Comparative Analysis of Judicial Assistance (Right of Access to Counsel and Interpreter) in Iranian Criminal Proceedings and the European Convention: Approach and Structural Gaps

Abstract

The right to judicial assistance, including effective access to legal counsel and an interpreter, constitutes one of the fundamental pillars of fair criminal proceedings. The research problem addressed in the present study arises from the gap between the formal legal recognition of these rights within the criminal justice system of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the deficiencies observed in their effective implementation, particularly during the preliminary investigation stage. These challenges are closely related to differences between Iran’s legal approach and the standards established under the European Convention on Human Rights and the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights concerning concepts such as “effective access” and “equality of arms.” The necessity of this research lies in the need for legislative reform and the alignment of domestic mechanisms with international fair trial standards. The study adopts a descriptive–analytical method with a comparative documentary approach and examines Iranian and European laws, regulations, and judicial practices. The findings indicate that although the Iranian legal system has, at the normative level, recognized the right of access to counsel and interpreter services, significant structural and procedural gaps remain in ensuring the effective and unconditional realization of these rights, particularly at the commencement of criminal proceedings. In particular, the interpretation developed by the European Court of Human Rights regarding the “timing of access” and the principle of “equality of arms,” when compared with prevailing practices in Iranian criminal procedure, reveals notable points of divergence. Achieving fair criminal proceedings requires harmonization of domestic legislation with international obligations and the removal of procedural restrictions that hinder the effective implementation of judicial assistance rights, especially during the investigative phase, as well as guaranteeing simultaneous and effective access to defense instruments such as legal counsel and interpreter services.