An Islamic Perspective of Political Economy - part 1

With the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe and in its heartland, the Soviet Union, the world is yet again dominated by the practices and laws of capitalism. Today’s world econo­my is shaped according to Adam Smith. No other alternative routes for economic development are envisaged but to let “the laws of the market” play their course in the marketplace. The “invisible hand” of the market is more visible now than at anytime as the determining and decisive factor in the lives of nations and men. Consequently, the self­-interest of members of society is to be the driving force of econo­my, and the law of supply and demand the regulating mechanism of profiteers in society. Even economists in what used to be the Marxist bloc are subscribing to such economic behaviour as the only alternative to remedy the ills of the economies of their nations.

 

Not quite true, say many Muslim thinkers and political activists. They believe that Islam provides humanity with solutions to problems created by imperfect man‑made political systems and moral values. Islam, according to them, is a divinely ordained social framework that should guide humanity to peace and tranquillity in all aspects of life, physical and metaphysical. One of these thinkers and political activists was Muhammad Baqir al‑Sadr of Iraq. Sadr was executed because he led a revolutionary movement against the Ba’thist regime in Iraq in 1980. He had conceived an Islamic political system to replace the existing regimes in the Muslim world, which he considered corrupt. His programme for the future is to create a new socioeconomic order that would replace the capitalist and socialist orders which are the dominating systems in the Muslim world. This paper intends to focus on his views and the basic principles of the Islamic economic system, which he believes is more capable of solving the contradictions of the capitalist system and, therefore, more able to satisfy human needs; more importantly, it has the capacity to develop and progress in accordance with human potentials.

 

As an Islamic jurist, Sadr derives his basis of argument from Islamic tenets and sacred sources. Here our purpose is to present his conceptual argument and economic engineering of society and to see how applicable these views and programmes are to reality. The aim of the study here is to highlight his argument and try to understand the structure of the Islamic economic system. His views in economics are part of his general political theory designed for the establishment of a complete Islamic social system. The behaviour of the Islamic economic system should be judged after the creation of an Islamic State, where the whole realm of socioeconomic human behaviour is determined according to Islam. Sadr’s major work in economics was written in 1960‑61, and aside from the pamphlet that he wrote later in his life, the main argument of his thought is contained in one work, Iqtisaduna(`Our Economics’).

 

The economy of the Islamic State, according to Sadr, is divided between that of the individual as the vicar of God (khalifah), and the ruler as the witness (shahid) who presides over the application of the laws of God. The economic structure of the Islamic State thus consist of private property and public property. However, one should not think that the economic structure of the Islamic State is some sort of combination of capitalism and socialism. Sadr strongly rejects this misconception. He argues that the juxtaposition of private and public right of ownership stems from the fundamental beliefs of Islam. [1] This is similar to the way that private ownership is advocated in the capitalist system, or public ownership by socialist: as the logical conclusion of their ideological and philosophical beliefs. To justify private ownership and public ownership in Islam, one must understand the right and obliga­tions of the individual and the State in Islam. Sadr’s detailed descrip­tion of economic relationships in the Islamic State and it economic structure represent the best available argument for the notion of Islamic economics.

 

Notes:

 

[1]. Al‑Sadr, “al‑Janib al‑’iqtisadi min al‑nizam al‑’Islami,” (The Economic Perspective of Islamic System) in Ikhtarnalak, 112‑113.

 

Source

 

Towards a Definition of Terrorism

Ayatullah Shaykh Muhammad ‘Ali TaskhiriVol V No. 1 (Muharram 1408 AH/1987 CE)

* Terrorism is a term that has been much bandied about in recent times in the world media. This paper was presented by the author, who is Director of the International Relations Department of the I.P.O., at the International Conference on Terrorism called by the Organization of the Islamic Conference, Geneva, from June 22-26, 1987. It is an attempt to define terrorism and to put it in a broad perspective.

Resolution 20/5-P (1.5) of the Fifth Islamic Summit supported the idea of an international conference to be convened under the aegis of the United Nations in order to discuss the subject of international terrorism and to differentiate it from the struggle of peoples for their acknowledged national causes and the liberation of their territories. 

This means that we should, at this meeting, take into consideration the following steps: 

(i) To refer, first of all, to Islamic sources in order to set the major criteria, to identify the principles according to which the humanity aims and actions is to be assessed, and to make such principles the basis of our judgement in the various cases. 

(ii) To examine genuine human nature unblemished by any considerations of narrow interests, in order to identify human rules that can be put forth at the international level as a general human criterion For this purpose, the results of our studies must cover the various fields of the international scene and constitute a general action framework. 

(iii) From these Islamic and human principles, we deduce a general comprehensive and exclusive definition, i.e. encompassing all the real attributes of terrorism and excluding the alleged criteria of terrorism which cannot be treated as such by lofty principles. 

(iv) Then, we should apply the criteria set forth to all the national and international instances of alleged terrorism. We should examine each of them closely in the light of the results, then put forward an appropriate and precise judgement which is free from any ambiguity or connivance and to confer on each act its true adjective. 

In the light of this introduction, we shall confine our study to the following points: 

First Point: 

It goes without saying that every international bloc, every State or indeed every community has enemies and opponents that seek to eliminate it, and, as the conflict becomes violent, each party tries to undermine the reputation of the other by attributing to it repulsive epithets, such as “anarchist”, “criminal”, “outlaw”, “inhuman”, “terrorist”, and the like. 

We may even find that each of the two parties indulges in such allegations in order to carry out a plan which involves the deprival of the other party of its rights on the pretext of collaborating with the enemy or plotting against lawful interests. 

To materialize this process, each party uses its international influence in order to win other parties over to its side either in action or in terms of support in international fora. The issue thus assumes a public character and the victory in a case is a matter of pressure, influence and the power of persuasion rather than a matter of sound logic. 

Accordingly, feelings are influenced and sentiments are exploited for the implementation of such plans motivated by self-interest, under the banner of “anti-terrorism” for instance. To be sure, terrorism is humanly reprehensible (if we disregard its motives and objectives), and no one in his senses would accept any threat to human dignity, freedom, property, honour, security, work, etc. This feeling is instinctive, genuine and incontestable. 

Second Point: 

If we consider the meaning of the word “terrorism” on the one hand, and its fallout and traces left on human life on the other, we note that terrorism may be carried out on different levels. There is a terrorism which threatens security, honour, property and the like; there is a cultural terrorism which tears human identity apart, and leads to the abyss of perdition and aimlessness; there is an information terrorism which deprives man of his freedom to breathe in an unpolluted atmosphere. We can cite other types of terrorism such as economic terrorism, scientific terrorism, diplomatic terrorism, military terrorism, etc. 

There exists, however, a division based on the type of perpetrators, which must be taken into account. It is the division into official and unofficial terrorism. Official terrorism - which is the more dangerous - consists of all acts that are supported by an internationally recognized quarter or State, whether by the army of that State or individual elements or in the form of an operation for the benefit of the said quarter. Opposing this type of terrorism is unofficial terrorism. 

