Customary legislation - Revision history

Sarfipour at 12:23, 29 March 2026

2026-03-29T12:23:17Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:23, 29 March 2026
Line 77:		Line 77:
	==footnotes==		==footnotes==
	{{footnotes}}		{{footnotes}}
			== references ==
			{{references}}
	* Amīnīpajūh, Hussein, and Ka‘bī, ‘Abbās, Dar Justujūyi Naẓarīyi-yi Qānūn Guḏārī dar Āthār-i Barkhī as Faqīhān-i Mu‘āṣir-i Imāmīyi, Ḥukūmat-i Islāmī quarterly, No. 87, 2019		* Amīnīpajūh, Hussein, and Ka‘bī, ‘Abbās, Dar Justujūyi Naẓarīyi-yi Qānūn Guḏārī dar Āthār-i Barkhī as Faqīhān-i Mu‘āṣir-i Imāmīyi, Ḥukūmat-i Islāmī quarterly, No. 87, 2019
	* Amīnīpajūh, Husseing, and Ka‘bī, ‘Abbās, Mabānī-yi Kalāmī-yi Qānūn Guḏārī va Āthār-i Fiqhī va Ḥuqūqī-yi Ān dar Ḥukūmat-i Islāmī, Ḥukūmat-i Islāmī quarterly, No. 2, 2019		* Amīnīpajūh, Husseing, and Ka‘bī, ‘Abbās, Mabānī-yi Kalāmī-yi Qānūn Guḏārī va Āthār-i Fiqhī va Ḥuqūqī-yi Ān dar Ḥukūmat-i Islāmī, Ḥukūmat-i Islāmī quarterly, No. 2, 2019

Sarfipour: /* Bibliography */

2026-03-29T12:21:04Z

Bibliography

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:21, 29 March 2026
Line 75:		Line 75:
	{{end}}		{{end}}

	==~~Bibliography~~==		==footnotes==
			{{footnotes}}
	* Amīnīpajūh, Hussein, and Ka‘bī, ‘Abbās, Dar Justujūyi Naẓarīyi-yi Qānūn Guḏārī dar Āthār-i Barkhī as Faqīhān-i Mu‘āṣir-i Imāmīyi, Ḥukūmat-i Islāmī quarterly, No. 87, 2019		* Amīnīpajūh, Hussein, and Ka‘bī, ‘Abbās, Dar Justujūyi Naẓarīyi-yi Qānūn Guḏārī dar Āthār-i Barkhī as Faqīhān-i Mu‘āṣir-i Imāmīyi, Ḥukūmat-i Islāmī quarterly, No. 87, 2019
	* Amīnīpajūh, Husseing, and Ka‘bī, ‘Abbās, Mabānī-yi Kalāmī-yi Qānūn Guḏārī va Āthār-i Fiqhī va Ḥuqūqī-yi Ān dar Ḥukūmat-i Islāmī, Ḥukūmat-i Islāmī quarterly, No. 2, 2019		* Amīnīpajūh, Husseing, and Ka‘bī, ‘Abbās, Mabānī-yi Kalāmī-yi Qānūn Guḏārī va Āthār-i Fiqhī va Ḥuqūqī-yi Ān dar Ḥukūmat-i Islāmī, Ḥukūmat-i Islāmī quarterly, No. 2, 2019

Sarfipour: /* Notes */

2026-03-29T12:20:43Z

Notes

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:20, 29 March 2026
Line 73:		Line 73:
	{{references}}		{{references}}
	<references group="note"/>		<references group="note"/>
			{{end}}

	==Bibliography==		==Bibliography==

Sarfipour: /* Notes */

2026-03-29T12:20:31Z

Notes

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:20, 29 March 2026
Line 71:		Line 71:

	==Notes==		==Notes==
			{{references}}
	<references group="note"/>		<references group="note"/>

Sarfipour: /* Footnotes */

2026-03-29T12:20:03Z

Footnotes

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:20, 29 March 2026
Line 69:		Line 69:
	* [[Guardian Council]]		* [[Guardian Council]]
	* [[The relationship between law and Sharia\|The relationship between law and Sharia]]		* [[The relationship between law and Sharia\|The relationship between law and Sharia]]

	~~==Footnotes==~~
	~~{{reflist}}~~

	==Notes==		==Notes==

Sarfipour: /* The lawfulness of non-independent legislation */

2026-03-29T12:06:49Z

The lawfulness of non-independent legislation

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:06, 29 March 2026
Line 55:		Line 55:

