Criticism of the Regulations of Article 3 of the Law on the Obligation to Officially Register Real Estate Transactions

The law requiring the formal registration of transactions, especially Article 3, was passed real estate with the aim of increasing transparency and reducing ownership disputes, but the implementation of this law faces several challenges. The implementing regulations of this article foresee mechanisms such as identical contracts, registration of drafts in the system, and smart termination, which.may Sovereignty of the will and freedom of contract are in conflict Also, the ambiguity in the precise definition of immovable property, high registration costs, and inefficiency of administrative systems have made the implementation of this law difficult. On the other hand, the smart termination mechanism has raised concerns about the violation of property rights and fair trial principles by eliminating the role of the judiciary in some cases. The purpose of this research is to explain the position of the regulation of Article (3) of the Law on the Obligation to Officially Register Real Estate Transactions in the country's legislative system and to assess the compliance or conflict of its provisions with fundamental legal principles such as the sovereignty of the will, freedom of contract, fair trial, and separation of powers, in order to provide reform solutions to improve the real estate transaction registration system. The research method is descriptive-analytical and library-based with a theoretical approach. Finally, we will find that the restrictions created in the freedom of contracts and the elimination of judicial authority are not consistent with the principles of the rule of will and fair trial and may lead to increased disputes and reduced security of transactions. Also, the extensive powers of the Document Registration Organization and the smart termination mechanism lead to weakening the independence of notaries, creating an informal market, and violating the defense rights of the parties.