After revising Article 175 of the Constitution and centralizing the management of the IRIB by eliminating the institution of the Supervisory Council, the constitutional legislator established the Supervisory Council, consisting of representatives of the three branches, as the exclusive supervisor of the IRIB due to the extent of the media's influence on the performance of the system's branches. However, with the approval of the law on the Supervisory Council and the assignment of the duties of the General Inspectorate to this council, the question arises as to how and with what documentation the inspection organization can supervise the performance of the IRIB, and in the event of a dispute arising as a result of the supervision of these two institutions, which opinion is more preferable? In fact, with the approval of the law on the implementation of Article 175 of the Constitution in the supervision section as a later law, the assumption of dual supervision for the IRIB is ruled out. This is because the laws related to both institutions have equal validity and it cannot be concluded from the lack of sufficient guarantees for the implementation of the opinions and decisions of the Supervisory Council that the General Inspectorate is the main supervisory institution and the IRIB Supervisory Council is envisaged as dual supervision.