Mohammad Kazem Haqani-Fazl

Jurisprudence of Governance in Cyberspace/1

We have witnessed how a single event can transform the trajectory of humanity. The First and Second World Wars profoundly altered many beliefs of the modern world. The invention of external storage devices easily turned compact discs into relics, and today, access to the web has rendered those storage devices obsolete, relegated to desk drawers and pockets. Smartphones, which have likely been around for little more than a decade, now serve as telephones, televisions, teaching tools, navigation aids, wallets for purchases, and much more. A single smartphone has consigned all these technological products to museums. How, then, can we predict the future?!

In the past, futurology might have been considered a form of entertainment or a pastime, with people consulting fortune-tellers and seers to gain mere conjectures about the future. However, with the increasing seriousness of governance—encompassing policymaking, legislation, and law enforcement across various domains—futurology has gained paramount importance. The question now is: What will the future of governance in cyberspace look like? Hojjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Mohammad Kazem Haqani-Fazl believes that the pace of global transformations is so rapid that predicting even the next ten years is extremely challenging, let alone 50 or 100 years into the future. However, the Director of the Encyclopedia of Contemporary Jurisprudence offers an intriguing prediction regarding the role of religious knowledge in the governance of cyberspace in the future. The full text of this exclusive commentary by this professor and researcher from the Qom Seminary is as follows:

We must acknowledge that the speed and scope of changes in today’s world are such that predicting the future is nearly impossible. This rapid and extensive transformation is even more pronounced in the field of information technology compared to other domains. Therefore, any speculation about the long-term future, even a decade from now, is, in my view, baseless.

The future, in the sense of 100 years from now, is far beyond our current imagination. However, for the next ten years, one can predict that the role of communication tools (not necessarily what we currently refer to as cyberspace) will expand significantly.

The factors influencing future lifestyles are far beyond individual preferences or governmental will. My mind cannot foresee anything definitive, as we have seen how a single event can alter humanity’s course. The First and Second World Wars transformed many beliefs of the modern world. The invention of external storage devices turned compact discs into relics, and access to the web has made those storage devices redundant, left in desk drawers and pockets. Smartphones, which have likely been around for little more than a decade, now serve as telephones, televisions, teaching tools, navigation aids, wallets for purchases, and much more. A single smartphone has consigned all these technological products to museums. How, then, can we predict the future?!

The only point I can rely on is my understanding of the trajectory the modern world has followed in recent decades. Based on this, it can be stated that, moving forward, we will continuously witness a reduction in the influence of governments and a shrinking scope of state intervention. The world is moving toward individualism and the empowerment of human individuality. Therefore, it can be said that governance in cyberspace, in the foreseeable future, will lack a subject for discussion or contemplation.

From this, it follows that when governance in cyberspace becomes irrelevant due to the absence of its subject, religious knowledge will also have no role in cyberspace governance. Cyberspace and the world of communications will be in the hands of individuals, wealthy elites, and economic cartels, not rulers.

On this basis, if religious individuals wish to step into the future with open eyes, they must strive to strengthen the civic power of religion. Instead of focusing on political power, they should, while they still have access to political power, use it to serve the civic power of religion.

Source: External Source