نشریه حکومت اسلامی
سال بیستم شماره 2 (پیاپی 76، تابستان 1394)

In the Islamic Republic of Iran, there has been and there is a concern for demographical policies within the framework of the Law. A review of demographical policies of the Islamic Republic of Iran support the fact that these policies have passed through three stages. Regarding the importance of the quantitative aspect of the structure of demographical policies of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and the fact that most of the debates over and concerns for these policies in terms of quantity, particularly of birth or population control, this article has dealt with the legal foundations and documents related to this aspect of demographical policies of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The study of legal foundations and available documents related to the idea of population and demographic policies provides support to the fact that demographic policies in its quantitative aspect, whether one takes the high birth rate approach or birth control approach into consideration, do not pose any legal obstacle, but rather they provide foundations and ample documents which are accepted by the Law, just as the variability of the policies in different phases have not posed and do not pose any obstacles given the subject being in the state of fluidity or multi-dimensional. This is in line with Supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei’s jurisprudential thoughts and views, concerns, intentions as well as his adopted and proclaimed main policies. The emphasis on paying attention to the experts’ findings of demographic policies is among the article’s objects of interests.

In determining a Muslim ruler, Imam Khomeini maintains that a Muslim ruler must be appointed while Sinhuri holds the view that he must be elected. Despite the sharp differences of opinion among those who take the “appointment theory” and those who take the “election theory”, the article in hand, while taking an analytical- descriptive approach to the problem, finds a democratic spirit as governing the theory of “Rightly-Guided (RÁshidah) Caliphate” by Sinhuri and that of Imam Khomeini’s “WilÁyat-e Mutlaqah-ye Faqih” or “the Absolute Guardianship of a Muslim Jurist”, which can be crystalize through some such mechanisms as conciliar and two-degree election, and as a consequence, by focusing on the common and agreed-upon grounds of election as such, taking justice, piety, and knowledge as conditions for the election of the experts (khobrigÁn) and the conciliar nature of their decisions, one can embark on the establishment of a council composed of the experts who can play a significant role in designating a Muslim ruler. Though one cannot ignore certain differences in the consequences of the fundamentals, providing a mechanism of this kind may result in securing the democratic feature of the process through which a Muslim ruler is designated, without ignoring the difference between this sort of democratic approach and western model of democracy.

The rule “no harm shall be inflicted or reciprocated in Islam” is one of the widely used rules in the Islamic jurisprudence which is thought to be of various dimensions. The article at hand has a cursory glance over the evidence and significations of the hadiths or narrations upon which the rule in question is based, and goes on to discuss and explicate the following aspects as viewed by Imam Khomeini and Shahid Ñadr, making clear the distinctions between the views of these two Muslim jurists: 1. Taking the rule of “no harm shall be inflicted or reciprocated in Islam” as a governmental rule;2. A study of the concept, criteria and referents of the rule in question;3. Deduction of positive prescripts from the rule in question; The results obtained are as follows:a.According to Imam Khomeini, the rule “no harm…” is governmental and at the disposal of the faqih-ruler and can serve as the basis for positive and social prescripts (rulings).b.By way of extension of the concept ‘harm’, particularly in relation to the concept of ‘defect in dignity’ and the belief in the necessity of the main locus and occasion of harm, Shahid Ñadr explores the problems to pave the ground for finding solutions for family problems and the problems in private areas, laying emphasis on the validity of common-sense knowledge of referents of harm and the certainty of what is signified by traditions as applied to the positive laws, thereby extending the domain and application of the principle at issue. The present article seeks to show that the review of the faqihs’ views on jurisprudential laws can add to the legislation capacity on the basis of governmental jurisprudence.

God has created man and His purpose of creating man was to give him opportunity to attain sublime perfections. The path to the perfections intended by God requires men to move in the direction of truth and divine obligation. The right to determine one’s destiny is a human natural right which is given to human beings by God, the Almighty. To demand this right in a proper way in the form of the right to designate a ruler is taken to be an important stage in the growth and perfections of human beings in a human society. Islam, as the best religion and divine guidance, has been bestowed upon humans for their personal and social happiness. People, either when the Infallible Imams are present or when they are absent (as the case with the last Infallible Imam in the period of Major Occultation) have decisive role in the establishment of an Islamic government.In accordance to the right to determine one’s own destiny at the time when the Infallible Imam is present (alive), people are entitled not to entrust the task of ruling and of running the social affairs to someone other than infallible Imams. Rather, they are entitled to elect, consciously and out of their free will, one of Infallible Imams of their time, as their leader, follow him as a good leading exemplar (oswatun Îasanah) and obey him without question. On the other hand, again according to the same right, this time in the period of occultation, people are entitled to demand their own rights by direct or indirect participation in the election of their leader, trying to elect from among the candidates the one who has the necessary and general qualifications of a leader.This kind of democracy in the contemporary world is the best of its kind which is nowadays termed as ‘religious democracy’ in the political literature of the world. The only practical example of this system of democratic government in this contemporary world under the name of Islamic Republic of Iran continues to exist in a lively manner.

