نشریه حکومت اسلامی
سال هفدهم شماره 3 (پیاپی 65، پاییز 1391)

This article seeks to explicate the nature of governmental rules. Hence, to define the concepts used in the article, the writer, in the first place, tries to give the literal meaning or definition of rules, government, and ruler. In the second place, in order to arrive at an all-embracing definition, he embark on giving the definitions offered by the contemporary Muslim jurisprudents and scholars for such rules and, in the third place, he puts forward various views on the nature of the governmental rules stating that these rules are not the same sort the primary real rules and secondary rules are thought to be. For, the primary and secondary rules have been directly extracted from the legal texts and are based on the essential good and badness of the rules themselves, while the governmental rules are subject to the urgent demands of the time and the place as well as the expediency or the conditions an Islamic judge should take into consideration, though this may not be substantiated by any stipulated legal texts. Furthermore, taking these governmental rules as being as transient as the secondary rules, which are subject to the expediencies or demands of the time and the place, in the sense that when there is no necessity for their existence, there would be no ground to act according to them, gives no reason to take the governmental rules as secondary rules and since it is the Saint Legislator who authenticates the governmental rules, one should consider these rules as part of legal rules (prescripts) and study them as the third sort of legal rules

“Right to information” in the sense that citizens have the right to gain access to the information the governmental institutions have is among the rights that has been taken into serious consideration worldwide. In 1388 SH, when the “Publishing and Open Access to Information Act” was ratified, the right to information gained wide acceptance in positive law. According to this Act, all public and private institutions are obliged to provide people with any pieces of recorded information (with the exception of classified documents) upon request. In Islamic fiqh, there exist various sources such as traditions, biographies and life-style of the infallible Imams which can be referred to as arguments for the principle of the necessity of maintaining the Islamic system and people’s having right to general information. The present paper tries to cast light on the arguments in question and their implications for the subject “right to information”.

The objective-theoretical model of Islamic caliphate is a historical model which has been theoretically justified and reconstructed after it had taken a real form. This theoretical justification and reconstruction is intended to establish its legitimacy. In this connection, the following constituents as that “caliphate is something secular”, “caliphate enjoys a divine or religious mission”, “a caliph is liable to sin”, “a caliph does not have God-given(inner) knowledge” are the effective ones which have been taken into consideration. Exploring the standard procedure of establishing legitimacy in this model is of great importance. Thus, this requires us to examine the extent to which this model can meet the requirement of legitimacy in three levels: “conditions for intellectual and philosophical possibility”, “conditions for occurring possibility” and “conditions for citing documentary evidence in support of legitimacy of caliphate”, though one can easily see the inability of the model in meeting the conditions in the three levels mentioned above. The best and the most complete formulation of meeting the requirement of legitimacy for the Islamic caliphate model in terms of secularity can be found in the theory of social contract. Of course, Islamic caliphate model as one of the examples of this theory in this theoretical perspective cannot have a justified and effective procedure for meeting the requirement of legitimacy.

Is enjoining the good and forbidding the evil as an obligatory action peculiar to the “good” or “bad” deeds which are openly performed or forsaken or is it an obligation in all cases of good or bad actions? In other words, do people and the government have any responsibility to forbid people from doing evil deeds or sins which are committed in hidden and in one’s own privacy? This article seeks to study two prevalent views on the subject in question, along with the arguments each may offer for and against it. It is worth nothing that what is emphasized on here is that, even according to those who consider commanding the good and forbidding the bad as a collective responsibility and who extends it to cover the private life of the individuals, one must take two points into consideration: 1. It is forbidden to probe into someone’s personal life (privacy), whether this is out of good intention or as one to prevent him or her from committing sins. 2. In case one happens to become aware of someone committing sins in his or her private life, not being probed into by anyone, it is permitted to embark on forbidding his or her evil deeds in secret or in a hidden manner and especially when all its necessary conditions are fulfilled. Therefore, to embark on openly warning someone against a sin when it was committed in hidden is not only unnecessary but also impermissible and even forbidden.

Sayyed Qutb al-Din Muhammad Neirizi al-Shirazi is one of the most influential and distinguished political scholars at the end of Safavid dynasty whose political thoughts have unfortunately been neglected. His political thoughts seem to have suffered neglect because of the high status he achieved in the history of Sufism. In this article, the writer seeks to deal with political thoughts of al-Neirizi as a main representative of the political and mystical thought in Iran, trying to bring into light the question how al-Neirizi, under the social circumstances of the last years of Safavid dynasty, made successful attempts to introduce some sort of political thought originating in Sufi principles, a sort of political thought which is of two essential elements of religious foundations, and rules and regulations based on people’s rights.

The theory of obedience to a tyrant has a great impact on the political and social developments of societies, for the rejection or acceptance of the theory in question can have different consequences for the changes occurring in a society. Sunni political fiqh considers it essential to obey a tyrant ruler. Although there are some Sunni juristconsults who oppose the idea of obedience to a tyrant ruler, this theory, in a way or other, has taken precedence over the others in the course of time. This idea has become a great hindrance for the formation of revolutions and political campaigns in the Sunni communities. Although some movements and uprisings emerged in Sunni Muslim communities, these movements have not rested on the jurisprudential principles of Sunnism. The article seeks to cast light on the views and opinions of the faqihs as well as their arguments, exploring the historical roots of the theory and its related subjects.

Believing in the all-embracing nature of the Holy Qura’ān, Imam Khomeini seeks in his various works to bring the abandoned Qur’ānic political and social doctrines into play by working out various strategies. Among these strategies some are theoretical and others are practical. That is why he tries to draw the attention to such theoretical strategies as the use of Qur’ānic teachings and the Imams’ words, the necessity of writing and compiling appropriate political and social commentaries on the Qur’ān, promoting freedom of thought and expression, strengthening self-belief and self-knowledge, emphasizing on the revival of all-embracing independent judgment based on the Qur’ān, as well as some practical strategies like establishing Islamic government, combating oppression, promoting the sense of resistance against collaboration with the enemy, promoting unity among Muslims in the world and bringing together the Islamic denominations, putting commanding the good and forbidding the evil into practice and promoting a school of economics based on the Qur’ānic ethical precepts and doctrines.