A member of the scientific council of the jurisprudence department of politics and international relations of the research institute of contemporary jurisprudence says: During the last four decades, the philosophy of elections in the Islamic system has been formed based on three common jurisprudential theories, which the basis of religious rationality lies in the basic challenge of the elites and, according to them, the mass of people in The last four decades have been about elections in the Islamic Republic.

Hujjat al-Islam Muhsin Muhajernia adds: During the last four decades, the philosophy of elections in the Islamic system has been formed based on three popular jurisprudential theories. These three points of view are the basis of the open and hidden discussions of the opinion-makers and the basis of the perception and power of the majority and have influenced the intellectual and practical process of the elections. These three perspectives have been the basis of religious rationality in the fundamental challenge of the elites and, accordingly, the mass of the people in the last four decades regarding the elections in the Islamic Republic.

Explaining the first theory, he says: This perspective, which can be named as “choice of governorship”, believed to be that absolute sovereignty over the world and man belongs to God, and God has made man the ruler of his social destiny. Therefore, the principle of the provincial system from the top to the bottom is elected by the nation. This choice is both a right and a duty for the citizens of the Islamic society. The most important concept of the Islamic revolution was the “power of choice”. The Iranian nation did not have such power of choice in the system of imperial tyranny. With the revolution, the principle of the Islamic system and wilayat al-faqih were elected, and in the system-building stage, both wilayat and government were registered in the constitution as elected by the nation. And “the votes of the people” became the basis of provincial governance. The late Imam, may his soul rest in peace, wrote in the historic letter of the revision of the constitution to Ayatullah Meshkini, the head of that parliament: “If the people voted for experts to appoint a righteous mujtahid to lead their government, when they also appointed a person to assume the leadership, he is accepted by the people. In this case, he becomes the “chosen guardian of the people” and his ruling is valid. According to this point of view, all the elements and forces of the provincial system are elected by the people and “elections” as a “divine gift” and an indicator of religious democracy are relevant.

In the continuation of this meeting, the professor of al-bahth al-kharij and university pointed to the second point of view and said: Over time, a theory was formed, which today is known as the “Kashf al-wilayeh” point of view. This point of view believes that the election is not objective, but it is a method to discover the province. The basis of this view is that the legitimacy of the authority of the jurist during the absence of Imam al-Mahdi, may Allah hasten his reappearance, is by divine appointment and people have no right in this appointment. People are obliged to “discover” the jurist and provide the basis for his rule. The elections mentioned in the constitution are the “way” of development. The powers of the state that are accepted at the discretion of the jurist, their “choice” is irrelevant. From their point of view, since the presidency derives its legitimacy from the legal guardian, it is necessary to obey him. People should try to discover “more qulified” and vote for him according to the Islamic law. The reason for being accountable and representing the people and dismissing the presidency is only the discretion of the jurist. According to this theory, representatives of leadership experts do not have the right to supervise the legal guardian because their status is lower than the legal guardian.

According to the discretion of the legal guardian, they are obliged according to the conditions stipulated in the constitution, the legitimacy of which is from the legal guardian. But they should discover the jurist and introduce him to the people. Therefore, the phenomenon of “elections” from this point of view is a kind of expediency for the discovery of al-wilayeh, which causes the realization of al-wilayeh and the extension of the legal guardian.

He went on to explain the political philosophy of kashf point of view and said: “Political philosophy in Kashf point of view is based on divine sovereignty and appointment and religious legitimacy, and the people are considered as “Muwalla Alaihim” that the philosophy of government and governorship is for guidance and prosperity. They are forged. Their selection is not based on the right, but it is a divine obligation in line with allegiance to the province, which is a condition for its fulfillment. Based on this point of view, people’s election is the “explorer” and wilayat al-faqih is the “revealed” matter. What is important and original in the category of elections in the Islamic Republic is the “revealed” matter, and the reveler only has a “method” to discover the reality.

Mr. Muhajernia, explaining the third theory regarding elections in the Islamic Republic, said: The third perspective is known as “Tawkil al-wilayah”, which believes that elections are a gift from God to determine the fate of society. Because public destiny is like “common property” whose shareholders are individual citizens. These citizens vote based on their “share rights”. They choose both the legal guardians and the provincial system, and they also choose the pillars and forces of the country and give them power of attorney based on the legal representation contract to manage the affairs of the nation. According to this point of view, the principle of elections is relevant.

In the end, referring to these three theories that have caused the creation of three types of “political philosophies” in the category of elections in the Islamic system, he said: Based on the first perspective, the establishment of the Islamic jurisprudence and the Islamic government from the beginning of its forging by God based on the observance of interests and it has been the corruption of humans and their happiness and guidance. When establishing this religious matter, God considered two pillars of enjoying religious conditions called “legitimacy” and people’s satisfaction called “acceptance” and then the guardianship of the faqih as the legitimate guardianship in continuation of the guardianship of the infallible imams (‘a). And the guardianship of the Messenger of God (s) has been appointed. Without any of these two pillars, the guardianship will not be formed. Legitimate government without acceptance is authoritarian and an acceptable government without legitimacy is also secular. According to the first two views, the principle of the legal guardianship and the Islamic government have divine legitimacy, with the difference that the Kashfi view believes that the divine legitimacy is fully assigned to the guardianship and the guardian of the jurist is installed in the position of proof and is discovered by the people’s choice. But according to the first point of view, the legitimacy of the province depends on the choice of the people. The decree of appointment is given to the guardian of all conditions when the people’s choice is attached to it. It is the same as the obligation of Friday prayer, which is legitimate with the addition of the two pillars of “the Friday imam” and “the presence of at least five imams”. If the Imam of Friday is also the Prophet (s), he cannot perform Friday prayers without the Imam, and millions of Imams cannot perform Friday prayers without the Imam of Friday. But the political philosophy in Tawakkili’s point of view, it seems that the legitimate guardianship that has been proposed in jurisprudence is a matter of preparation and guidance according to the dictates of reason, that people based on their reason choose trustworthy and legitimate rulers and give them power of attorney to manage the common destiny of the society. And they do not have any guardianship over the people.