Contemporary Jurisprudence

Examination of Good Governance from the Perspective of Political Jurisprudence in the 262nd Scientific Session of the Research Institute for Contemporary Jurisprudence Studies

Translated by AI

The scientific session of the Research Institute for Contemporary Jurisprudence Studies, centering on "Reading Good Governance from the Perspective of Political Jurisprudence," provided a platform for presenting emerging views in the field of Islamic Political Jurisprudence.
In this scientific session, Hujjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Dr. Mohsen Mohajernia emphasized the necessity of presenting a coherent jurisprudential model for governance and, by distinguishing between "Government" (Hukumat) and "Governance" (Hukmrani), enumerated the key indicators of the desired system (such as transparency and justice).
He also, while defining Political Jurisprudence as an intra-jurisprudential discipline, emphasized the importance of determining a macro-theoretical framework.
In contrast, Dr. Seyyed Sadeq Haqiqat, in his critique, demonstrated that these discussions are still in the stages of theoretical formation. His critique focused on the sufficiency of the proposed frameworks as well as the limits of the authority of Political Jurisprudence in entering dynamic discussions of power. He called for the explanation of stronger theological foundations as well as the alignment of the proposed frameworks with the traditional view of jurists.

The two hundred and sixty-second scientific session of the Research Institute for Contemporary Jurisprudence Studies, titled “Reading Good Governance from the Perspective of Political Jurisprudence,” was held with the presentation of Hujjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Dr. Mohsen Mohajernia, a faculty member of the Research Institute for Islamic Culture and Thought.

According to the Information Portal of the Research Institute for Contemporary Jurisprudence Studies, Dr. Mohajernia, at the beginning of this session, emphasizing the necessity of presenting a jurisprudential model for good governance, said:
“When we place governance vis-à-vis Political Jurisprudence, it entails that jurisprudence presents a model for good governance.”

Pointing to the historical experience of various governance models in the Islamic world, he added: “From the Caliphate model among the Sunnis to the Guardianship (Velayi) system in Shiite jurisprudence and even Republic systems, all are models that have been experienced both in theory and in practice.”

This professor of the Seminary and University considered the first step in the discussion of governance to be the explanation of the position of Political Jurisprudence and stated: “Political Jurisprudence is a branch of jurisprudence that examines politics in the realm of Applied Jurisprudence (Fiqh-e Muzaf) and is an intra-jurisprudential discipline, not merely an interdisciplinary one.”

Distinguishing between “Government” and “Governance,” Dr. Mohajernia stated: “Governance is different from governing; governance is a process that is the result of the interaction of power, civil society, the private sector, and formal structures to achieve the common goals of society.”

Continuing, he enumerated the indicators of good governance as transparency, free access to information, consensus and public satisfaction, justice, accountability, and public participation in power, and emphasized: “The realization of these components is the condition for public satisfaction and the efficiency of the political system.”

In another part of his remarks, proposing three frameworks of the “System of Ummah and Imamate,” the “System of State and Nation,” and the “Political System of Imamate-Nation,” the faculty member of the Research Institute for Culture and Thought noted: “Any discussion of Political Jurisprudence and governance, without determining the macro-theoretical framework, will suffer from ambiguity and disagreement.”

Continuing the session, Dr. Seyyed Sadeq Haqiqat, a faculty member of the Imam Khomeini and Islamic Revolution Research Institute, while appreciating the presented materials, proceeded to critique the raised views.

Dr. Haqiqat believed that the governance system of “Imamate-Nation” alone is not sufficient. He also stated that the framework of “State and Nation,” which is one of the modern theories of political science, is not sufficient alongside Political Jurisprudence to explain governance. Therefore, one must go towards the “Imamate-Nation” framework to be able to speak of a reading of governance from the perspective of Political Jurisprudence and address this discussion.

He emphasized that although Political Jurisprudence is an Applied Discipline, the presented discussion falls into the group of theological discussions of “Expectation from Religion, Governance, and Political Jurisprudence,” and Dr. Mohajernia has not clearly expressed his theoretical basis in this field.

Dr. Haqiqat also, regarding the raised threefold classification (System of Ummah and Imamate, State and Nation, and Political [System of] Imamate-Nation), stated that by examining its content, this classification is not common in the view of jurists and theologians. Furthermore, this question is raised: Can Political Jurisprudence discuss governance directly as a “process” and “power dynamic”? If Political Jurisprudence wishes to address the explanation of processes, power dynamics, and institutions, it needs stronger documentation and evidence.

Source: External Source