نشریه رهیافت انقلاب اسلامی
پیاپی 71 (تابستان 1404)

This study aims to examine the optimal governance model concerning the element of public trust in the Islamic system and society. The research question is: What is the role of the agents of the Islamic system in achieving the optimal governance model based on public trust The results indicate that the performance of the agents of the Islamic system, from the perspective of public trust, plays a significant role in shaping the optimal governance model in two ways: horizontal trust (interactions and relationships among the agents) and vertical trust (relationships between agents and the people). This means that the role and performance of the agents in achieving the optimal governance model in the Islamic system, in its horizontal aspect, require consideration of elements such as consultation and meritocracy, avoidance of division and power-seeking, and realism. Moreover, from the perspective of vertical trust, it requires simplicity and integrity, opposition to oppression, justice, and receptiveness to criticism in order to realize the structure of an ideal society. The practical and theoretical conduct of the infallible Imams (peace be upon them) introduces the dimensions of optimal governance as being contingent upon the application of the aforementioned principles. The experience of the Islamic Republic of Iran has also continued this approach; however, it requires operationalizing these principles within the current conditions of society, accepting criticism in the form of public culture and institutionally, and stating criteria for distinguishing principled, honest, and most suitable elites, so that public trust can serve as a permanent support for the Islamic system. This article employs a theoretical framework for modeling and a descriptive-analytical method.

This article investigates the role and effectiveness of institutional structures in combating corruption in Iran and China, focusing on the relationship between political power, administrative organization, and accountability mechanisms. The study compares how two distinct political systems—an Islamic theocracy and a socialist one-party state— design, manage, and utilize institutional frameworks to control corruption. Employing a qualitative–comparative methodology and document analysis, the research explores the evolution, mandates, and performance of key anti-corruption institutions such as Iran’s Supreme Audit Court, the General Inspection Organization, and the Chinese Central Commission for Discipline Inspection (CCDI). Findings show that while both countries have established extensive institutional networks to monitor financial integrity and public service ethics, the degree of political autonomy and transparency within these structures determines their effectiveness. China’s centralized disciplinary system has achieved relative efficiency through internal party supervision and strong enforcement, whereas Iran’s fragmented oversight model— marked by overlapping authorities and limited inter-agency coordination—undermines accountability. The study concludes that genuine institutional reform requires strengthening independence, transparency, and the rule of law rather than merely expanding the number of anti-corruption agencies.

 This study aims to examine the position of tolerance and patience in Iranian society after the Islamic Revolution, specifically focusing on the views of Imam Khomeini (RA) and the Supreme Leader. The research question is: What are the main elements of an ideal Islamic society based on tolerance and patience according to the leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran The hypothesis of the research is: In the views of Imam Khomeini (RA), tolerance and patience negate violence and coercive behaviors, while in the views of Ayatollah Khamenei, tolerance and patience are not absolute matters but rather relative concepts that require a framework within Islamic society. The results indicate that tolerance and patience in Islamic thought are based on a type of ethical and political approach that necessitates a framework to safeguard the public morality of society and prevent the disregard of Sharia rulings. Therefore, contrary to what is proposed in a secular approach, tolerance and patience are not indifferent to the fate of public morality in society or the promotion of any idea, even the negation of Sharia rulings. These two concepts, like any other principles in political and social arenas, require consideration of public ethics and the responsibility of the Islamic government to support the expression of the opinions and views of the people, while also ensuring that citizens’ activities do not lead to insults, repression, belittlement, or negation of the principles of Sharia and ethics in Islamic society. This article employs descriptive and analytical methods and utilizes library resources, with the theoretical framework being the model of Islamic moral and political tolerance. 