	According to them, the nature of [[legislation]] in the [[Islamic government]] is different from [[legislation]] in other governments<ref name="ref33">Muntaẓirī, Dirāsāt fī Vilāyat al-Faqīh, vol. 2, pp. 59-60</ref> and they believed that it includes the three stages of [[legislation]], recognition and planning<ref name="ref34">Amīnīpajūh and Ka‘bī, Mabānī-yi Kalāmī-yi Qānūn Guḏārī va Āthār-i Fiqhī va Ḥuqūqī-yi Ān dar Ḥukūmat-i Islāmī, pp. 9-23</ref>. This group of [[jurists]], particularly [[Sayyid Ruhollah Musavi Khomeini\|Imam Khomeini]], believed that the right of lawmaking belongs exclusively to God, and even the [[Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)\|Prophet of Islam (PBUH)]] does not share this right with Him<ref name="ref35">Khomeini, Ṣaḥīfi-yi Imam, vol. 15, p. 312</ref>. After the enactment of laws by God and enouncing them through the [[Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)\|Prophet (PBUH)]], it is time to recognize the divine laws and extract them from the sources of religion. This is done by the [[Imams (AS)]] through citing the [[Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)\|Prophet (PBUH)]] and the [[ijtihad]] of [[jurists]]<ref name="ref36">Khomeini, Vilāyat-i Faqīh, pp. 43-44; Muntaẓirī, Dirāsāt fī Vilāyat al-Faqīh, vol. 2, p. 59; Subḥānī, Al-Taqnīn fī al-Ḥukūmat al-Islāmīyyah, pp. 238-258</ref>. According to this opinion, customary [[legislation]] in the [[Islamic government]] will basically be the adaptation of new events to Islamic standards and regulations<ref name="ref37">Ahvāzī, Imam Khomeini bi Ravāyat-i Ayatollah Hāshimī Rafsanjānī, p. 155</ref>. This group of [[jurists]], citing some theological propositions such as the exclusiveness of [[legislation]] to God, finality, comprehensiveness and universality of [[Islamic Sharia]], believe that Islam has left no issue without a ruling so that there would be a need to make a decision about it<ref name="ref38">Hāshimī, Ḥuqūq-i Asāsī-yi Jumhūrī-yi Islāmī-yi Iran, vol. 2, p. 734</ref>. For this reason, in the [[Islamic government]], the [[parliament]] does not have the right to legislate and its special task is only to recognize the issue<ref name="ref39">Mihrpūr, Didgāh-hāyi Jadīd dar Masā’il-i Ḥuqūqī, p. 48</ref>, advise and plan on how to implement the [[Sharia]]<ref name="ref40">Khātam Yazdī, Ab‘ād-i Fiqhī-yi Imam Khomeini, p. 114</ref>.		According to them, the nature of [[legislation]] in the [[Islamic government]] is different from [[legislation]] in other governments<ref name="ref33">Muntaẓirī, Dirāsāt fī Vilāyat al-Faqīh, vol. 2, pp. 59-60</ref> and they believed that it includes the three stages of [[legislation]], recognition and planning<ref name="ref34">Amīnīpajūh and Ka‘bī, Mabānī-yi Kalāmī-yi Qānūn Guḏārī va Āthār-i Fiqhī va Ḥuqūqī-yi Ān dar Ḥukūmat-i Islāmī, pp. 9-23</ref>. This group of [[jurists]], particularly [[Sayyid Ruhollah Musavi Khomeini\|Imam Khomeini]], believed that the right of lawmaking belongs exclusively to God, and even the [[Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)\|Prophet of Islam (PBUH)]] does not share this right with Him<ref name="ref35">Khomeini, Ṣaḥīfi-yi Imam, vol. 15, p. 312</ref>. After the enactment of laws by God and enouncing them through the [[Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)\|Prophet (PBUH)]], it is time to recognize the divine laws and extract them from the sources of religion. This is done by the [[Imams (AS)]] through citing the [[Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)\|Prophet (PBUH)]] and the [[ijtihad]] of [[jurists]]<ref name="ref36">Khomeini, Vilāyat-i