Third Point: 

We may focus, in any act or conduct, on two determining factors: 

1. The motives of the perpetrator. 

2. The human acceptability of the act itself. 

These are not inseparable aspects. The personal motives of the perpetrator may look humane to him but not so to the public. Conversely, the perpetrator may have no human purpose in mind or may indeed have a purpose that he perceives to be inhumane but is considered from the public point of view to be a humane act. 

Therefore, viewpoints may differ in the judgement whether such an act is good or evil (usuli jurisprudents have done a great deal of valuable research on the rational basis of differentiating between good and evil deeds, but this is not the place to go into it). What must be stated here is that neither of the factors, taken separately, is sufficient to determine the acceptability or the reprehensibility of an act or to judge such an act positively or negatively. A positive assessment in regard to both factors must be carried out in order to judge and act. 

Consequently, we have to ensure objectivity in our investigation in order to find a criterion for identifying the acceptability and humanity of an act from the standpoints of both Islam and mankind in general. 

As regards the Islamic standpoint, we have to refer to the principles, concepts and judgements which relate to the question of terrorism - in its literal sense - to give a general definition of condemnable terrorism, i.e. the terrorism that is rejected by Islam as contrary to the process of the human being’s perfection determined by God Almighty for mankind through human nature and prescribed through revelation. 

When referring to Islamic teachings, we find that Islam is very rich in this field, and we notice that Islamic jurists have delved into the various aspects that relate to the subject. 

We have the judgements on al-baghy, i.e. armed revolt by a group against a just and legitimate government, intimidation of the general public, and pursuit of divisive political goals that damage national unity. 

We also have the judgements on al-harabah, which is defined as “the use of weapons, on land or sea, by day or night, to intimidate people, in a city or elsewhere, by a male or female, strong or weak.” God Almighty declares in the Qur’an: 

This is the recompense of those who fight against God and His Messenger, and spread corruption in the land. they shall be put to death, or crucified, or have their hands and feet cut off on alternate sides, or be banished from the land. That is a degradation for them in this world; and in the next awaits them a mighty chastisement (5:33)

As may be noticed, the verse mentions the subject and the purpose, namely war against society and spreading of corruption in the land. It has also mentioned the severe punishment to be dealt out to the perpetrators, which points to Islam’s concern for the subject. 

There are also the laws about theft and murder which can be mentioned in this regard. Likewise, we come across in Islamic texts terms which relate to the matter at hand, such as homicide (al-fatk), deceit (al-ghilah), and seditious conspiracy (al-’i'timar). 

There are also texts which stipulate utmost respect for covenants and treaties even if it is discovered later that they favour the other party. As long as he adheres to their provisions, these must be observed. 

Furthermore, we have the requirements of the Islamic ethical system which consists of concepts unknown to positive law yet are deeply-rooted in this system. Lying may, for instance, reach the degree of a major sin and so may calumny. We thus find that Islam seeks earnestly to protect all kinds of true human freedoms, and to defend the dignity of the individual and society, as well as the cohesion of society and integrity of the family, considering any attack on them to be an atrocious crime liable to the sternest punishment which may go as far as execution, crucifixion and the like. 

Islam upholds the principle of personal responsibility and considers any attack on innocent people as a major crime. It focuses on the defence of the weak, the humble and the oppressed and enjoins jihad for their protection: 

And why should you not fight for the cause of Allah, and for the helpless old men and women…. (4:75)

The Muslim is required to always stand up for the oppressed until they get their rights. Imam ‘Ali (A) gave this advice to his two sons: 

Be opponents of the oppressor and defenders of the oppressed.

He also said: 

To me the lowly are noble until I get their rights for them, and the powerful are weak until I get such rights from them.

Perhaps the mention in the Holy Qur’an of the blessing of security “And hath made them safe from fear” (106:4) is the best proof of the importance it attaches to security. 

However, it would take too long to elaborate on all the related matters. Nevertheless we wish to state that the first criterion for identifying humaneness is the intention of the perpetrator and the general acceptability of his act is Din with all its spirit, laws and concepts. 

Turning our attention to the second framework, namely the general human framework, we can accept those principles that are unanimously respected by mankind as represented by its official organs, its popular organizations, its conscience and sentiments, as another set of criteria to determine the presence of humaneness or its opposite in the intention of the perpetrator, and of the above-mentioned general acceptability (although we believe the two criteria to be mostly overlapping). 

As an example of the foregoing, we may notice the present unanimity of mankind in considering the following as inhuman: 

• prostitution and the disintegration of family relationships;
• narcotics and the disintegration of individual’s rational personality;
• colonialism and the undermining of peoples’ dignity and plundering of their resources;
• racism and the disintegration of human brotherhood;
• violation of all recognized rights and the breaking of covenants:
• bombardment of populated areas, use of chemical weapons. attacks on civil aviation, national railways, commercial and tourist vessels, and similar methods which are universally condemned in war.

There is no divergence whatsoever as regards the anti-human nature of the above instances. Therefore, these and similar violations suggest the acceptable criteria which should form the basis of our definition, and any act to eliminate and oppose them is a human act which must be supported if itself not accompanied by violation of other human values. 

Fourth Point: Definition of Terrorism 

In the light of the above, we can arrive at a comprehensive definition of terrorist acts, a definition which is unanimously acceptable and on which we can base our positions. Yet before putting forth our suggested definition, we may recall that we should note therein the following elements: 

• intimidation and violation of security of any kind;
• presence of inhuman intention and motive;
• unacceptability of the end and purpose and the act itself by humanity.

Accordingly, our definition may be as follows: 

Terrorism is an act carried out to achieve an inhuman and corrupt (mufsid) objective, and involving threat to security of any kind, and violation of rights acknowledged by religion and mankind.For the sake of clarity, we may add the following points: 

1. We have used the term ‘human’ instead of ‘international’ for the sake of wider consensus, official or otherwise, so as to emphasize the general human character of the statement. 

2. We have introduced the epithet ‘corrupt’ (mufsid) to connote the attribute accompanying inhuman objectives, i.e. the spreading of corruption in the land, and to include the imperative to avoid such objectives. 

3. We have referred to various types of terrorism with the phrase; “security of any kind”. 

4. We have mentioned the two criteria, i.e. religious and human, first to be consistent with our belief and then to generalize the criterion. 

5. As may be noticed, the fact that an operation is violent does not constitute a condition for considering it a case of terrorism. In the light of the above definition, we shall be able to ascertain the nature of one act or another and determine whether it is a case of terrorism. We shall confirm that the definition does not apply to the following: 

a. acts of national resistance exercised against occupying forces, colonizers and usurpers;

b. resistance of peoples against cliques imposed on them by the force of arms;

c. rejection of dictatorships and other forms of despotism and efforts to undermine their institutions;

d. resistance against racial discrimination and attacks on the latter’s strongholds;

e. retaliation against any aggression if there is no other alternative.

Similarly, the definition does not apply to any democratic action unaccompanied by terrorism even if it does not have a humane objective. Nor does it apply to individual destructive acts if they have no social effects. 