The present study aims to provide a sociological analysis of the generational and cultural crisis in Iran after the Islamic Revolution, focusing on the poems of Ahmad Azizi. His poetry reflects the troubled mental structures in both the language and content of his works. The main research question asks how Azizi’s poems represent the social, cultural, and value-based experiences of a generation confronted, in the midst of post-revolutionary transformations, with crises of identity, generational rift, the conflict between tradition and modernity, moral despair, and cultural domination. The hypothesis of this research is that Ahmad Azizi’s poetry, through its symbolic, paradoxical, and satirical language, embodies a form of collective awareness of the contemporary social and cultural crises in Iran. The research method is qualitative, based on interpretive content analysis with the framework of genetic structuralism. Data were purposively collected from selected verses and lines of Azizi’s works and analyzed through three stages of open, axial, and selective coding. Findings reveal that Azizi’s poetry not only mirrors the social conditions of the post-revolutionary era but also functions as a resistant discourse against cultural domination and the collapse of meaning.

This study explores sport as a mechanism of social control and its legal implications under Iranian law, focusing on the jurisprudential and legal analysis of Clause (th) of Article 158 of the Islamic Penal Code. From a sociological perspective, sport contributes to the internalization of norms, emotional regulation, and collective solidarity, functioning as an informal institution that reinforces social order. Legally, however, sports-related incidents raise complex issues concerning civil and criminal liability. Employing a descriptive–analytical method and library-based data collection, the research investigates how Article 158 delineates the boundary between lawful sports conduct and criminal behavior. The findings reveal that while the Article excludes sports-related injuries from criminal liability if rules are observed and religious principles are not violated, civil liability may persist unless informed consent and risk acceptance are proven. Comparative analysis with Canadian law highlights that the “assumption of risk” doctrine operates as an independent defense in common law, whereas in Iran, similar effects derive from Islamic legal principles such as idhn (permission) and iqdam (voluntary action). The study concludes that sport functions as both a field of moral education and a component of Iran’s criminal policy, demanding more consistent judicial interpretation and clearer legal guidelines to balance freedom, responsibility, and social order.

This study aims to examine the role of various factors in shaping postmodern values in the city of Kermanshah and seeks to answer the question of which social and cultural factors have the greatest impact on the formation of such values. The main hypothesis of the research is that factors such as media consumption, cultural capital, family relations, attitudes toward class values, and the public sphere exert a positive influence on postmodern values, whereas religious background and ethnic identity have an inverse effect. The research was conducted using a descriptive-survey method with a researcher-designed questionnaire. The statistical population consisted of citizens over 18 years of age in Kermanshah, from which 384 individuals were selected through cluster sampling. Findings reveal a tension between tradition, modernism, and postmodernism in Kermanshah, particularly among younger generations who, under the influence of globalization and new technologies, tend to embrace values such as individualism and relativism. This study highlights the necessity of analyzing cultural and social transformations in transitional societies and suggests that policymakers should undertake more effective planning to manage these shifts.

This article offers a comparative analysis of the political philosophy and reformist theology of Ayatollah Mohammad-Hossein Na’ini (1860–1936) and John Locke (1632–1704), two thinkers who, despite emerging from vastly different intellectual and theological traditions, converge on the question of limiting power and legitimizing governance. The main purpose is to examine how both thinkers—Na’ini through Islamic reformist theology and Locke through Enlightenment rationalism—sought to reconcile divine authority with popular sovereignty. The study employs an analytical-comparative methodology, drawing on textual analysis of Na’ini’s Tanbih al-Ummah wa Tanzih al-Millah and Locke’s Two Treatises of Government. Findings show that while Locke’s legitimacy of power rests on natural rights, consent, and the social contract, Na’ini articulates legitimacy through divine trusteeship (amanat) and collective supervision (nazar-e omumi). Both perspectives establish moral and legal boundaries against tyranny, emphasizing accountability and the protection of human dignity. The article concludes that Na’ini’s synthesis of religious reform and political constitutionalism represents a unique indigenous framework comparable to Locke’s liberal constitutionalism, both aiming to restrain absolute rule and secure justice within their respective civilizational contexts.
 

