Judiciary advocacy, as an important and sensitive profession, is recognized as an essential tool for enforcing the law and ensuring justice, as well as safeguarding the rights of citizenship and fundamental freedoms. It is considered an independent and autonomous profession in the modern world. This professional independence is guaranteed in the legal system of every country, through which a lawyer can freely practice within the framework of professional standards approved by the legal community, without any restrictions or limitations imposed by the government, particularly the judiciary, and in accordance with their own judgment. It goes without saying that this independence and freedom of action does not mean that lawyers are not bound by laws, regulations, or orders and decisions of legal authorities, but rather that they are not intellectually, practically, or professionally dependent on the administrative and judicial system and have the right to disagree with administrative and judicial authorities and act based on their own judgment, within the framework of the law. The job security and organization of the affairs of judiciary lawyers through their self-governing

The international legal system and the legal systems of different countries, including Iran, have made great efforts to establish an independent and free institution composed of qualified lawyers, based on the interests and considerations mentioned. For example, in the preamble of the set of principles entitled “Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers” adopted by the Eighth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders in 1990, it is stated that: “…the necessary support for human rights and fundamental freedoms, whether economic, social, cultural, civil or political, requires that all persons have effective access to legal services provided by an independent legal profession… Professional associations of lawyers have a vital role in defending acceptable ethical and professional standards, protecting their members from harassment and intimidation, and providing legal services to all those in need, as well as cooperating with governmental and non-governmental institutions in promoting the ideals of justice and public interest.” In paragraph 23 of the mentioned international document, it is also stated that: “

In the legal system of Iran, following the significant changes that occurred after the Constitutional Revolution and the establishment of the rule of law, the necessity of guaranteeing the freedom and independence of lawyers as one of the most important pillars of achieving the rule of law in various legal texts was pursued by the legislator. This includes Article 17 of the draft law, which states: “From the date of implementation of this law, no lawyer can be suspended or prohibited from practicing law, except by a final order of the disciplinary court.” This important occupational guarantee for the legal profession means that no other judicial or administrative authority besides the disciplinary court of the Bar Association can temporarily or permanently prevent a lawyer from practicing law or suspend their license.

Despite all the mentioned legal support and the proper understanding of the legislator of the necessity of guaranteeing the freedom and independence of lawyers and the institution of advocacy, in recent years, unmeasured actions and decisions beyond the jurisdiction of legal authorities and institutions have threatened and jeopardized the integrity, freedom, and independence of the institution of advocacy, causing serious damage to this civil institution. These actions include the executive regulations of the bill on the independence of the Bar Association, which was issued on 6/4/1400 by the former head of the judiciary. The issued regulations, in various aspects, contain fundamental flaws and provisions that undermine the freedom and independence of lawyers and the Bar Association. Due to limited space, only some of these flaws are briefly mentioned.

Firstly, the head of the judiciary has gone beyond his legal authority and has announced changes to the regulations set by the Bar Association. This is in violation of Article 22 of the Bar Association Independence Law, which states that the regulation of matters related to the Bar Association, such as elections, handling of violations and their punishments, promotions, internships, and law licenses, is solely the responsibility of the Bar Association and the approval of regulations is the responsibility of the Minister of Justice (currently the head of the judiciary). It is obvious that if the legislator had intended to give the power of amending and adding to the regulations to the approving authority, they would have used different wording, for example, they would have proposed the regulations to the Bar Association and left the final approval to the approving authority. It is worth mentioning that the provision for the approval of regulations by the Bar Association in Article 22 of the mentioned law is only for the purpose of formalizing the regulations and can be seen

Secondly, there are serious provisions in various materials of the announced regulations by the former head of the judiciary that have caused significant harm to the institution of advocacy, as one of the oldest and most important civil institutions that guarantees the rule of law. The creation of new illegal structures for the qualification of volunteer lawyers (Article 48 of the regulations), the possibility of disqualifying a lawyer based on their beliefs even after obtaining a license (Articles 47, 49, and 85 of the regulations), excessive violations of lawyers’ privacy and deprivation of their fundamental rights, including freedom of expression (Paragraph 35 of Article 76, Paragraph 10 of Article 124, and Article 79 of the regulations), giving the power to suspend or prohibit lawyers from working in places other than the Bar Association’s disciplinary court (Article 142 and Paragraphs 5 and 6 of Article 159 of the regulations), depriving the Board of Directors and its president of the right to make decisions on