Faqīh, pp. 43-44; Muntaẓirī, Dirāsāt fī Vilāyat al-Faqīh, vol. 2, p. 59; Subḥānī, Al-Taqnīn fī al-Ḥukūmat al-Islāmīyyah, pp. 238-258</ref>. According to this opinion, customary [[legislation]] in the [[Islamic government]] will basically be the adaptation of new events to Islamic standards and regulations<ref name="ref37">Ahvāzī, Imam Khomeini bi Ravāyat-i Ayatollah Hāshimī Rafsanjānī, p. 155</ref>. This group of [[jurists]], citing some theological propositions such as the exclusiveness of [[legislation]] to God, finality, comprehensiveness and universality of [[Islamic Sharia]], believe that Islam has left no issue without a ruling so that there would be a need to make a decision about it<ref name="ref38">Hāshimī, Ḥuqūq-i Asāsī-yi Jumhūrī-yi Islāmī-yi Iran, vol. 2, p. 734</ref>. For this reason, in the [[Islamic government]], the [[parliament]] does not have the right to legislate and its special task is only to recognize the issue<ref name="ref39">Mihrpūr, Didgāh-hāyi Jadīd dar Masā’il-i Ḥuqūqī, p. 48</ref>, advise and plan on how to implement the [[Sharia]]<ref name="ref40">Khātam Yazdī, Ab‘ād-i Fiqhī-yi Imam Khomeini, p. 114</ref>.
	By applying the opinions of these [[jurists]] in drafting the [[Constitution]], according to Article 72 of this law, the [[Islamic Consultative Assembly]] must enact regulations that are in line with Islamic standards. For this reason, in principle 91, an institution was foreseen next to the Assembly to verify the non-contradiction of the Assembly's enactments with the standards of [[Sharia]] and the [[Constitution]]. According to [[Sayyid Ruhollah Musavi Khomeini\|Imam Khomeini]], the Assembly, upon recognizing the issue, leaves it to the [[Guardian Council]] to determine the verdict<ref name="ref41">Mu’min, Ikhtīyār-i Valī-yi Amr dar Qānūn Guḏārī, p. 80</ref>. However, when dispute occurred between the Assembly and the [[Guardian Council]]<ref name="ref42">Mu’min, Ikhtīyār-i Valī-yi Amr dar Qānūn Guḏārī, p. 81</ref> regarding laws such as urban land law and labor law, [[Imam Khomeini]] gave some freedom to the Assembly in [[legislation]] by citing titles such as necessity and [[Maslaha\|expediency]], and also limited the authenticity of the [[Guardian Council]]’s recognition by forming the [[Expediency Discernment Council]]<ref name="ref43">Mu’min, Ikhtīyār-i Valī-yi Amr dar Qānūn Guḏārī, pp. 81-82</ref>.		By applying the opinions of these [[jurists]] in drafting the [[Constitution]], according to Article 72 of this law, the [[Islamic Consultative Assembly]] must enact regulations that are in line with Islamic standards. For this reason, in principle 91, an institution was foreseen next to the Assembly to verify the non-contradiction of the Assembly's enactments with the standards of [[Sharia]] and the [[Constitution]]. According to [[Sayyid Ruhollah Musavi Khomeini\|Imam Khomeini]], the Assembly, upon recognizing the issue, leaves it to the [[Guardian Council]] to determine the verdict<ref name="ref41">Mu’min, Ikhtīyār-i Valī-yi Amr dar Qānūn Guḏārī, p. 80</ref>. However, when dispute occurred between the Assembly and the [[Guardian Council]]<ref name="ref42">Mu’min, Ikhtīyār-i Valī-yi Amr dar Qānūn Guḏārī, p. 81</ref> regarding laws such as urban land law and labor law, [[Sayyid Ruhollah Musavi Khomeini\|Imam Khomeini]] gave some freedom to the Assembly in [[legislation]] by citing titles such as necessity and [[Maslaha\|expediency]], and also limited the authenticity of the [[Guardian Council]]’s recognition by forming the [[Expediency Discernment Council]]<ref name="ref43">Mu’min, Ikhtīyār-i Valī-yi Amr dar Qānūn Guḏārī, pp. 81-82</ref>.

