One of the important topics of arbitration is the objection to the arbitral award which is only possible in the form of an annulment request. Articles 489 to 493 of the Iranian Civil Procedure (ICP) are dedicated to this issue. Despite determining the cases of annulment of the arbitrator’s award the legislator has remained silent regarding the possibility or impossibility of exclusion of the right to object the arbitrator’s award. What makes the validity of the exclusion of the right to object the Arbitrator’s award in our legal system doubtful is the legal barrier of public order and the jurisprudential barrier of the Esqat- Ma- Lam- Yajeb. Because on the one hand, it is believed that the provisions related to annulment of the arbitrator’s award are imperative and related to public order. On the other hand, exclusion of the right to object before issuing the arbitrator’s award can be considered as an example of Esqat- Ma- Lam- Yajeb because no right has yet been created that can be revoked. The present article uses a descriptive analytical method to explain that exclusion of the right to object before issuing the arbitrator’s award is not considered Esqat- Ma- Lam- Yajeb and is valid. But regarding the conflict with the public order, separation should be considered: some grounds of objection to the arbitrator’s award are closely related to the public interest of the society which exclusion of the right to object against them is invalid but some others have been established in order to guarantee and protect the personal interest of the arbitration parties that it is acceptable to revoke the right to object against them according to the principle of autonomy and the principle of relinquishment, The rule of eghdam also supports the validity of such an exclusion.