The above definition, however, does apply to the following: 

a. acts of piracy on land, air and sea;

b. all colonialist operations including wars and military expeditions;

c. all dictatorial acts against peoples and all forms of protection of dictatorships, not to mention their imposition on nations;

d. all military methods contrary to human practice, such as the use of chemical weapons, the shelling of civilian populated areas, the blowing up of homes, the displacement of civilians, etc.;

e. all types of pollution of geographical, cultural and informational environment. Indeed, intellectual terrorism may be one of the most dangerous types of terrorism;

f. all moves that undermine adversely affect the condition of international or national economy, adversely affect the condition of the poor and the deprived, deepen up nations with the shackles of socio-economic gaps, and chain up nations with the shackles of exorbitant debts;

g. all conspiratorial acts aimed at crushing the determination of nations for liberation and independence, and imposing disgraceful pacts on them.

The list of examples that fit in with the suggested definition is almost endless. 

Fifth Point: 

Although many meetings have been held and many attempts made to combat terrorism, they have generally failed because of the following reasons: 

- They were not based on international human considerations but were aimed primarily at achieving narrow interests. 

At any rate, the real cure of terrorism - acts of individual terrorism in particular - consists, in our view, in removing the conditions that have brought it about. 

Islam, in its treatment of all cases of deviation, strongly stresses this aspect. It seeks first to reform the social atmosphere and eliminate all inducements to crime. It also emphasizes self-restraint through education of the innermost soul and through giving the latter a unique human mould that causes it to spontaneously shun any transgression of prescribed human norms and rules by the Shari’ah. In addition, Islam does not omit to lay down a comprehensive, realistic and flexible code of sanctions that deals with facts according to their social effects. 

Going back to our current reality, we must seek the prevalence of a just system and prevent aggression and encroachment upon other peoples’ rights. Under such circumstances when a person allows himself to be induced to commit terrorism or aggression, the whole mankind will stand up against him. If, however, we fail to fulfil this standard, all our treatments will be local and palliative; though they may alleviate pain, they will not eradicate the cause of the disease. 

source

Leadership in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran

This is what Wilayah al-Faqih means legally in Iran. It is taken directly from the Islamic Republic of Iran’s constitution and one will get a good understanding of this position through reading the law.

Leadership in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran

• Article 2: The Islamic Republic
• Article 5: The Just and Pious Faqīh
• Article 57: Branches of the Government in the Islamic Republic
• Article 60: The Executive
• Article 91: The Guardian Council
• Article 107: Electing the Supreme Leader by the Assembly of Experts
• Article 109: Qualifications and Conditions of the Leader
• Article 110: Duties and Powers of the Leader
• Article 111: Death, Resignation or Dismissal of the Leader
• Article 112: The Expediency Council
• Article 113: The President
• Article 131: Death, Dismissal or Resignation of the President
• Article 142: Property of the Leader, the President and Some Other Officials
• Article 157: Head of the Judiciary
• Article 175: Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB)
• Article 177: Revision of the Constitution

Article 2

The Islamic Republic is a system based on belief in:
1. The Unique God (as stated in the phrase “There is no god except Allah”), His exclusive sovereignty and the right to legislate, and the necessity of submission to His commands.
2. Divine revelation and its fundamental role in setting forth the laws.
3. The return to Allah in the Hereafter, and the constructive role of this belief in the course of man’s ascent towards Allah.
4. The justice of Allah in creation and legislation.
5. Continuous leadership (Imāmah), and its fundamental role in ensuring the uninterrupted process of the revolution of Islam.
6. The exalted dignity and value of man, and his freedom coupled with responsibility before Allah. This system secures equity, justice, political, economic, social, and cultural independence, and national solidarity by recourse to:
a. Continuous ijtihād of the faqīhs possessing necessary qualifications, exercised on the basis of the Qur’an and the Sunnah of the Infallibles, upon all of whom be peace.
b. Sciences and arts and the most advanced results of human experience, together with the effort to advance them further.
c. Negation of all forms of oppression, both the infliction of and the submission to it, and of dominance, both its imposition and its acceptance.

Article 5

During the Occultation of the Imam of the time (may Allah bring forward his reappearance), the Imāmah and leadership of the Ummah devolve upon the just, pious courageous, and resourceful faqīh who is fully aware of the circumstances of his age and possessed of administrative ability. He assumes the responsibilities of this office in accordance with Article 107.

Article 57

The branches of government in the Islamic Republic are the legislature, the judiciary, and the executive. They function under the supervision of the absolute wilāyat-e-’amr and the leadership of the Ummah in accordance with the forthcoming articles of this Constitution. These branches are independent of each other.

Article 60

The functions of the executive, except in the matters that are directly placed under the jurisdiction of the Leader by the Constitution, are to be exercised by the president and the ministers.

Article 91

With a view to safeguard the Islamic ordinances and the Constitution concerning the compatibility of the legislation passed by the Islamic Consultative Assembly with Islam, a council to be known as the Guardian Council is to be constituted with the following composition:
1.six just faqīhs aware of the present needs and the issues of the day to be selected by the Leader, and
2.six jurists, specializing in different areas of law, to be elected by the Islamic Consultative Assembly from among the Muslim jurists nominated by the Head of the Judiciary.

Article 107

After the demise of the eminent marji‘ of taqlīd, great Leader of the universal Islamic revolution, and the founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Ayatollah al-’Uẓmā Imam Khomeini (quddisa sirruh al-sharif) who was recognized and accepted as marji‘ and Leader by a decisive majority of the people, the task of appointing the Leader shall be vested with the experts elected by the people. The experts will review and consult among themselves concerning all the faqīhs possessing the qualifications specified in Articles 5 and 109. In the event they find one of them better versed in Islamic regulations and the subjects of the fiqh, or political and social issues, or possessing general popularity, or special prominence for any of the qualifications mentioned in Article 109, they shall elect him as the Leader. Otherwise, in the absence of such superiority, they shall elect and declare one of them as the Leader. The Leader thus elected by the Assembly of Experts shall assume the wilāyat-e-’amr and all the responsibilities arising therefrom. The Leader is equal to the rest of the people of the country before the law.

Article 109

Following are the essential qualifications and conditions for the Leader:
1. Scholarship, as required for issuing fatwā in different fields of fiqh.
2. Justice and piety, as required for the leadership of the Islamic Ummah.
3. Right political and social perspicacity, prudence, courage, administrative facility and adequate capability for leadership. In case of multiplicity of persons fulfilling the above qualifications and conditions, the person possessing better jurisprudential and political perspicacity will be given preference.

Article 110

Following are the duties and powers of the Leadership:
1. Making the general policies of the Islamic Republic of Iran after consultation with the Expediency Council.
2. Supervising over the proper execution of the general policies of the system.
3. Issuing a decree for a national referendum.
4. Assuming supreme command of the armed forces.
5. Declaring war and peace, and mobilizing the armed forces.
6. Appointment, dismissal, and acceptance of resignation of:
a. The faqīhs of the Guardian Council.
b. The supreme judicial authority of the country.
c. The head of the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting.
d. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
e. The chief commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps.
f. The supreme commanders of the Armed Forces and the Police.
7. Resolving differences between the three branches and regulating their relations.
8. Resolving the system’s problems, that cannot be solved by conventional methods, through the Expediency Council.
9. Signing the decree formalizing the election of the President of the Republic by the people. The suitability of candidates for the Presidency of the Republic, with respect to the qualifications specified in the Constitution, must be confirmed by the Guardian Council before elections take place; and, in case of the first term [of the Presidency], by the Leadership.
10. Dismissal of the President of the Republic, with due regard for the interests of the country, after the Supreme Court holds him guilty of the violation of his constitutional duties, or after a vote of the Islamic Consultative Assembly testifying to his incompetence on the basis of Article 89 of the Constitution.
11. Pardoning or reducing the sentences of convicts, within the framework of Islamic criteria, recommended by the Head of the Judiciary.
The Leader may delegate part of his duties and powers to another person.