	===Lawfulness of legislation under the supervision of the guardian===		===Lawfulness of legislation under the supervision of the guardian===

Sarfipour: /* The lawfulness of non-independent legislation */

2026-03-29T12:03:47Z

The lawfulness of non-independent legislation

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:03, 29 March 2026
Line 52:		Line 52:

	===The lawfulness of non-independent legislation===		===The lawfulness of non-independent legislation===
	After the victory of the [[Islamic Revolution of Iran]], those [[jurists]] who were influential in this victory acknowledged the need of the [[Islamic society]] and government for laws<ref name="ref30">Khomeini, Ṣaḥīfi-yi Imam, vol. 15, p. 312</ref> and believed that the obligation of legislative processes is at utmost clarity because of the expansion of governments and the multiplicity of novel events and the necessity of drawing the main lines for administering the society<ref name="ref31">Khomeini, Vilāyat-i Faqīh, pp. 43-44; Muntaẓirī, Dirāsāt fī Vilāyat al-Faqīh, vol. 2, p. 60; Javādī Āmulī, Vilāyat dar Qur’ān, p. 144; Subḥānī, Ilāhīyyāt ‘Alā Hudā al-Kitāb va al-Sunnah va al-‘Aql, vol. 2, p. 81</ref>. They considered it necessary to obey the approved law, even if it is against a person's opinion<ref name="ref32">Muntaẓirī, Dirāsāt fī Vilāyat al-Faqīh, vol. 2, pp. 59-60</ref>.		After the victory of the [[Islamic Revolution of Iran]], those [[jurists]] who were influential in this victory acknowledged the need of the [[Islamic society]] and government for laws<ref name="ref30">Khomeini, Ṣaḥīfi-yi Imam, vol. 15, p. 312</ref> and believed that the obligation of legislative processes is at utmost clarity because of the expansion of governments and the multiplicity of novel events and the necessity of drawing the main lines for administering the society<ref name="ref31">Khomeini, Vilāyat-i Faqīh, pp. 43-44; Muntaẓirī, Dirāsāt fī Vilāyat al-Faqīh, vol. 2, p. 60; Javādī Āmulī, Vilāyat dar Qur’ān, p. 144; Subḥānī, Ilāhīyyāt ‘Alā Hudā al-Kitāb va al-Sunnah va al-‘Aql, vol. 2, p. 81</ref>. They considered it necessary to obey the approved law, even if it is against a person's opinion<ref name="ref32">Muntaẓirī, Dirāsāt fī Vilāyat al-Faqīh, vol. 2, pp. 59-60</ref>.
	According to them, the nature of [[legislation]] in the [[Islamic government]] is different from [[legislation]] in other governments<ref name="ref33">Muntaẓirī, Dirāsāt fī Vilāyat al-Faqīh, vol. 2, pp. 59-60</ref> and they believed that it includes the three stages of [[legislation]], recognition and planning<ref name="ref34">Amīnīpajūh and Ka‘bī, Mabānī-yi Kalāmī-yi Qānūn Guḏārī va Āthār-i Fiqhī va Ḥuqūqī-yi Ān dar Ḥukūmat-i Islāmī, pp. 9-23</ref>. This group of [[jurists]], particularly [[Imam Khomeini]], believed that the right of lawmaking belongs exclusively to God, and even the [[Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)\|Prophet of Islam (PBUH)]] does not share this right with Him<ref name="ref35">Khomeini, Ṣaḥīfi-yi Imam, vol. 15, p. 312</ref>. After the enactment of laws by God and enouncing them through the [[Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)\|Prophet (PBUH)]], it is time to recognize the divine laws and extract them from the sources of religion. This is done by the [[Imams (AS)]] through citing the [[Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)\|Prophet (PBUH)]] and the [[ijtihad]] of [[jurists]]<ref name="ref36">Khomeini, Vilāyat-i Faqīh, pp. 43-44; Muntaẓirī, Dirāsāt fī Vilāyat al-Faqīh, vol. 2, p. 59; Subḥānī, Al-Taqnīn fī al-Ḥukūmat al-Islāmīyyah, pp. 238-258</ref>. According to this opinion, customary [[legislation]] in the [[Islamic government]] will basically be the adaptation of new events to Islamic standards and regulations<ref name="ref37">Ahvāzī, Imam Khomeini bi Ravāyat-i Ayatollah Hāshimī Rafsanjānī, p. 155</ref>. This group of [[jurists]], citing some theological propositions such as the exclusiveness of [[legislation]] to God, finality, comprehensiveness and universality of [[Islamic Sharia]], believe that Islam has left no issue without a ruling so that there would be a need to make a decision about it<ref name="ref38">Hāshimī, Ḥuqūq-i Asāsī-yi Jumhūrī-yi Islāmī-yi Iran, vol. 2, p. 734</ref>. For this reason, in the [[Islamic government]], the [[parliament]] does not have the right to legislate and its special task is only to recognize the issue<ref name="ref39">Mihrpūr, Didgāh-hāyi Jadīd dar Masā’il-i Ḥuqūqī, p. 48</ref>, advise and plan on how to implement the [[Sharia]]<ref name="ref40">Khātam Yazdī, Ab‘ād-i Fiqhī-yi Imam Khomeini, p. 114</ref>.
