Note: Dr. Mohadeseh Moeinifar, a faculty member at Imam Khomeini International University in Qazvin, has been engaged in research and authorship in the fields of jurisprudence and law related to cyberspace and media for many years. Articles such as “Children’s Rights, Islamic Rules for Digital Parenting, and Their Enforcement in Iranian Laws,” “Requirements for Upholding Privacy Rights in the Context of the Internet of Things from the Perspective of Iranian Law,” and “Requirements for Identifying and Upholding Rights in the Digital Space” are among her contributions in this field. We discussed cyberspace policymaking with her. While precisely outlining the requirements of policymaking, she also highlighted the conceivable areas for jurisprudential engagement in this domain. The full text of this exclusive interview is presented below:

Contemporary Jurisprudence: What does policymaking regarding cyberspace entail? What are its requirements and dimensions?

Moeinifar: At a macro level, policy refers to devising practical solutions to address specific social issues or to achieve particular objectives. Accordingly, cyberspace policymaking involves a set of measures and programs designed to influence people’s behavior with the aim of improving the state of cyberspace. However, policy tools in this context can be divided into five categories: information, laws and regulations, taxation and price control, research, and direct investment. Regarding the first, the government must propose programs to raise awareness among the public or target groups and facilitate their implementation. In the second category, the government strives to improve the condition of target groups by enacting laws and regulations. In terms of taxation and price control, startups that have emerged and developed in cyberspace can benefit from tax exemptions, while other businesses may face heavier taxation. Regarding research, it must be acknowledged that research projects to evaluate government performance in this and other areas are conducted in all countries. In terms of investment, the government must allocate budgets to create facilities and infrastructure, not only to establish regulations and awareness but also to provide practical access to cyberspace, such as developing the necessary infrastructure for a national internet or creating national platforms.

Contemporary Jurisprudence: What are the requirements and characteristics of successful cyberspace policymaking?

Moeinifar: For successful cyberspace policymaking, several key factors must be considered:

First, successful cyberspace policymaking is achieved when an accurate assessment of the demands of the public and citizens regarding cyberspace is obtained. Subsequently, efforts should be made to balance these demands while considering appropriate ethical, legal, and religious criteria to arrive at a suitable list of priorities.

Second, one of the most critical elements of policymaking is responsibility and accountability, which is equally relevant to successful cyberspace policymaking. This characteristic may even be of greater importance in this context, as issues in this domain significantly impact various aspects of human life, and their involvement in certain areas can be highly sensitive.

Third, effectiveness is another feature of successful policymaking. This means that cyberspace policies must have a tangible impact on target groups to achieve their intended objectives.

Fourth, cost-effectiveness is essential in cyberspace policymaking. This implies that the costs of implementing cyberspace policies should not impose excessive burdens on the national budget while ensuring that the policies are executed with reasonable costs.

Fifth, cyberspace policymaking must be based on justice. Providing equal access to resources and facilities related to cyberspace, such as the internet or other relevant services, can be a hallmark of a successful policy.

Sixth, alignment between short-term and long-term impacts in cyberspace policymaking is crucial. This involves addressing current needs while simultaneously considering future requirements. This feature is particularly significant in implementing successful cyberspace policies, as the cyberspace domain is constantly evolving due to technological advancements.

Contemporary Jurisprudence: Does the discipline of jurisprudence inherently possess the capacity and tools to shape “policies,” or is its influence limited to the legal and legislative domains?

Moeinifar: I would first prefer to reframe this question as follows: legislation or regulation is itself a significant component of policies. Therefore, the question should be which aspect of policymaking the discipline of jurisprudence influences. As previously mentioned, policy tools in this context can be divided into five categories: information, laws and regulations, taxation and price control, research, and direct investment. It appears that jurisprudence can play a significant role in the first two categories. In terms of awareness-raising, a jurist can take effective steps by articulating jurisprudential rulings related to cyberspace, particularly by emphasizing the authority of religious scholars to maximize this impact and not limiting it to mere derivation of rulings. In the domain of laws and regulations, legislative jurisprudence, as an emerging field, can significantly enhance the influence of jurisprudence on legal principles and the establishment of legal rules.

Contemporary Jurisprudence: Is “policymaking” inherently a single-disciplinary endeavor, or must it necessarily involve the collaboration of multiple disciplines? If so, what is the role of jurisprudence in cyberspace policymaking?

Moeinifar: The ultimate goal of policymaking is to address human needs. Therefore, relying solely on one discipline is insufficient to understand the various dimensions of humanity and its needs. Instead, multiple disciplines must be utilized together to achieve an accurate understanding of modern humanity and its requirements. The diversity of policy tools further underscores the role of other sciences in shaping policies. Jurisprudence, law, social sciences, statistics, management, geography, economics, and other disciplines play significant roles in determining these tools.

Contemporary Jurisprudence: From a jurisprudential perspective, what policies are recommended for cyberspace governance?

Moeinifar: Given the rapid technological advancements in this field, the most critical governance policy in cyberspace is based on the principle of negating dominance (Nafy-e Sabil). As mentioned, countries’ approaches to cyberspace governance are divided into three groups: the first group, such as the United States, governs the macro layers of global cyberspace; the second group is subordinate to the first; and the third group operates independently but lacks specific rules for cyberspace governance. Based on this, internal independence in managing and governing cyberspace is of particular importance.

The second cyberspace governance policy is based on the principle of preserving the system, which can encompass various dimensions such as individual, social, economic, and national security.

The third cyberspace governance policy involves coordination among the various layers of cyberspace governance, ensuring a logical connection between different types of governance, such as data governance and platform governance.

The fourth governance policy can be based on the principle of enjoining good and forbidding evil, thereby opening the door for public participation in this matter.

Contemporary Jurisprudence: What are the potential challenges and harms of involving jurisprudence in cyberspace policymaking? What should be done to address these challenges and harms?

Moeinifar: Given the approach of jurisprudence and its capacity to provide guidance for human life in all domains, it seems that this question carries a bias, portraying jurisprudence as interfering in cyberspace policymaking. In contrast, the claim of providing guidance for human life cannot be fulfilled without governance. Therefore, jurisprudence can serve as an effective tool for successful cyberspace governance. Nevertheless, some general challenges of cyberspace governance include:

1. The diversity of perceptions regarding cyberspace and the lack of theoretical consensus, which can negatively impact the role of jurisprudence in cyberspace governance.
2. Disparities in views on how to engage with emerging cyberspace technologies, which may also exist among jurists.
3. A shortage of specialized jurisprudential research centers focused on cyberspace, a challenge that also applies to other disciplines.
4. The challenge of developing human resources in the cyberspace domain, which can be particularly significant for specialists in jurisprudential studies of cyberspace.