Article 111

Whenever the Leader becomes incapable of fulfilling his constitutional duties, lacks one of the qualifications mentioned in Articles 5 and 109, or it becomes known that he did not possess some of the qualifications initially, he will be dismissed. The authority to determine this matter is vested with the experts specified in Article 108. In the event of the death, resignation, or dismissal of the Leader, the experts shall take steps within the shortest possible time for the appointment of the new Leader. Till the appointment of the new Leader, a council consisting of the President, head of the Judiciary, and a faqīh from the Guardian Council chosen by the Expediency Council shall temporarily take over all the duties of the Leader. In the event, during this period, any one of them is unable to fulfill his duties for whatsoever reason, he will be replaced by another person chosen by the Expediency Council provided that the majority remains faqīh. This council shall take action in respect of items 1, 3, 5, and 10, and sections d, e, and f of item 6 of Article 110 upon the decision of three-fourths of the members of the Expediency Council. Whenever the Leader becomes temporarily unable to perform the duties of leadership owing to his illness or any other incident, then during this period, the council mentioned in this Article shall assume his duties.

Article 112

Upon the order of the Leader, the Expediency Council shall meet when the Guardian Council judges a bill passed by the Islamic Consultative Assembly to be against the principles of sharī‘ah or the Constitution, and the Assembly, considering the system’s interest, is unable to meet the expectations of the Guardian Council. Also, the Council shall meet for consideration on any issue forwarded to it by the Leader or in order to carry out any other responsibility mentioned in this Constitution.
The permanent and changeable members of the Council shall be appointed by the Leader.
The rules for the Council shall be formulated and approved by the Council members subject to the confirmation of the Leader.

Article 113

After the office of Leadership, the President is the highest official in the country. His is the responsibility for implementing the Constitution and acting as the head of the executive, except in matters directly concerned with (the office of) the Leadership.

Article 131

In case of the President’s death, dismissal, resignation, absence, or illness lasting longer than two months, or when his term in office has ended and a new president has not been elected due to some impediments, or similar other circumstances, his first deputy shall assume, with the approval of the Leader, the powers and functions of the President. The Council, consisting of the Speaker of the Islamic Consultative Assembly, head of the judiciary, and the first deputy of the President, is obliged to arrange for a new President to be elected within a maximum period of fifty days. In case of the first deputy’s death, or other matters which prevent him from performing his duties, or when the President does not have a first deputy, the Leader shall appoint another person in his place.

Article 142

The assets of the Leader, the President, the deputies to the President, and ministers, as well as those of their spouses and offspring, are to be examined before and after their term of office by the head of the judicial power in order to ensure they have not increased in a fashion contrary to law.

Article 157

In order to fulfill the responsibilities of the judiciary in all judicial, administrative and executive affairs, the Leader shall appoint a just Mujtahid well versed in judiciary affairs and possessing prudence and administrative abilities as the head of the judiciary for a period of five years who shall be the highest judicial authority.

Article 175

The freedom of expression and dissemination of thoughts in the Radio and Television of the Islamic Republic of Iran must be guaranteed in keeping with the Islamic criteria and the best interests of the country. The appointment and dismissal of the head of the Radio and Television of the Islamic Republic of Iran rests with the Leader. A council consisting of representatives of the President, the head of the judiciary and the Islamic Consultative Assembly — each two representative —shall supervise the functioning of this organization. The policies, the manner of managing the organization, and its supervision will be determined by law.

Article 177

The revision of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, whenever needed by the circumstances, will be done in the following manner:
After consulting the Expediency Council, the Leader issues an edict to the President stipulating the amendments or additions to be made by the Council for Revision of the Constitution which consists of:
1. Members of the Guardian Council.
2. Heads of the three branches of the government.
3. Permanent members of the Expediency Council.
4. Five members of the Assembly of Experts.
5. Ten persons selected by the Leader.
6. Three members of the Council of Ministers.
7. Three people from the judiciary.
8. Ten representatives of the Islamic Consultative Assembly.
9. Three university professors.
The method of working, manner of selection and the terms and conditions of the Council shall be determined by law. The decisions of the Council, having been confirmed and signed by the Leader, shall be valid if approved by an absolute majority vote in a national referendum.

Western Nationalism and Islamic Nationhood

This article is an introduction (pishguftar) that Martyr Murtada Mutahhari wrote for his book Khadamat-e mutaqabil-e Islam wa Iran (The Mutual Services of Islam and Iran) first published in 1349 H.Sh./1960. The translation of this book is under way and will soon be published by the Sazman-e Tablighat-e Islami, and it is hoped to be published in the future in al-Tawhid journal.

In the Name of God, the Beneficent, the Merciful

The relations, conflicts and clashes between various nations have in the present age become a daily issue which has acquired much greater significance than in any other epoch of human history. One of the problems related to it, or perhaps one of the most fundamental of them, is the problem of nationalism, its constructive elements, its scope and limits.

During the last two or three decades many new nations, whose number exceeds fifty, have come into existence, or have acquired a new shape and name. In some cases, a country or a nation was divided into two or more parts, each pursuing a different path. In some cases nations with specific ideological, religious and geographical characteristics have completely changed their philosophical and religious conditions to replace them by a totally different system of ideas and social institutions. All these changes and the birth of new nations accompanying them, were preceded by years of struggle, resistance, endeavour and bloodshed, which consumed immeasurable time, energy and talents of peoples and called for many sacrifices, small and great.

Did the nations that emerged during recent times have no existence in the past? Did the nations that were separated and divided not form a real, stable social unit in their previous state? Those nations that changed their system while preserving most of their specific traits such as language, race, ecological conditions and geographical boundaries, are they still what they were in the past? Moreover, all the main political, social, and military problems of our age are formulated in terms of nations and national interests. Nationalism is the most current and popular of all ideologies at present. Even those social and political ideologies that are opposed to nationalist tendencies, on initiating a movement, present themselves in nationalist garb and fall back upon nationalist slogans.