As stipulated in the article 4 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, all the laws and regulations governing in the Islamic Republic of Iran should be based on and in accord with the Islamic criteria. By the terms ‘generality’ and ‘application’ stated in the article 4 of the constitution is meant the area covered by the Islamic laws and regulations, extending to cover not only the articles of the constitution and all regulations but also all the laws and statutes passed in the Iranian Parliament (parliamentary statutes) before and after the Islamic Revolution, all the bylaws, circular letters issued by the three powers, ratified bills (decrees) of certain institutions and commissions such as the Expediency Discernment Council of the System, Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution (also known as the Supreme Cultural Revolution Council or SCRC). In the meantime, the authority for discerning the constitutionality of laws and regulations [the extent to which the laws and regulations are in accord with the Islamic precepts and criteria] has been entrusted with the Muslim jurists of the Guardian Council of the Constitution. Likewise, in the constitutions of Iraq and Afghanistan, certain articles have been dedicated to this important issue. Many articles of the constitution of Afghanistan have dealt with the issue at hand in detail and the two supervising authorities: Stera Mahkama or the Afghan Supreme Court and the Independent Commission for Overseeing the Implementation of Constitution (ICOIC) have been entrusted with this task, while the constitution of Iraq has nothing to do with this issue and the Federal Supreme Court of Iraq, acting as an independent judicial body, interprets the constitution and determines the constitutionality of laws and regulations.

Legitimacy (of a government) is the most fundamental issue in the political and social realm which is, in fact, concerned with the idea that how a political structure is permitted to exert its rule and why people find it necessary to obey that rule. The same issue has gained tremendous importance to the extent that it subjects social structures to challenge.As far as the jurisprudential (fiqhi) approach is concerned, the question is raised whether the Muslim jurists or faqihs take social authority or guardianship (wilÁyat) and being in political office subject to the will and demands of the majority or not. Due to the fact that such a question has not been raised by the early Muslim jurists, no clear and explicit statement of the matter has been made thus far. However, since faqihs has sought to make the Islamic precepts and judgements clear with considerable degrees of detail and to make use of the general rules in dealing with various subjects, one can make references to the answers given in this regard.However, it should be noted that Muslim jurists have known a government (a rule or reign) by its ruler or governor, thus if they have spoken of rulings about a ruler or governor and his authority, they have actually taken one and the same approach to the question at hand. However, having a cursory glance over the works of these religious scholars makes it clear that they have not considered a ruler’s coming to power as subject to the common consent, but rather, as evidenced by certain works of faqihs, they have not taken people’s disapproval of a ruler coming to power as an obstacle to his reign.

The spread and promotion of ShiÝism can be taken as the greatest achievement of the Safavids as they proclaimed ShiÝism as their official religion. This important change has had its impacts on the political thoughts of the Safavids during their reign over two centuries (907-1135 AH), thereby establishing ties between religion and politics. It was such that the Safavids began to support the ShiÝa clerics and establish religious governmental offices which had not already existed. It goes without saying that this tie between politics and scholars’ religious approaches was not possible without taking into consideration the influence of the educational institutions and centers in establishing and promoting ShiÝa doctrines. In this period, the construction of mosques and religious schools was taken into serious consideration and endowments and charities were received to construct them. Drawing upon a historical-analytical method, the article at hand which provides a case study of the relations between politics and religion in Safavids’ time seeks to collect necessary data from various historical sources around the budget allocated for centers for religious sciences and schools. The obtained results show that these institutions would provide their budget from sources like endowments, charities, legal alms (religious taxes), pensions, government budgets, money gifts from benefactors, and personal incomes. However, in addition to endowments, charities and other budgets, a large amount of budget allocated for the expenditure for these educational institutions by the Safavid government is considered to be something new and worth noticing.