	By applying the opinions of these [[jurists]] in drafting the [[Constitution]], according to Article 72 of this law, the [[Islamic Consultative Assembly]] must enact regulations that are in line with Islamic standards. For this reason, in principle 91, an institution was foreseen next to the Assembly to verify the non-contradiction of the Assembly's enactments with the standards of [[Sharia]] and the [[Constitution]]. According to [[Imam Khomeini]], the Assembly, upon recognizing the issue, leaves it to the [[Guardian Council]] to determine the verdict<ref name="ref41">Mu’min, Ikhtīyār-i Valī-yi Amr dar Qānūn Guḏārī, p. 80</ref>. However, when dispute occurred between the Assembly and the [[Guardian Council]]<ref name="ref42">Mu’min, Ikhtīyār-i Valī-yi Amr dar Qānūn Guḏārī, p. 81</ref> regarding laws such as urban land law and labor law, [[Imam Khomeini]] gave some freedom to the Assembly in [[legislation]] by citing titles such as necessity and [[Maslaha\|expediency]], and also limited the authenticity of the [[Guardian Council]]’s recognition by forming the [[Expediency Discernment Council]]<ref name="ref43">Mu’min, Ikhtīyār-i Valī-yi Amr dar Qānūn Guḏārī, pp. 81-82</ref>.		According to them, the nature of [[legislation]] in the [[Islamic government]] is different from [[legislation]] in other governments<ref name="ref33">Muntaẓirī, Dirāsāt fī Vilāyat al-Faqīh, vol. 2, pp. 59-60</ref> and they believed that it includes the three stages of [[legislation]], recognition and planning<ref name="ref34">Amīnīpajūh and Ka‘bī, Mabānī-yi Kalāmī-yi Qānūn Guḏārī va Āthār-i Fiqhī va Ḥuqūqī-yi Ān dar Ḥukūmat-i Islāmī, pp. 9-23</ref>. This group of [[jurists]], particularly [[Sayyid Ruhollah Musavi Khomeini\|Imam Khomeini]], believed that the right of lawmaking belongs exclusively to God, and even the [[Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)\|Prophet of Islam (PBUH)]] does not share this right with Him<ref name="ref35">Khomeini, Ṣaḥīfi-yi Imam, vol. 15, p. 312</ref>. After the enactment of laws by God and enouncing them through the [[Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)\|Prophet (PBUH)]], it is time to recognize the divine laws and extract them from the sources of religion. This is done by the [[Imams (AS)]] through citing the [[Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)\|Prophet (PBUH)]] and the [[ijtihad]] of [[jurists]]<ref name="ref36">Khomeini, Vilāyat-i Faqīh, pp. 43-44; Muntaẓirī, Dirāsāt fī Vilāyat al-Faqīh, vol. 2, p. 59; Subḥānī, Al-Taqnīn fī al-Ḥukūmat al-Islāmīyyah, pp. 238-258</ref>. According to this opinion, customary [[legislation]] in the [[Islamic government]] will basically be the adaptation of new events to Islamic standards and regulations<ref name="ref37">Ahvāzī, Imam Khomeini bi Ravāyat-i Ayatollah Hāshimī Rafsanjānī, p. 155</ref>. This group of [[jurists]], citing some theological propositions such as the exclusiveness of [[legislation]] to God, finality, comprehensiveness and universality of [[Islamic Sharia]], believe that Islam has left no issue without a ruling so that there would be a need to make a decision about it<ref name="ref38">Hāshimī, Ḥuqūq-i Asāsī-yi Jumhūrī-yi Islāmī-yi Iran, vol. 2, p. 734</ref>. For this reason, in the [[Islamic government]], the [[parliament]] does not have the right to legislate and its special task is only to recognize the issue<ref name="ref39">Mihrpūr, Didgāh-hāyi Jadīd dar Masā’il-i Ḥuqūqī, p. 48</ref>, advise and plan on how to implement the [[Sharia]]<ref name="ref40">Khātam Yazdī, Ab‘ād-i Fiqhī-yi Imam Khomeini, p. 114</ref>.
			By applying the opinions of these [[jurists]] in drafting the [[Constitution]], according to Article 72 of this law, the [[Islamic Consultative Assembly]] must enact regulations that are in line with Islamic standards. For this reason, in principle 91, an institution was foreseen next to the Assembly to verify the non-contradiction of the Assembly's enactments with the standards of [[Sharia]] and the [[Constitution]]. According to [[Sayyid Ruhollah Musavi Khomeini\|Imam Khomeini]], the Assembly, upon recognizing the issue, leaves it to the [[Guardian Council]] to determine the verdict<ref name="ref41">Mu’min, Ikhtīyār-i Valī-yi Amr dar Qānūn Guḏārī, p. 80</ref>. However, when dispute occurred between the Assembly and the [[Guardian Council]]<ref name="ref42">Mu’min, Ikhtīyār-i Valī-yi Amr dar Qānūn Guḏārī, p. 81</ref> regarding laws such as urban land law and labor law, [[Imam Khomeini]] gave some freedom to the Assembly in [[legislation]] by citing titles such as necessity and [[Maslaha\|expediency]], and also limited the authenticity of the [[Guardian Council]]’s recognition by forming the [[Expediency Discernment Council]]<ref name="ref43">Mu’min, Ikhtīyār-i Valī-yi Amr dar Qānūn Guḏārī, pp. 81-82</ref>.

