Doctrine of “to Have the Right to” versus “to Be Right” with an Approach based on Imam Khomeini’s Viewpoints

The clarification of “to have the right to” or “to be right” is an important and functional issue in legal debates with some effects and instruments coming forth, consequently. The semantic study of “right” is a must since it serves as a basis for the philosophy of various sciences. A review of Imam Khomeini’s remarks indicates that the sphere of “right” is very vast, among which the right to life and the right to freedom are the most important ones.  In legal systems, “to have the right to” as a legal doctrine versus “to be right” refers to the person deserving right to do something to enjoy some right to benefit something. If the person is believed to have right, he shall be entitled to a set of privileges or authority. In the world of the being, creatures enjoy various rights by virtue of their positive attributes which is associated with certain duties burdened on them. This association, though, is not agreed by consensus, something that affects sanctions for safeguarding the rights of individual and the community. There are different explanations on the meaning of right, but the meaning indicating association of right and duty and restricting the sphere of extreme rightfulness of persons through the origin of right, i.e. justice, will be more appropriate.