Measuring the human rights performances on the international rule of law scale on the part of only insufficiently democratised states – like Islamic Republic of Iran and Egypt – requires specific indications. These indicators help to classify the factual human rights practices of governments and judges of Supreme Constitutional Courts and analogue institutions, such as, the Iranian Guardian Council. My main indicator to measure the rule of law performances on the part of contemporary I.R. Iran and Egypt is linked to the question how far these two states are and have been receptive towards international human rights law and transnational jurisdiction. My comparative approach will exemplify how Egypt’s human rights performances throughout the 1990s have been significantly more effective in containing illegitimate governmental policy objectives.