A Study of the Relationship between Legal Hermeneutics and the Interpretive Judgements of the Guardian Council

Hermeneutics is the science of interpretation.Generally speaking,hermeneutics has three approaches:specific,general and philosophical.classic hermeneutics presumes a fixed meaning for text and tries to find out the intention of the writer.However,in philosophical hermeneutics,text does not necessarily refer to a fixed meaning.This is due to the unlimited real meanings of one text,none of which has priority over the others.classic hermeneutics has a close relationship with topic of Terms(Alfaaz) in principles of Islamic Jurisprudence(Figh’).On the other hand,theoretical foundations of philosophical hermeneutics are mostly inconsistent with opinions of Islamic scholars.
The laws are also in need of being interpreted in case of their ambiguity,deficiency or silence of legislator.Hence,interpretation of legal texts is considered as a branch of hermeneutics named as legal hermeneutics.The Constitution is not exceptional;its interpretation is specifically assigned to the Guardian Council.
The Guardian Council is a legal authority with legal-jurisprudential tendencies that in its capacity as the interpreter of Constitution,tries to discover the legislator’s intention through the principles of Shia Jurisprudence.Therefore,only those hermeneutical tendencies that believe in a fixed meaning of text can be evaluated by interpretive judgments of the Guardian Council;the philosophical hermeneutics which is based on a changeable understanding of a text cannot be implemented in the Council’s interpretive judgments.