Another Example of Legislative Writing and Its Approval in the Revolutionary Parliament, Particularly Regarding the Important Law of the Central Bank

In Article 22, Clause 4 of the Central Bank Law, which addresses the establishment of a special judicial branch in the Administrative Justice Court, what does the renewed judicial emphasis mean here, given that the nature of proceedings in the branches of the Administrative Justice Court is fundamentally judicial?

Aside from the fact that the right to appeal and other fair trial matters have been stripped from the stakeholders in the name of the law, reference is made to Article 477 without specifying which law it pertains to.

It appears that the lawmakers intended to reference Article 477 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which deals with the special stage of claims contrary to Islamic law by the head of the judiciary.

Now we face a deadlock at this stage:

This is because this article does not refer to any corresponding law, including the new Administrative Justice Court law.

As Article 477 of the Criminal Procedure Code does not mention the Administrative Justice Court, there is no mechanism described for the authority receiving the request for proceedings, nor is there any reference to the rulings of the Administrative Justice Court in the executive regulations of this article approved by the head of the judiciary.

With the approval of this law, it seems that even the Legal Department of the Judiciary and the Legal Deputy of the Administrative Justice Court cannot provide advisory opinions on:

Is the authority receiving requests under this approved article the office of the head of the judiciary? Is it the head of the Administrative Justice Court? Are they the heads of the provincial courts? Is it the judicial deputy of the head of the judiciary?

With the approval of this article, it remains unclear which law needs to be amended to provide a solution.