A delay in the future research of environmental jurisprudence and natural resources

Is environmental jurisprudence be a natural fruit from the jurisprudence tree?

By Mr. Hasan ljra’i

The future research of environmental jurisprudence and natural resources, as it appears, is easy and restrained; Easy because, as it was said, it faces less complexities compared to new trends such as jurisprudence of art, and refrains because there are many and conflicting scenarios and possibilities, in practice, it makes the future research of this knowledge difficult.

Note: Although future research is not so new in the world of science, but in Iran and of course in Islamic sciences, it is considered a very new baby. Meanwhile, in order to avoid the passive approach of contemporary jurisprudence towards emerging issues and to turn it into an active approach, it seems appropriate to seriously pursue future studies in emerging jurisprudence. On the occasion of the “Fundamentals of Environmental and Natural Resources Jurisprudence” case, Hasan Al-Hasani, a scholar and researcher at Qum Seminary, has written a note about the future research of only the environment and natural resources, which you will see:

Living in today’s world is accompanied by new concerns and preoccupations that affect the most traditional and original fields of knowledge, transform them whether you like it or not, and gradually create small changes in them that may have been unimaginable in the distant or recent past.

The knowledge of jurisprudence among Muslims, including Shiites, has always been a knowledge that focuses on man and his duties. It is difficult to find a topic or ruling in the field of jurisprudence that is outside of the relationship between man and God and his relationship with other people: Thus, even if we do not say that the environment and natural resources have no place in jurisprudence, at least we can definitely say that these two issues have no place in the foundations and presuppositions of jurisprudence and the preservation of the environment and protection of natural resources have not been taken into account in the preparation of rulings.

In deriving and issuing jurisprudential rulings, should jurists consider preserving the environment in the long term? Should they also consider protection of natural resources as one of the goals of jurisprudence and, for example, refrain from issuing rulings that clearly cause the destruction of the environment? Or should they even avoid rulings that have the possibility of long-term damage to the environment and natural resources? Any answer to these questions can lead to serious changes in jurisprudence and its related knowledge, including the principles of jurisprudence; Of course, except in the case that the preservation of the environment and natural resources is considered completely out of the scope of fiqh obligation.

If we believe that jurisprudence must be committed to the preservation of the environment and natural resources and pay attention to it in the process of inferring and issuing rulings, in addition to the changes that are made in the existing rulings, many new issues and rulings will also enter the cycle of jurisprudence discussions. And the cycle of inferring and issuing a verdict; Among the rulings related to forests, protected areas, hunting of endangered animals, and even lighting fires in forest and mountain areas, which will bring the possibility of short-term or long-term damage to the environment and natural resources. In this way, the importance of preserving the environment and natural resources from the point of view of jurists can change the knowledge of jurisprudence today so that it has fundamental differences with previous periods.

Despite the aforementioned complications and the need for jurists to answer comprehensively and accurately to the questions briefly stated before, it should not be overlooked that the relationship between the knowledge of jurisprudence and the concern of preserving the environment and natural resources, compared to issues such as jurisprudence of art, is fraught with serious obstacles. And it is not a founder, because, based on the assumption that jurisprudence is serious about preserving the environment, the process of inferring and issuing rulings in this regard does not face serious challenges, and to a large extent, the necessary changes in related rulings can be predicted; Unlike the jurisprudence of art, which, due to the sometimes contradictory features of jurisprudence and art, one of which is normative and the other non-normative, it is not possible to speak of a jurisprudence which, by preserving the basic and central features of art, can enclose it in religious frameworks and at the same time prevent the necessary creations and deconstructions happen.

The jurisprudence of environment and natural resources, in addition to adding to the presuppositions and foundations of jurisprudence and obliging the jurists to preserve the privacy of nature and creating the requirement that the aforementioned concern and preoccupation be taken into account in the entire process of inference, the audience of related rulings also develops with environmental issues; Because not only humans and believers are obligated in this regard, but jurisprudence related to the environment and natural resources will also be covered by governments; Because an important part of the responsibility for preserving the environment and natural resources will be the responsibility of governments; Because it is beyond the authority of the obligees.

Based on all that has been said, the first step in building environmental and natural resources jurisprudence, or to be more precise, the introduction to building a jurisprudence committed to preserving the environment and natural resources, is the accurate and clear familiarization of jurists with the two mentioned categories. The requirement to answer the questions mentioned at the beginning of this article is that jurists find out what short-term and long-term effects environmental destruction will have and to what extent it can endanger human life and livelihood. Will the destruction of the environment and natural resources make the earth impossible for human life in the long run? Or will the quality and extent of people’s use of God’s blessings face a crisis?

For the jurists to get answers to each of these questions and dozens and hundreds of other essential and decisive questions, a continuous and two-way relationship is required so that the concerned and policy makers in the field of environment and natural resources inform the jurists of the crises and challenges and the necessities related to these topics. Answer their ambiguities and clarify in a continuous process that the issue of environment and natural resources can be taken into consideration as an issue for the actions of those responsible.

In the previous paragraphs of this article, it was repeatedly mentioned about the questions that the answers of the jurists can create a new jurisprudence. Through these many possibilities, it can be seen that the future research of environmental jurisprudence and natural resources, as it appears, is easy and restrained; Easy because, as it was said, it faces less complexities compared to new trends such as jurisprudence of art, and refrains because there are many and conflicting scenarios and possibilities, in practice, it makes the future research of this knowledge difficult.

However, in short, it can be said that if the jurists consider the concerns related to the preservation of the environment and natural resources even in its most minimal aspects in the field of jurisprudence and rulings, the field of jurisprudence will be expanded and many new rulings will be added to it. However, as mentioned before, the concerns of preserving the environment and natural resources do not have such a foundational character that even the maximum attention and commitment to it will distance the conventional knowledge of jurisprudence from its present identity, change its foundations and limit its boundaries to face deep displacements.

In this way, it can be said with confidence that the leaves and branches of environmental jurisprudence and natural resources will soon grow from the trunk of the jurisprudence tree and become a natural part of it, without forcing the jurists to face the issue in their foundations and assumptions. Just make fundamental changes.

On the other hand, the jurisprudence of environment and natural resources, although it is still in its first steps, but unlike the jurisprudence of art, political jurisprudence and economic jurisprudence, it does not face many obstacles to its expansion, and perhaps its fruits can be seen on the tree of jurisprudence in the coming years.

This article is a part of the file “Fundamentals of Environmental and Natural Resources Jurisprudence” and will be prepared and published in collaboration with Ijtihad Network.