves, women, and disabled individuals, while still being fair. As a result, the second part of Aristotle’s definition is often seen as promoting positive discrimination. One of the rational and moral justifications for unequal treatment is presented in John Rawls’ theory of justice. Rawls refers to the “Difference Principle” which states that a rational and aware human being, free from personal interests and affiliations, would choose a fair distribution of wealth and opportunities beyond the “Veil of Ignorance”. This serves as a rational basis for justifying unequal treatment in redistributing wealth and opportunities in favor of the weakest individuals.

In terms of historical evidence, positive discrimination officially and currently emerged after the civil rights movement of African Americans in America during the presidencies of Johnson and Nixon; although both presidents allowed this policy to remain hidden for a long time. President Lyndon Johnson in his famous speech at Harvard University in 1965 (later considered as the source for change in America without discrimination in terms of national and racial equality) addressed the issue of implementing positive discrimination in this way: “You cannot keep someone in chains for years and then set them free and tell them to start at the starting line (point zero) and expect them to have the freedom to compete with others, and in this way believe that you have fully observed justice and fairness.”

Positive discrimination policies in the United States have been controversial, with opponents labeling them as a form of “reverse discrimination.” However, these policies have continued to provide more opportunities for racial minorities to succeed in work and education, form a black bourgeoisie, and even have good political participation and reach the highest political positions. This was evident when Barack Obama was elected as President in 2009, becoming the first African-American to hold the highest position of power in America.

Another example of a country implementing affirmative action policies is India. In India, special supportive laws have been put in place for a class of people previously known as “untouchables” (Dalits). Through these laws, special quotas for employment, education, and facilities have been provided to enable their participation in public life like other citizens. As a result, their economic and social status has improved compared to the past, when they were marginalized and excluded from the progress in society enjoyed by the majority. In the past, they were considered impure and it was believed that contact with them required specific religious rituals to purify oneself. As a result, they were pushed to the fringes of society and were not able to benefit from the social, economic, and cultural advancements that other parts of society were experiencing. However, with the implementation of affirmative action policies, their situation has changed from being suppressed by negative discrimination in the past to being able to participate in all political and social matters like the majority of

Positive discrimination does not only belong to minorities; today, many countries use affirmative action policies in favor of women. A close example of this is Afghanistan and Pakistan, where a certain percentage of seats in their parliament are reserved for women (in Pakistan’s National Assembly, women hold 60 seats, which make up 17% of the total assembly). This reserved seat system in parliament allows women to have a presence, despite traditional patriarchal structures in society, and gives them a chance to compete with men in election campaigns, as there are seats specifically designated for them.

The application of positive discrimination in countries like Iran, considering the ruling political system and legal system, may seem like a fantasy at first glance. This is because positive discrimination is a product of a paradigm shift from a negative approach of prohibition of discrimination to a positive approach. However, Iranian society has not yet faced this shift. In other words, the Iranian legal system has not fully accepted the principle of non-discrimination and equality for all, let alone the transition from formal equality to real equality. This means that, until further notice, the people of Iran are not equal and women and minorities are deprived of many rights and opportunities that are enjoyed by the majority of men. But despite this negative view, if we can be a little more positive, we should consider a situation for marginalized women and minorities in which a neutral government, through consideration of privileges, support, and incentive programs, can involve them in various political, economic, and cultural arenas (similar to what exists in the country to support the families