Note: Although discussions about the right to human equality have been ongoing for years and it has been considered a human demand for centuries, there are still many ambiguities regarding its nature and dimensions: Is this right tawqifi or imda’i? And what is its relation to justice? For this purpose, we spoke with Hujjat al-Islam Dr. Sajjad Omidi, researcher at the Islamic Research Center of the Parliament. He believes that this right cannot be entirely considered tawqifi and shar’i, nor entirely imda’i and customary. The details of this exclusive interview by Contemporary Jurisprudence with this researcher of the Qom seminary are as follows:

Contemporary Jurisprudence: What is the right to human equality, and what are its dimensions?

Omidi: The right to human equality has various dimensions. One of its dimensions is social equality, meaning matters in which all individuals in a particular society or groups have the same status in certain aspects. These dimensions include civil rights, freedom of expression, property rights, and equal access to social goods and services. One of the most important dimensions of social equality is the existence of equal opportunities in society for all individuals, in such a way that no social class is eliminated or subjected to legal discrimination; for example, age, gender, race, sexual orientation, origin and lineage, class or status, income or property, language, religion, beliefs, opinions, health, or disability should not lead to unequal treatment under the law or unfair reduction of opportunities.

Equality, apart from social equality, is also conceivable in political, educational, economic, and other arenas.

In the verses of the Noble Quran, various arenas of equality are explicitly mentioned:

Equality in relation to the Creator (Rum/40);

Equality in the wisdom of creation (Dhariyat/56);

Equality of humans in deserving the blowing of the divine spirit into them (Sajdah/9);

Equality in the planting of the seed of knowledge within all of them (Baqarah/31);

Equality in the factor of perfection (Baqarah/285 and Shura/13);

Equality in inherent dignity with primary dignity (Isra/70);

Equality in the talent for acquiring valuative and acquisitive dignity (Hujurat/13);

Equality in the origin of human creation (Nisa/1);

Equality in the primary material of creation (Hijr/26);

Equality in nature and characteristics, including in intellect and conscience (Qiyamah/2, 14, and 15);

Equality before natural and positive rights and laws (Ma’idah/8 and 135).

Contemporary Jurisprudence: Does the right to equality fall under human rights or citizenship rights? Is it a natural right or a contractual one? What differences does choosing each of these entail?

Omidi: The right to equality falls under both human rights and citizenship rights. Humans, by their very nature and merely by being human, enjoy all human rights. In accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Geneva Conventions, and other international documents, human rights have the following characteristics:

Universality;

Inalienability;

Non-discrimination;

Non-transferability;

Indivisibility;

Equality-seeking.

Interconnectedness and interdependence are among other points that can be mentioned. Therefore, these rights belong to all individuals everywhere in the world, no one can be deprived of them, and all individuals—regardless of factors such as race, nationality, gender, religion, sexual orientation, color, language, and the like—are equal in enjoying these rights, with no distinction, preference, restriction, or deprivation in benefiting from them. Moreover, these rights are inviolable.

Contemporary Jurisprudence: By what evidences can the right to human equality be proven? Does proving the right to human equality through each of these evidences entail different consequences compared to proving it through other evidences?

Omidi: The right to equality of humans can be proven based on various evidences, which I will briefly mention:

Fitrah (innate disposition): Many philosophers believe that humans inherently possess dignity and value that distinguish them from other beings. This inherent dignity serves as a basis for the right to equality.

Reason: Human reason enables one to understand superficial and apparent differences and conclude that all humans are equal in essence and nature and should enjoy equal rights.

Ethics: Many ethical schools consider the equality of humans as a fundamental principle and believe that all humans should be respected and honored equally.

Quran and Sunnah: Equality of humans is explicitly emphasized in the Quran and hadiths. Numerous verses, including verse 98 of Surah An’am, consider all humans from a single soul (Adam) and thus express the principle of equality.

Views of other religions: Other religions, by emphasizing the inherent dignity of humans and the importance of ethics and justice, in a way affirm the principle of human equality.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights: This declaration, as an important human rights document, emphasizes the equality of all humans before the law and their enjoyment of fundamental rights and freedoms.

Constitutional and civil laws of other countries: Many countries have recognized the principle of human equality in their constitutional and civil laws and strive to realize it in practice. In summary, the right to human equality can be proven based on a set of philosophical, religious, and legal foundations and is accepted as a fundamental principle in modern societies.

Contemporary Jurisprudence: Is human equality a tawqifi matter that must be expressed by the Lawgiver, or is it a customary matter whose concept and instances are determined by custom?

Omidi: The right to equality is inherent and innate to humans. This very right falls under human rights and the fundamental rights of countries. Of course, this right is expressed in the sharia in a telegraphic and concise manner, and thus some of its dimensions are expressed by custom.

In general, there are two main approaches in this field:

The tawqifi approach (divine appointment): This approach believes that human rights, including the right to equality, are specifically and explicitly determined and expressed by the Lawgiver (the divine Legislator), and no one can posit a right for themselves or others beyond what is expressed in the sharia. In other words, human rights in this view have a divine and imperative aspect and are extracted from religious sources.

The customary approach (customary appointment): This approach believes that human rights, including the right to equality, are formed through custom and social agreements. In this view, human rights are considered a contractual matter based on collective needs and desires, gradually forming and evolving through social interactions and collective agreements.

In this regard, there are various approaches that are mentioned:

Islam: In Islam, some human rights (such as those related to family, inheritance, etc.) are specifically expressed in the Quran and Sunnah and are considered tawqifi rights. However, many other rights (such as political, civil, and economic rights) are expressed in general terms in the Quran and Sunnah, and their instances are determined by custom and the ijtihad of jurists. In other words, Islam adopts a combined approach of tawqifi and customary in the field of human rights.

Philosophy of law: In the philosophy of law, there are two main approaches: natural rights and positive rights. Natural rights believe that human rights exist based on human nature and the universe and are discoverable, while positive rights believe that human rights are enacted by laws and regulations.

Social sciences: In social sciences, human rights are considered a social phenomenon influenced by various factors such as culture, economy, and politics.

Ultimately, the issue of the right to human equality can be examined from various perspectives. Some believe that this right is tawqifi and determined by the Lawgiver, while others believe that it is customary and shaped by custom. It seems that a combined approach from both views—one that pays attention to both shar’i foundations and customary requirements—is more suitable for explaining the right to human equality; hence, it is better to say that some of its dimensions are specified by the sharia, and others are specified by custom.

Contemporary Jurisprudence: What is the difference between the right to human equality as a citizenship right and the right to human equality as a fiqh rule?

Omidi: If the right to equality is a citizenship right, the obligation to observe it arises from the country’s laws, but if it is a shar’i right, the reason for its obligation is human conscience and belief in the Hereafter.

The right to equality can be considered both as a citizenship right and as a fiqh rule, but there are differences in their foundations and manner of application. The right to equality as a citizenship right is based on the laws and regulations of a country and applies to all citizens regardless of religion, gender, ethnicity, and the like; whereas as a fiqh rule, it is founded on Islamic principles and foundations and may have restrictions in its scope and manner of application in some cases; in other words, the right to equality as a citizenship right is a universal right defined in the laws of a country and enforceable for all citizens. Whereas the right to equality as a fiqh rule is an ethical and valuative principle defined in Islam and may have differences in implementation compared to the citizenship right.