From a different point of view, for us Iranians, too, the issue of nationalism has contemporary relevance, in spite of the fact that our nation and homeland have not been attacked or occupied by any foreign power, and we see much difference and many contradictions between interpretations given by various individuals to nationalism. At present two factors are at work: first, there is the racial and hereditary factor which is related to our history preceding the last fourteen centuries; the second factor relates to the ideological, religious, social and cultural traditions formed and developed during the last fourteen centuries. As for our physical and racial roots, we belong to the Aryan race, and with regard to our ideological and cultural constitution, traditions and social institutions we are linked to Islam, which came to our land through a non-Aryan race. If we give basic importance to the factors of race and heredity in our definition of ‘nation’, it will, under the present circumstances, take our nation on a particular course in the future. However, if the social institutions and the ideological structure prevailing for the last fourteen centuries are considered to be of basic importance in defining our nationality, our policy and our future course will be something different. If we give priority to the Aryan factor in determining and defining Iranian nationality, its consequence in the last analysis will be to make us closely related to the Western world. And this affinity and relation to the West would influence our national and political policy, whose main result would be to break our relationship with our neighbours and non-Aryan Muslim nations and incline us towards Europe and the West. In this case, the imperialist West becomes our kin and Muslim Arabs will become strangers. On the contrary, if the ideological system, religion, and social institutions of the last fourteen centuries are regarded as the deciding factor in identifying our nationality, it will lead us to adopt a different course and policy whose basis is faith. In that case Arab, Turk, Indian, Indonesian and Chinese Muslims will be our own kinsmen, and the non-Muslim West will be alien to us.

Hence the issue of nationality is not a purely academic issue; it is a real issue of vital importance which determines the course of action and policy, the future and the destiny of a social and political unit known today as the Iranian nation. Hence it deserves to be taken up seriously and understood clearly.

 

full article

The Political Philosophy of Islam

 

If we want to make a balanced comparison between Islamic and other views in the field of polity and form of government we should make a review of the important issues in the philosophy of politics, and on every issue find out what is the view of Islam, comparing it with the other views. We must make a detailed investigation of the basic differences between them. Very briefly, we will now mention some issues and explain the views of Islam pertaining to them in order that it may be possible to make a comparison.

The first issue is the importance of social life. Islam, like the other schools of thought, emphasizes social life. But more than this it considers it a duty to attend to social problems and to struggle for the benefit of all human beings. Being indifferent to such problems is considered in Islam to be a grave sin.

This attention is so important that it sometimes becomes necessary to spend all of one’s property and even to endanger one’s own life to save others from worldly and other-worldly afflictions and harms, from going astray and from spiritual corruption, and from misfortune in the next life. It is unlikely that any school of thought other than Islam has advanced this idea so far. Of course, we believe that none of the heavenly religions have any disagreement on basic principles and rules. Naturally, they hold this view in common with Islam.

The second issue is the necessity of law for social life, since no society can survive without rules and social regulations, for otherwise it would soon succumb to chaos, deterioration and destruction. The view of Islam on this matter is also clear and does not Stand in need of an explanation. We should however, mention two points. The first point is that from the perspective of Islam, the goal of law is not only to bring about social order and discipline, but beyond this to maintain social justice; because, firstly, without justice the order would not be durable and the masses of the people would not tolerate injustice and oppression for ever; and secondly, in a society not governed by justice most people would not have the opportunity for desired growth and development and hence, the goal of man’s creation and social life would not be realized.

Another point is that, from the Islamic viewpoint, social laws should be such as to prepare the ground and context for the spiritual growth and eternal felicity of the people. At the very least they should not be inconsistent with spiritual development, for, in the view of Islam, the life of this world is but a passing phase of the entire human life which despite its short duration, has a fundamental role in human destiny. That is, it is in this phase that with his conscious behaviour the human being should prepare for himself his everlasting felicity or wretchedness. Even if a law could maintain the social order in this world but would cause eternal misfortune for humans, from this Islamic view it would not be a desirable law, even if it were to be accepted by the majority.

The third issue is how and by whom the law should be legislated. The accepted theory in most current societies is that the laws should be legislated and approved by the people themselves or their representatives. Since the consensus of all the people or of their representatives is practically impossible, the view of the majority (even if merely half plus one) is the criteria for the validity of the law.

This theory, first of all, is based on the idea that the goal of law is to satisfy the people’s needs, not to provide that which would truly benefit them. Secondly, since it is impossible to have unanimous agreement, we should suffice with the opinion of the majority. However, the first idea mentioned is not accepted by Islam, for many people wish to satisfy their bestial instincts and temporary lusts without thinking of their disastrous consequences.

Usually the number of such people is at least one half plus one, so the social laws would be dictated by the desires of such people.

It is obvious that the schools which believe in a goal beyond animal lust and base desire will not be able to condone this idea.

With regard to the second idea, that is, the validity of the vote of the majority in the absence of unanimity, it should be said that only in absence of a deciding divine and intellectual criterion can the majority be the criterion for preferring an opinion. However, in the Islamic system there do exist such divine and intellectual criteria.

In addition, usually a powerful minority, by using the facilities for widespread propaganda, has an important role in channelling the thoughts and beliefs of others, and in fact what is approved is only the desire of a limited but powerful minority, not the true desire of the majority or of all the people. Furthermore, if the criterion is that the people’s choice would be valid for themselves, why shouldn’t we also accept the choice of a minority as valid for itself, even if it would result in a type of autonomy? In this case, what would be the logical justification for governments to oppose the wishes of some social groups which they rule by force?!
From the perspective of Islam with regard to this problem, laws should be legislated in such a way that they procure the benefits of the members of the society, particularly of those who desire to improve themselves and to gain eternal felicity. It is obvious that such law should be legislated by one who has enough knowledge about the real and eternal benefits of humans, and, secondly, who does not sacrifice the benefits of others for his personal interests and vain desires. It is obvious that there is no one wiser than Almighty God, Who has no need of His servants or their works, and Who has provided divine legislation only for the sake of benefitting them.
Certainly, the social laws described in the heavenly revealed books do not explicitly state all the social rules which are necessary for every time and place, but religious law does provide a general framework for the derivation of regulations necessary for changing conditions of time and place, and, at least by observing the limits delineated by this framework it may be possible to avoid falling into the deadly valley of eternal perdition.

The fourth issue is that of who should enforce social law.
Islam, like most other political schools, requires the existence of a State as a power which is able to prevent violations of the law, and the lack of the State is equivalent to the suspension of law, chaos, and the violation of the rights of the weak.

It is obvious that there are two fundamental qualifications for administrators of the law, particularly for the one at the top of the pyramid of power: first, sufficient knowledge of the law in order to prevent infringement of it due to ignorance; and second, self-control over his desires in order to prevent the intentional misapplication of the law. Other qualifications, like administrative acumen, courage, and so on, can be considered as supplementary requirements.

Naturally, the ideal is that the administrator of the law should generally be without ignorance, selfishness, and other vices, and such a person is one who, in religious terminology, is called ma’sum (infallible). All Muslims believe in the infallibility of the Prophet, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and upon his progeny, and the Shi’ites also believe in the infallibility of the Imams, peace be upon them. In the absence of an infallible one, these criteria should be observed, to the extent possible, for the selection of the leader as well as for lower positions in the official hierarchy in a proportionate manner.