	===Lawfulness of legislation under the supervision of the guardian===		===Lawfulness of legislation under the supervision of the guardian===

Sarfipour: /* The obligation of enacting laws as the prelude to obligation */

2026-03-29T11:42:37Z

The obligation of enacting laws as the prelude to obligation

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:42, 29 March 2026
Line 43:		Line 43:

	===The obligation of enacting laws as the prelude to obligation===		===The obligation of enacting laws as the prelude to obligation===
	[[Mirza ~~Naini\|Mīrzā Nā’īnī~~]] considers the preservation of the [[Islamic state]] from the evil of dictatorship as one of the obligations agreed upon by the [[Shiites]] and [[Sunnis]], which will not be possible without supervisory organs<ref name="ref25">Khomeini, Vilāyat-i Faqīh, pp. 43-45</ref>. As he puts it, during the [[The Occultation\|Occultation]], supervision depends upon the existence of a [[Constitution]]<ref group="note" name="note1">Nā’īnī considers the lawfulness of legislation to depend on three conditions: a) Assigning the constitution to all kinds of interests; b) basing it on the rules and requirements that arise from the contract of trust and c) ensuring non-contradiction of its chapters and articles with the rules of Sharia. (Fayarḥī, Āstāni-yi Tajaddud, p. 335)</ref> and legislative bodies such as a [[parliament]]<ref group="note" name="note2">Nā’īnī believes that limiting tyranny is not possible without the realization of the main cause of that limitation, which is establishment of the Parliament. (Fayarḥī, Āstāni-yi Tajaddud, p. 335)</ref>. Therefore, [[legislation]] is obligatory as the prelude to implementing obligations<ref name="ref26">Muntaẓirī, Dirāsāt fī Vilāyat al-Faqīh, vol. 2, p. 59</ref>.		[[Mirza Mohammad-Hossein Gharavi Na'ini]] considers the preservation of the [[Islamic state]] from the evil of dictatorship as one of the obligations agreed upon by the [[Shiites]] and [[Sunnis]], which will not be possible without supervisory organs<ref name="ref25">Khomeini, Vilāyat-i Faqīh, pp. 43-45</ref>. As he puts it, during the [[The Occultation\|Occultation]], supervision depends upon the existence of a [[Constitution]]<ref group="note" name="note1">Nā’īnī considers the lawfulness of legislation to depend on three conditions: a) Assigning the constitution to all kinds of interests; b) basing it on the rules and requirements that arise from the contract of trust and c) ensuring non-contradiction of its chapters and articles with the rules of Sharia. (Fayarḥī, Āstāni-yi Tajaddud, p. 335)</ref> and legislative bodies such as a [[parliament]]<ref group="note" name="note2">Nā’īnī believes that limiting tyranny is not possible without the realization of the main cause of that limitation, which is establishment of the Parliament. (Fayarḥī, Āstāni-yi Tajaddud, p. 335)</ref>. Therefore, [[legislation]] is obligatory as the prelude to implementing obligations<ref name="ref26">Muntaẓirī, Dirāsāt fī Vilāyat al-Faqīh, vol. 2, p. 59</ref>.