This article explores the reflection and transformation of Shi‘i epic literature in the context of the Islamic Revolution of Iran, focusing on the works of Ibn Hessam Khosafi (15th century) and Tahereh Saffarzadeh (20th century). It examines how religious-mythical narratives of martyrdom, justice, and resistance, rooted in the Karbala paradigm, evolved from classical Persian poetry to revolutionary discourse. Using an analytical-comparative method, the study investigates thematic continuity and aesthetic transformation between medieval Shi‘i epic verse and contemporary revolutionary poetry. Findings indicate that while Ibn Hessam’s Khavaran-nama integrates the heroic ethos of Imam Ali and his descendants within a mystical-epic framework, Saffarzadeh’s poetry reinterprets the same archetypes as metaphors for political awakening and anti-imperialist struggle. Both poets employ the Ashura narrative as a symbolic structure that fuses spirituality with socio-political commitment. The research concludes that Shi‘i epic literature not only shaped the cultural consciousness of the Islamic Revolution but also provided a theological and aesthetic language for resistance, martyrdom, and eschatological hope.

The civil responsibility of the state is one of the key topics in public law that examines the principles and rules for compensating damages resulting from the actions or omissions of the state. In the legal system of Iran, this responsibility is defined based on civil laws and the Civil Liability Act (approved in 1960). In contrast, the legal system of the United States operates under the principle of sovereign immunity and provides a limited framework for lawsuits against the government through the “Federal Tort Claims Act.” This research compares these two systems through a case study of Huawei’s case, which is related to violations of U.S. economic sanctions against Iran. The Huawei case exemplifies the conflict between domestic law and international law; the United States views sanctions as a legitimate tool for foreign policy, whereas Iran perceives these actions as violations of national sovereignty and free trade. The research question investigates the differences in the foundations of state civil responsibility in these two legal systems and their impact on international interactions. The hypothesis is that state civil responsibility in Iran is based on codified laws and is absolute in certain cases, whereas in the United States, it is limited to specific conditions under the aforementioned law. Using a comparative analysis method, the results indicate that the differences in these approaches significantly affect international lawsuits and the rights of individuals, with the Huawei case serving as a prominent example of these impacts.

This study examines the legal and political mechanisms for resolving environmental disputes arising from oil contracts in Iran, focusing on the ecological crisis of the Hawizeh (Hoor al-Azim) Wetland. The main research question asks how existing legal and political frameworks can effectively manage environmental conflicts between the parties to oil contracts. The study hypothesizes that despite the existence of legal frameworks and international standards, weak enforcement, insufficient monitoring, and lack of transparency have made dispute resolution highly complex. Using a document-based legal content analysis and comparative study with international environmental standards, the paper evaluates the ecological degradation caused by oil extraction activities in the region. Findings indicate that effective prevention and resolution of environmental disputes in oil projects require revising domestic laws, strengthening enforcement, enhancing transparency, and expanding diplomatic and cross-border cooperation—particularly with Iraq. The study underscores the necessity of contractual environmental clauses, international arbitration mechanisms, and environmental diplomacy as tools for achieving sustainable and legally balanced outcomes.

This study, entitled Iran and the Environmental Challenges of the GAP Project: Examining Turkey’s Civil Liability under International Environmental Law, analyzes the non-criminal liability of the Republic of Turkey for the transboundary environmental impacts of the GAP project on the Islamic Republic of Iran. The central research question is to what extent Turkey can be held legally responsible, within the framework of international environmental law and based on the theory of civil liability, for the environmental harms inflicted upon Iran. The hypothesis posits that even in the absence of binding bilateral agreements between the two countries, core principles such as strict liability, the precautionary principle, and the no-harm rule provide a legal basis for holding Turkey accountable. The research follows a descriptive-analytical methodology, drawing on international legal instruments, judgments of the International Court of Justice, and empirical data concerning the environmental consequences of the GAP project for Iran. The findings reveal that Turkey has neglected its obligations arising from civil liability, failing to implement compensatory measures, conduct joint environmental assessments, or engage in preventive cooperation. Consequently, the Islamic Republic of Iran is legally entitled to pursue international legal remedies and seek compensation for the environmental damages incurred.