Political Thought
Kioomars Ashtarian
Abstract
Analyzing the structure of Constitutional law in the Islamic Republic of Iran can be used to identify the capacities of amending the Constitution and redefining the Iranian governance system. This article, with an institutional-normative approach, seeks to show the theoretical capacities of the constitutional ...
Read More
Analyzing the structure of Constitutional law in the Islamic Republic of Iran can be used to identify the capacities of amending the Constitution and redefining the Iranian governance system. This article, with an institutional-normative approach, seeks to show the theoretical capacities of the constitutional movement on the one hand and the capacities of Mantaghato-laugh (Free area of Islamic regulation) on the other hand to review the Constitution of the Islamic Republic. In Iranian governance, the distortion of the national division of institutional tasks in the form of bureaucratic-tribal monarchy has been widespread in the governance structure. As such, the structural differentiation of social spaces, which leads to the logical separation of religion from public policies, has been ignored. This is while the concept of a “Free area of Islamic regulation” gives general directions to public policies that can return powers and duties to the people, to the government, and the parliament without compromising the legitimacy of the political regime. This article has several theoretical pillars that are used synthetically in connection with the main finding of the article. 1) order and power, 2) separation of powers, 3) legitimacy, 4) unity of religion and politics, and 5) constitutional orientation of public policy making. The main point of the article is that the theoretical capacities of these 5 pillars can be useful for analyzing the structure of the Islamic Republic of Iran's Constitution and revising it. First, with a normative approach, we have discussed the right to exercise power and the separation of powers (the first and second theoretical pillars). The fact that the constitution guides the operation of political societies is born from the idea that the government must protect the fundamental rights of individuals. The fundamental rights have a technical dimension that organizes the exercise of power and therefore creates limitations for the exercise of power. That is why separation of powers is considered a tool against abuse of power, prevention of tyranny, and a factor of national self-actualization, and according to Montesquieu, there will be no freedom without separation of powers. In terms of the third theoretical pillar of this article, it has been discussed that the relation of legitimacy and efficiency are closely intertwined in Iranian governance. In the Constitution, there are several principles that not only determine the direction of the policy-making systems but also lay the foundations of an interventionist government with full responsibility for the welfare of the citizens. As a result, public policies take into account the legitimacy of the political system, and in practice, the legitimacy of the political regime depends on its efficiency. This phenomenon has found an ideological facet in the shadow of the theory of Unity of religion and politics. With regards to the relationship between religion and politics in the Islamic Republic (the fourth pillar of the article), we are facing two aspects of political jurisprudence theory and legal tradition, which appear to be aligned but at the same time can be contradictory. On the one hand, legitimacy refers to the divine sovereignty over the world, and it is embodied in the Islamic Republic's Constitution. On the other hand, for some “official” theorists of the last two decades, this divine sovereignty has led to the acceptance of an approach called the theory of “discovery” and “designation”, which we call "revelation legitimacy". This revolutionist approach, in its essence, makes the legal processes of the constitution irrelevant, which means that at first, it reduces the role of experts to a passive role in the designation of Leader. The fifth pillar of the article deals with the "basic rules of public policies" and the issues of political structure related to public policies. The importance of this article is that it allows freedom of public policy-making to the citizens.
Milad Heidari
Abstract
In addition to government and official institutions such as the police, the gendarmerie, and the National Organization for Security and Intelligence (SAVAK), the second Pahlavi government used militias to suppress its opponents. This use of armed non-state actors continued throughout this period (1942-1979). ...
Read More
In addition to government and official institutions such as the police, the gendarmerie, and the National Organization for Security and Intelligence (SAVAK), the second Pahlavi government used militias to suppress its opponents. This use of armed non-state actors continued throughout this period (1942-1979). In fact, force and violence which should have been the monopoly of the state were also entrusted to non-state actors. Previous academic studies have ignored and underestimated the role of such informal/semi-official forces in the politics and militarism of the government. Moreover, these studies have paid little attention to their persistence. Therefore, the purpose of the present study was to explain why pro-government militias continued to exist in the second Pahlavi period. To explain this issue, the views of experts in the field of militias were used as the research hypotheses. The research method was functional-historical explanation and library, documentary, and field methods were used for data collection. The present study examined the performance of militias during the events and political developments of this period. The research showed that during the various political and security crises that the Pahlavi government was involved in from the beginning to the end, gradually, some of the advantages of the militias over the official and government military were realized. These advantages included the low cost of managing and training them, local and specialized knowledge, strengthening the legitimacy of the government, and their deniability. Therefore, the government insisted on strengthening and developing the militias.
Yaser Ghahremaniafshar; Kheirollah Parvin
Abstract
Modernization of governance and the attainment of collective enthusiasm and participation in political decision-making began since the fundamental shift of sovereignty from the Sultan to people. The modern state, as a descendant of ancient forms of governance, defines its sovereignty based on human wisdom ...
Read More
Modernization of governance and the attainment of collective enthusiasm and participation in political decision-making began since the fundamental shift of sovereignty from the Sultan to people. The modern state, as a descendant of ancient forms of governance, defines its sovereignty based on human wisdom rather than spiritual sources. As a claimant to the divine and popular sovereignty, the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI)—within the Constitutional Law—has recognized its own political–legal framework based on revelation and jurisprudence. Yet as a political entity in international politics and relations, the IRI cannot remain indifferent to the necessities of the modern world, especially when it comes to political and legal systematization. As a result, the IRI has also used modern methods of governance to organize the country legally and politically as well as to manage public affairs. Since state and modernity are pluralistic phenomena in intellectual and political systems, there are differences in the way the components of the Modern are recognized. Taking this as its central topic, the present study used a descriptive–explanatory and prescriptive approach as well as the library data to analyze the constituting components of state. The main finding is the fact that the difference lies in the normative basis and genesis of the two legal systems.