Basically, the basis of the thesis of Vilayat-e- Faqih (lit., guardianship of the jurisprudent meeting all the requisite requirements) is the proposition that a person who is nearer to the station of infallibility should occupy the position of the infallible one, i.e. on top of the pyramid of power, in order that this position may be occupied by one with the best knowledge of the precepts and laws and their fundamental bases, one who has the most piety and self-control. By means of these two basic qualifications (jurisprudence and piety) it is at least possible that he will be less likely intentionally or unintentionally to transgress against the law of Islam.
Another point which may be raised here is that from an Islamic perspective no human has any intrinsic right to rule over another, even if he issues valid and just decrees, for all people, like other creatures, have been created and are the property of Almighty God, and no one may interfere with another’s property without his permission. A human being has no right even to use his own bodily parts in a manner contrary to God’s will and consequently he cannot allow others to do so. Hence, the only one Who Himself has an absolute right to govern and to depose of anyone and anything is Almighty God. Every authority and wilD.yah should be from Him or at least with His sanction. It is obvious that Almighty God would never permit anyone to execute the law without having the necessary knowledge of His laws, or without there being a guarantee of the correctness of his deeds and obedience to the divine laws, or without piety and the necessary moral qualifications.

On the other hand, we know that except for the prophets and their selected successors, no one else was specifically designated by Almighty God to execute the law and to govern. So, people must try to find persons who resemble the prophets and the Ma’sR.mR.n (infallible ones) as closely as possible. It seems that the best way is first to select committed experts of religion (pious jurists), and then to allow them to select from among themselves the best one, for the experts may more correctly identify the best.

Such selection is safer from defects of an intentional or unintentional character.

It also has become clear that the political features of Islam derive from the basic elements of the world view of Islam and its view of man. That is, the emphasis on the just character of law and its harmony with human spiritual development derives from the view that God Almighty created all mankind in order that people may follow the way of development toward nearness to . God and eternal felicity by their meritorious conduct in life. The right of all humans to happiness and the enjoyment of the blessings of this world exists in order that all may advance on the way of their development in a better and speedier manner.

The legislation of the divine laws and religious principles, whether they apply to the individual or society, is for determining the basic outlines of this path. The conditions of expertise in law and piety, in addition to other necessary administrative qualifications, is for securing the necessary conditions for the general development of the people, for reaching eternal felicity and for preventing intentional and unintentional deviation from the correct way of social life.

By: Ayatollah Misbah Yazdi

Imam Khomeini throught the eyes of a westerner

Although there has been talk about seeing the leader of the Islamic Republic, the much hated, much revered Ayatollah Khomeini, I had learned that it was better – with something a portentously important as such a visit – to make the effort and then accept what happened.

…Imam Khomeini was a symbol in the West of the most obdurate atavistic pride and implacable hatred. And even some Westerners with whom I had talked who had met Khomeini commented on his charisma, but in the same breath remarked at the total absence of humour or warmth in his demeanour.

Now I had the opportunity to judge myself.

…Now I was to see in the flesh the personage whose will had dominated Iran, whose policies (although attributed to God) had caused so much disruption in Iran and had drawn so much negativity from the West.

I secured a seat at the front of the hall; Khomeini’s chair, draped with a white sheet, was situated on a stage above us at least fifteen feet from floor level.

…We were there for about forty-five minutes before there were signs that the Imam was about to make his entrance. The signal was clear; several other turbaned ‘ulama emerged from the door and indicated to the mullah who was waiting on stage that the chieftain, priest, holy man commander and Imam was on his way. At the appearance of Khomeini in the doorway everyone jumped to his feet and began shouting, “Khomeini!” “Khomeini!” “Khomeini!” in the most vibrant athletic, rejoicing, militant tribute that I had ever witnessed for another human being. Everyone seemed completely taken over by the spontaneous surge of love and adulation, and yet there was the proclaiming with every cell of their heart the absolute confidence that what and who they were honouring was worthy of such honour in the eyes of Allah. Indeed I would say that the explosion of ecstasy and power that greeted the Imam was itself not so much a simple reflex based upon a fixed idea of the Imam; it was rather the natural and exuberant hymn of praise, of celebration that was demanded by the very majesty and overpowering charisma of this man. For once the door opened for him I experienced a hurricane of energy surge through the door, and in his brown robes, his black-turbaned head, his white beard he stirred every molecule in the building and riveted the attention in a way that made everything else disappear. He was a flowing mass of light that penetrated into the consciousness of each person in the hall. He destroyed all images that one tried to hold before one in sizing him up. He was so dominant in his presence that I found myself organized in my sensations by that which took me far beyond my own concepts, my own way of processing experience.

I had expected-no matter what the apparent stature of the man to find myself scrutinizing his face, exploring his motivation, wondering about his real nature. Khomeini’s power, grace, and absolute domination destroyed all my modes of evaluation and I was left to simply experience the energy and feeling that radiated from his presence on the stage. A hurricane he was, yet immediately one could see there was a point of absolute stillness inside that hurricane; while fierce and commanding, he was yet serene and receptive. Something was immovable inside him, yet that immovability moved the whole country of Iran. This was no ordinary human being; in fact even of all the so called saints I had met-the Dalai Lama, Buddhist monks, Hindu sages-none possessed quite the electrifying presence of Khomeini. For those who could see (and feel) there could be no question about his integrity, nor about the claim, however muted by people like Yazdi, by his people that he had gone beyond the normal (or abnormal) selfhood of the human being and had taken residence in something absolute. This absoluteness was declared in the air, it was declared in the movement of his body, it was declared in the motion of his hands, it was declared in the fire of his personality, it was declared in the stillness of his consciousness. There was no mystery about why he was so loved by millions of Iranians and Muslims throughout the world and he demonstrated, to this observer at least, the empirical foundation for the notion of higher states of consciousness. Yes, the severity, the humourlessness, the absolutist judgement was apparent; yet given the circumstances within which he was placed, there was the affirmation of appropriateness in his every gesture and aspect. This was the most extraordinary person I had seen.

At first he did not speak; another religious leader addressed the audience, Khomeini sitting in a kind of immaculate silence and perfect equilibrium. He was motionless; he was detached; he was in an ocean of peacefulness; and yet something was in pure motion; something was dynamically involved; something was ready to wage constant war. He dwarfed all those people whom I had met in Iran; he dominated the stage even while the other mullah spoke.

All eyes were on Khomeini, and there was not the slightest trace of egotism, of self-consciousness, even, if I can say it, of inner dialogue or random thinking. His whole being focused relentlessly yet spontaneously on the point of concentration that aesthetically and spiritually fitted into the dramatic scene we were witnessing. Despite the fierce intention, the absolute sense of uncompromising rectitude, there was yet the sense of something perfectly effortless and smooth that dictated the manifest movements of his hands, the sound of his throat clearing, the focus of his attention. Here hundreds of patriots and Muslims had shouted his greatness, had sworn their love, their absolute adulation; yet while receiving all this he remained within himself, he remained unmoved; he remained in the dignity of some imperturbable inner state that was beyond the boundaries of a causation that I was familiar with.

