The framework of this paper is the influence of international conventions on national legislation. I shall focus on the role of the Convention for the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) in the Iranian legal discourse and focus especially on the position of female jurists and theologians vis-à-vis CEDAW. CEDAW, which is signed by many Muslim states, albeit with reservations, has not been signed by Iran. The Iranian Parliament endorsed the reformist government’s proposal to accede to the Convention on 12th August 2003, but the Council of Guardians rejected this endorsement. The matter was then referred to the Expediency Council, where it is still awaiting a final verdict to date (February 2011). The paper will analyse the arguments brought forward by three different actors: the Council of Guardians that rejected the proposal, Shahindokht Mawlaverdi (Tehran), a jurist specialized in international law, and Fariba ?Alasvand, a theologian of Qom who discusses this convention from an Islamic legal perspective. While Mawlaverdi argues in favor of CEDAW on the basis of Islamic legal arguments, ?Al?svand strictly opposes the international convention. After surveying the arguments that are brought forward in favor of and against CEDAW, the paper will try to answer the following questions: Which concept of gender roles can be inferred from these different arguments? And have these two female jurists any voice in the public discourse on the role of international conventions in the Islamic Republic? How do their arguments relate to those brought forward by the Guardian Council? The paper is based on personal interviews, legal documents and the writings of the three actors surveyed.