اندیشه‌های حقوق عمومی

The expansion of intelligent systems in public services has given rise to a type of automated administrative decision that can directly affect citizens' rights, without the algorithms being transparent or the logic of decision-making being clearly understandable to citizens. The research question is to what extent such decisions are compatible with fair trial guarantees and what legal and institutional requirements should be envisaged to protect citizens' rights against them. The aim is to clarify the status of automated administrative decisions in Iranian public law and to extract the necessary requirements for their compliance with the right to a fair trial. The research has been conducted using a descriptive-analytical method, relying on the analysis of laws, policy documents, and existing practice. The results show that, despite general principles such as the right to petition and the prohibition of discrimination, there are serious gaps in the definition and regulation of automated administrative decisions, algorithmic transparency, the right to be informed, and complaint mechanisms and human review, making legislative, institutional, and technical reforms necessary in this regard.