The reader may wince at the extravagance of my description of this man; he must know, however, that despite everything that I had heard, despite the contradictory evidence I had received before (the seeming violence of the rhetoric, the lack of creative playfulness and so on), the actual and immediate impression of what Imam Khomeini was had nothing to do with some sort of idea or concept. The experience was too overpowering for that. Imagine for a moment the pushing of the body of oneself out of one’s mother’s womb, or the moment when one might awaken to the fact that one was being created inside a foetal body, or the moment when one was conscious of dying, or the moment when one first discovered the power of egos: these experiences have as their basis a primary determinant outside of the frame of reference the individual; what is dominant is the intrinsic nature of the reality which is giving birth to the experience. Such is what happened on the morning of Wednesday, February 9th, 1982 in North Tehran. The subjectivity of the experience seemed to be objectified by something that was at the very basis of my consciousness; I transcended the mode of experience that normally determined what sensations, thoughts, feelings constellated into my awareness of self. Khomeini was that powerful; Khomeini was that strong; Khomeini was that egoless and invincible.

…He was not someone with whom one could discuss the meaning of individual choice, or the sensuous beauty of ballet, but he was yet the most formidable human being on the stage of international politics, and he seemed, at least from my vantage point, to be easily a contemporary of Christ himself; not that Khomeini would ever compare himself with Christ – but he radiated that same uncompromising integrity and one-pointed intention.

…And yet I must go further; Imam Khomeini broke into my heart and my brain with a current of emotion that I can only describe as extreme positivity, what I would prefer to call ‘love’.

By Robin Woodsworth Carlsen

From his book

‘The Imam and his Islamic Revolution’

His special attention to Ayatullah Khamenei:

His special attention to Ayatullah Khamenei

 

As per his extreme order and discipline in his work, after the summary of the news, Imam appointed 8 o’clock in the morning for office work and stamping bills.   He never changed this timetable.

 

Even on those days that occasionally, because of slight illness or intense cold weather and frost, that he didn’t come to his work room, we were authorised to go to his room, so that no matter what, the work of the office and businesses did not get delayed or suspended.  So that order and timing did not clash, if he foresaw a certain issue that would prevent him being on time, he would inform us the day before.

 

After the completion of this portion of his work, he carried out the programme of reciting aqd (marriage contracts for couples) and then hand-kissing, and after that, if a private meeting for heads or various persons had been arranged beforehand, they were carried out.  Despite all these scheduled programmes, exceptions also occurred whereby Imam ordered the schedule to be suspended.

 

One of these exceptions related to Ayatullah Khamenei. When Imam became aware that he was present in the office at the start, i.e. at 8 o’clock in the morning, he instructed us: “All of you leave your work until later.”  In this manner, against the norm, first the meeting with Ayatullah Khamanei was carried out and then we got busy in our work.

 

At that time, we did not understand the distinction and special attention given by Imam to Ayatullah Khamenei, but it wasn’t long, that with the passing of time, another example of the foresight and deep thinking of the Imam became apparent.[43]

Leadership from the Perspective of Imam Khomeini

 Great article about Islamic leadership and the concept of wilayat al-faqih from the perspective of the founder of the Islamic revolution. This is taken from Sayyid Khamenei’s site: www.leader.ir

Leadership from the Perspective of Imam Khomeini (q.)

Conditions of Leadership

The necessary conditions to be available in a leader are directly connected to the nature of the Islamic government. Disregarding the general conditions like wisdom and proper management, two basic conditions, i.e. justice and to know the law, should also be available.
Even after the demise of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.), when the bitter controversy about who would succeed him appeared, there was no theoretical dispute among Muslims over such an issue that his successor should be a knowledgeable and virtuous man. Mainly there were two controversial issues:
1- Since the Islamic government is a government of law, the person who governs should have a wide knowledge of law as it is referred to in traditions. It is necessary for the ruler as well as every one who takes charge of a post or occupies a job to acquire such knowledge; the only difference is that the leader should be the most knowledgeable. Our Infallible Imams (a.) had just used this same point – that the Imam (the religious leader) has to have superiority over others – to prove their imamate. Also, the queries that Shī‘ah scholars raise and criticize others fall within this very domain when they say: the caliph did not know the answer to a question about the Islamic Law or he did a certain act which was against the Islamic law, so he was not qualified for this office.(1)
Muslims consider justice and knowing the law as essential conditions and basic elements while other things are neither significant nor necessary. For example, to know how the angles are or what the characteristics of the Creator (Allah) are has nothing to do with the matter of leadership. Similarly, suppose someone knows everything about physics and has discovered all the natural forces or knows music well, he will neither be qualified to be a caliph nor be given priority – over those who are just and knowledgeable in Islamic law – to occupy the office of leader.
Therefore, what is really related to the caliphate – which was the matter of discussion and talk during the era of the Noble Prophet (s.) and our Infallible Imams (a.) and which is accepted by all Muslims – is that the ruler or the caliph should, firstly, know the Islamic law and, secondly, be just and perfect in both religious beliefs and morals. This fact is admitted by the reason as well because the Islamic government is a government of law and not a government of desires or a dictatorship.
If the leader is not acquainted with law, he will not be competent to govern people. Because if he follows [another person] in taqlīd, that will weaken his power; and if he does not, he cannot put the Islamic law into effect. The tradition that “the Islamic jurists rule over the kings” (الفقهاء حکام علی السلاطین) is undisputed.(2) If kings really follow Islam, they should follow the Islamic jurists and ask their opinion. In this way the jurists themselves will be the real rulers and, therefore, the power should officially be given to them and not to those who are compelled to follow jurists as they do not know the law.
2- A leader should be perfect in religious beliefs and morals, just and spiritually not polluted with sins. The individual who wants to take the responsibility for applying the Islamic penal code properly, to control the Muslims’ assets and country’s expenditures and wants Allah, the Exalted, to delegate him the administration of His servants’ affairs should not be a sinner because Allah, the Almighty, does not allow a tyrant to have such a power (لاینال عهدی الظالمین).(3)
Unless the ruler is just, he will not administer justice in providing Muslims with their rights, collecting and distributing taxes properly, and putting the penal code into effect. Such a ruler may also make his friends, supporters and relatives take control of people and spend Muslims’ assets in fulfilling his own personal whims and desires.(4)

It Is Not Necessary to Be a Marji‘

I was and I am still believing and I am insisting on the belief that it is not necessary that an Islamic leader should be a marji‘. A just mujtahid chosen by the honored experts – who are the representatives of the whole country [in the Assembly of Experts] – is just enough. When the people vote for the experts in order that they appoint a just mujtahid to rule them and those experts, then, has really assigned somebody to the leadership post, the leadership of such a person would be accepted by the people. In such a case, this person becomes the walī (leader) that has been elected by the people and whose orders and commands are, consequently, effective.(5)

