A Comparative Study of Citizenship in Statute Law and Citizenship in Islamic Jurisprudence

Today, as human and international relations become more complex, the need to align doctrinal principles with domestic and international law has become increasingly apparent. The present article has been prepared with the aim of examining the issue of homeland and citizenship in jurisprudence and the subject law and practice of different countries regarding the issue of citizenship.

This research is of theoretical type and the research method is descriptive-analytical and the method of data collection is library and has been done by referring to documents, books and articles.

Citizenship in Imami jurisprudence is based on two foundations of belief (faith) and membership in the Islamic government (covenant). Accordingly, in the principles of Imami jurisprudence, a person who believes in Islam in the Islamic government or resides in the territory of the Islamic government as a follower (followers of other religions and prophets of the Book) has the citizenship and support of the Islamic government. As a result, some residents of Islamic lands who believe in their traditional (non-monotheistic) beliefs are excluded from government support. In positive law, the institution of citizenship represents a material and spiritual relationship between the individual and the government, which is either rooted in the individual's origin or, depending on the conditions set forth in the law, is acquired by the individual or granted by the government. By citizenship, both the individual and the government assume obligations to each other.

 In order to organize this research, while observing the authenticity of the texts, honesty and fidelity have been observed.

Since the rights in question must be assigned to all the inhabitants of the land in terms of citizenship coverage, Therefore, it generally determines the citizenship of individuals based on the two criteria of soil (place of birth) and blood (ratio) and adjusts it with sub-criteria such as occupation, which is the case in most countries, including Iran. Thus, there seem to be differences in the application of jurisprudential and legal views on the issue of citizenship, and since the purpose of implementing jurisprudential rulings and legal laws is to administer justice to all citizens under the rule of the Islamic country, it seems necessary for jurisprudential scholars and legal experts. Efforts are being made to create a theoretical consensus between the two perspectives.