	===The difference between innovated false beliefs and innovative matters===		===The difference between innovated false beliefs and innovative matters===

Sarfipour: /* Muslims do not need new laws */

2026-03-29T11:19:23Z

Muslims do not need new laws

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:19, 29 March 2026
Line 24:		Line 24:

	===Muslims do not need new laws===		===Muslims do not need new laws===
	According to [[Mohammad Hossein Tabrizi\|Mohammad Hussein Tabrīzī]], an Iranian [[jurist]] during [[Iranian Constitutional Era\|Iran’s constitutional era]], the existence of the [[divine comprehensive law]] is enough to organize the lives of people, and it leaves no need for a new law. In upcoming issues, people should refer to religious scholars based on the provisions of [[Imam al-Mahdi (AS)\|Imam al-Mahdī’s (AS)]] decree<ref name="ref9">Tabrīzī, Kashf al-Murād, p. 131</ref>. Marandī Najafī, another [[jurist]] in the constitutional era, believed that considering the abolition of past religions by Islam, and based on the ~~اکمال دین verse (~~[[~~Surah Al-Ma'idah\|verse~~ 3 ~~of surah al-Mā’idah~~]] about the completion of religion), there will be no need for the enactment of new laws and anyone who believes otherwise, in fact, denies God and the [[Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)\|Prophet (PBUH)]]<ref name="ref10">Najafī Marandī, Dalā’il Barāhīn al-Furqān, pp. 197-200</ref>. Also, [[Sayyid Javad Varai\|Sayyid Javād Vara‘ī]] has said that after the victory of the [[Islamic Revolution of Iran]], some [[jurists]] considered lawmaking as deception and standing against the [[Qur'an]]. They believed that the [[Qur'an]] and the [[Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)\|Prophet’s]] conduct make our [[Constitution]] and that there is no need for new laws<ref name="ref11">Vara‘ī, Nisbat-i Fiqh va Qānūn dar Nigāh-i ‘Alimān-i Dīn, pp. 57-59</ref>.		According to [[Mohammad Hossein Tabrizi\|Mohammad Hussein Tabrīzī]], an Iranian [[jurist]] during [[Iranian Constitutional Era\|Iran’s constitutional era]], the existence of the [[divine comprehensive law]] is enough to organize the lives of people, and it leaves no need for a new law. In upcoming issues, people should refer to religious scholars based on the provisions of [[Imam al-Mahdi (AS)\|Imam al-Mahdī’s (AS)]] decree<ref name="ref9">Tabrīzī, Kashf al-Murād, p. 131</ref>. Marandī Najafī, another [[jurist]] in the constitutional era, believed that considering the abolition of past religions by Islam, and based on the [[Quran 5:3]] about the completion of religion), there will be no need for the enactment of new laws and anyone who believes otherwise, in fact, denies God and the [[Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)\|Prophet (PBUH)]]<ref name="ref10">Najafī Marandī, Dalā’il Barāhīn al-Furqān, pp. 197-200</ref>. Also, [[Sayyid Javad Varai\|Sayyid Javād Vara‘ī]] has said that after the victory of the [[Islamic Revolution of Iran]], some [[jurists]] considered lawmaking as deception and standing against the [[Qur'an]]. They believed that the [[Qur'an]] and the [[Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)\|Prophet’s]] conduct make our [[Constitution]] and that there is no need for new laws<ref name="ref11">Vara‘ī, Nisbat-i Fiqh va Qānūn dar Nigāh-i ‘Alimān-i Dīn, pp. 57-59</ref>.

	===Contradiction of legislation with the Prophet’s (PBUH) prophethood and finality===		===Contradiction of legislation with the Prophet’s (PBUH) prophethood and finality===