The Model of Leadership

In the early days of Islam, the ideal Islamic government ruled twice: first at the time of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (s.) and secondly when Imam Ali ibn Abī Tālib (a.) governed in Kūfah. They were the only two examples that the immaterial values dominated. In other words, they were governments of justice in which the rulers had never violated the law. During those two periods, a government of law was in control and perhaps we will never find another government of law with such qualities all over the world. A government whose walī al-amr – ‘king’ or ‘president’ in nowadays’ terms – was equal to the simplest citizen living there before the law.
It happened in the government of the early Islam. In this regard, there is a story about Amīr al-Mu’minīn, Imam Ali (a.). During his rule which was extended to include the Arab Peninsula, Egypt, Iran and many other areas, while it was he who was assigning judges, an individual from Yemen – living under the control of this very government – brought a lawsuit against the Imam (a.) and the judge summoned Imam Ali (a.). When Imam (a.) arrived in the court, the judge tried to show respect for him. Although the judge was really appointed by Amīr al-Mu’minīn (a.) himself, Imam (a.) said, ‘While judging do not respect only one party. He and I should be equal. And after the judge issued a rule against Imam Ali (a.), he accepted it cheerfully.
In such a government all are equal before the law because the Islamic law is a divine one and all – whether the ruler, the Prophet, the Imam or the common people – are equal before Allah, be He blessed, the Exalted.(6)

Leader among People

The Islamic leader was not like kings and presidents. He was coming and sitting among the people in a small mosque in Madīnah and listening to their words. Those who had the country’s destiny in their hands were meeting the common people in the same mosque in such a way that when somebody entered the mosque could not differentiate the leader and government officials from the populace. They were just like people in their dress style and association. Justice was so applied that if a citizen from the lowest class of the society took a legal action against the first person in the country, the judge used to summon the leader who would attend the court.(7)

Wilāyah of the Jurist Is against Dictatorship

In Islam it is the law which rules. The Noble Prophet (s.) was also following the law, the Divine law. He was not able to violate it. Addressing the Holy Prophet, Allah the Exalted says that if you say something against that which I say, I will seize you and cut off your aorta.( If the Prophet (s.) was a dictator or a person that people were afraid lest he may dictate to them on enjoying the whole power, then a jurist could, also, be a dictator.(9)
A jurist will never be despotic. A jurist with such characteristics is just. This kind of justice differs from the social justice. Jurist’s justice is so that if he lies just once or if he has only a single look at a non-maḥram, he will be no longer considered as just. Such a person cannot and does not act against the law.(10)

Powers of the Leader and Government

If an eligible person with these two characteristics rises and comes to power, he will acquire the same wilāyah (authorities) which were established for the noble Prophet Muhammad (s.) as far as administering the society is concerned. And, therefore, all people are required to obey him.
Such understanding that the governmental powers of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) were more than those of Imam Ali (a.), or that the government authorities of Amīr al-Mu’minīn (a.) should be more than those of the jurist, is just wrong. Of course, the moral qualities of the Prophet Muhammad (s.) is universally the best, and then those of Amīr al-Mu’minīn (a.). However, being in the highest rank of moralities does not increase one’s governmental powers. Allah; who had given such authorities to the Prophet (s.) and the Infallible Imams (a.) like mobilizing and calling up the armed forces, assigning rulers and mayors, collecting taxes and spending them on the basis of Muslims’ common interest; had given the same authorities to this very government with only one difference that He did not recognize a certain person for such a post, but gave a general title for it which is: ‘the just Islamic jurist’.
When we say that after the disappearance [of the Imam of Time (aj.)] the powers, which the Prophet (s.) and the Imams (a.) had, are given to the just jurist; nobody should misunderstand this by thinking that the position of jurists is the same with that of the Imams (a.) and the Prophet (s.) because the discourse here is not on positions, but on duties and responsibilities. Wilāyah, which means the power of governing and administrating a country and putting the sacred Islamic laws into effect, is a very difficult and important duty. It does not provide the person with an unusual station or position to put him in a higher class in comparison with the normal individuals. In other words, wilāyah here; which refers to ruling, enforcing laws and administrating [a country]; is not an honor, as many conceive, but rather a weighty and great responsibility.
Among the matters that the jurist should accept its responsibility is the enforcement of the Islamic penal code. The question here is that is there a distinction among the Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.), the Infallible Imams (a.) and a jurist so far as applying penal code is concerned? If jurist’ position is lower, should he pass a lighter sentence? Should the number of lashes received by an adulterer/ adulteress – which is 100 – be 150 if judged by the Noble Prophet (s.), 100 if judged by Amīr al-Mu’minīn (a.) and only 50 if judged by a jurist? Or it is the executive ruler who should have the responsibility of putting the Divine Penal Code into effect no matter whether he is the Prophet (s.a.w.); Imam Ali (a.), his representative, or a judge in Baṣrah or Kūfa; or an Islamic jurist now.
Also, the Noble Prophet (s.) and Amīr al-Mu’minīn (a.) were responsible for collecting taxes, khums, zakat, jizyah and taxes on lands. How much zakat should Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.) take? Should he take – from somewhere – twice as much as he take from another place?
What would Imam Ali (a.) do when he became a caliph? What about you if you become a jurist of time and influential? Is the wilāyah of the Prophet (s.) with respect to these matters varies from that of Imam Ali (a.) and a jurist? Allah, the Exalted, had appointed the Prophet Muhammad (s.) as the walī (leader) for all Muslims and as long as he was alive, he had control over even Amīr al-Mu’minīn (a.).
When the Prophet (s.a.w.) passed away, Imam Ali (a.) also had control over all Muslims even over the next Imam. It means that his governmental commands should have been obeyed by all and he was able to appoint and depose local rulers.
Just as the Noble Prophet(s.) was charged with implementing rules and establishing the Islamic system and Allah had made him leader and ruler of Muslims and considered submission to him as mandatory, a just jurist should also be leader and ruler, apply Divine rules and endeavor to set the Islamic social system up.(11)

Governance Is a Primary Rule and Has Priority over Secondary Rules

If the government powers were considered within the domain of the Divine secondary rules, the delegation of the Divine government and the absolute wilāyah to the Prophet Muhammad (s.) would be a meaningless phenomenon.
The governance, which is a part of the absolute wilāyah of the Prophet Muhammad (s.), is among the primary Islamic rules and takes precedence over the whole secondary rules including the prayer, fasting and ḥajj. The [Islamic] ruler can ruin a mosque or a house which obstructs a street and pay the owner its price. He can also temporarily ban the mosques – when necessary – or demolish a mosque which proves detrimental [to the public good] in case it is impossible to prevent its harm without destroying it. The government can unilaterally revoke a Shar‘ī contract that it has itself signed with people when it is understood to be against the interest of the county or Islam. It is also able to stop any practice, be it a worship or not, if it is recognized to be against the good of Islam. The government can even temporarily prevent performing ḥajj, which is among the important Divine obligations, when it proves to be against the Islamic country’s interest.(12)

Wilāyah and Right of Ownership

In Islam it is legal [to own] property but it is restricted by certain limitations. Limitation of ownership is among the issues which are within the jurist’s area of competence due to his wilāyah; which [wilāyah of the jurist] is, unfortunately, not clear for our intellectuals. In spite of the fact that ownership is respected by the sacred Legislator, walī al-amr (the Leader of Muslims) has the power to restrict a legal property or even confiscate it if he realizes that such ownership goes against the advantage of Islam and Muslims.(13)

____________________

Footnotes:

1. Bihar ul-Anwar – vol. 25, p. 116; Nahj ul-Balaaghah, p. 588, sermon 172; al-Ihtijaaj – vol. 1, p. 229.
2. Mustadrak al-Wasā’il – vol. 17, p. 321; Kitāb al- Qa