Sarfipour at 11:16, 29 March 2026

2026-03-29T11:16:43Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:16, 29 March 2026
Line 11:		Line 11:
	'''Customary legislation''' (in Persian: [[:fa:قانون‌گذاری_عرفی\|قانون‌گذاری عرفی]]) is subject of this Article. From the point of view of some [[jurists]], whether during [[Iranian Constitutional Era\|Iran’s constitutional era]] such as [[Mohammad Hossein Tabrizi\|Mohammad Hussein Tabrīzī]] and [[Fazlullah Nuri\|Faḍlullāh Nūrī]], or in the era of the [[Islamic Republic of Iran]] such as [[Sayyid Mohammad Hossein Hosseini Tehrani\|Sayyid Mohammad Hussein Husseinī Tehranī]], '''Customary legislation''' or the writing of constitutional and ordinary laws by legislative bodies is considered to be against the [[Sharia]]. To prove their claim, they have cited reasons such that Muslims do not need new [[legislation]], particularly a [[Constitution]], with the existence of the [[divine comprehensive law]]; that [[legislation]] contradicts the [[Prophethood]] and finality of the [[Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)\|Prophet of Islam (PBUH)]]; that non-Muslims have domination over Muslims; and that the [[majority vote]] is considered a false belief.		'''Customary legislation''' (in Persian: [[:fa:قانون‌گذاری_عرفی\|قانون‌گذاری عرفی]]) is subject of this Article. From the point of view of some [[jurists]], whether during [[Iranian Constitutional Era\|Iran’s constitutional era]] such as [[Mohammad Hossein Tabrizi\|Mohammad Hussein Tabrīzī]] and [[Fazlullah Nuri\|Faḍlullāh Nūrī]], or in the era of the [[Islamic Republic of Iran]] such as [[Sayyid Mohammad Hossein Hosseini Tehrani\|Sayyid Mohammad Hussein Husseinī Tehranī]], '''Customary legislation''' or the writing of constitutional and ordinary laws by legislative bodies is considered to be against the [[Sharia]]. To prove their claim, they have cited reasons such that Muslims do not need new [[legislation]], particularly a [[Constitution]], with the existence of the [[divine comprehensive law]]; that [[legislation]] contradicts the [[Prophethood]] and finality of the [[Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)\|Prophet of Islam (PBUH)]]; that non-Muslims have domination over Muslims; and that the [[majority vote]] is considered a false belief.
	On the other hand, [[jurists]] such as [[Mirza Mohammad-Hossein Gharavi Na'ini]], [[Sayyid Muhammad Baqir Sadr]] and [[Mohammad Beheshti\|Sayyid Muhammad Husseinī Bihishtī]] divided the duties of the [[Mukallaf\|obligees]] into the two areas of those about which there is a text and about which there is none. They acknowledge the existence of comprehensive and complete divine rules in the area about which there are texts and believe that the society requires some legislative body; because, in a wide range of permissible matters and in explaining secondary rules about which there is no text, the responsibility of decision-making has been entrusted to human beings. According to them, there is a need for [[legislation]] in the areas about which there is no text as well as in those areas of [[Sharia]] rulings over which [[jurists]] differ. They consider the enactment of laws to be of the rational ways that have been approved by the Lawmaker and that is obligatory as the prelude to obligation.		On the other hand, [[jurists]] such as [[Mirza Mohammad-Hossein Gharavi Na'ini]], [[Sayyid Muhammad Baqir Sadr]] and [[Mohammad Beheshti\|Sayyid Muhammad Husseinī Bihishtī]] divided the duties of the [[Mukallaf\|obligees]] into the two areas of those about which there is a text and about which there is none. They acknowledge the existence of comprehensive and complete divine rules in the area about which there are texts and believe that the society requires some legislative body; because, in a wide range of permissible matters and in explaining secondary rules about which there is no text, the responsibility of decision-making has been entrusted to human beings. According to them, there is a need for [[legislation]] in the areas about which there is no text as well as in those areas of [[Sharia]] rulings over which [[jurists]] differ. They consider the enactment of laws to be of the rational ways that have been approved by the Lawmaker and that is obligatory as the prelude to obligation.
	After the victory of the [[Islamic Revolution of Iran]], the [[jurists]] that were influential in Iran’s Islamic victory, including [[Imam Khomeini]] and [[Hossein-Ali Montazeri\|Hussein Ali Muntaẓirī]], considered lawmaking in Islam to include the three stages of [[legislation]], recognition and planning. According to them, in Islam, the right to legislate belongs to God, and after its transmission by the [[Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)\|Prophet (PBUH)]], divine decrees are extracted from the sources of religion by the [[Imams (AS)]] and the [[ijtihad]] of [[jurists]]. According to them, the [[parliament]] in the [[Islamic government]] does not have the right to legislate. Rather, its special task is to discover the issue, advise and plan on how to implement the [[Sharia]] and adapt new events to its standards.		After the victory of the [[Islamic Revolution of Iran]], the [[jurists]] that were influential in Iran’s Islamic victory, including [[Sayyid Ruhollah Musavi Khomeini\|Imam Khomeini]] and [[Hossein-Ali Montazeri\|Hussein Ali Muntaẓirī]], considered lawmaking in Islam to include the three stages of [[legislation]], recognition and planning. According to them, in Islam, the right to legislate belongs to God, and after its transmission by the [[Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)\|Prophet (PBUH)]], divine decrees are extracted from the sources of religion by the [[Imams (AS)]] and the [[ijtihad]] of [[jurists]]. According to them, the [[parliament]] in the [[Islamic government]] does not have the right to legislate. Rather, its special task is to discover the issue, advise and plan on how to implement the [[Sharia]] and adapt new events to its standards.
	Also, [[jurists]] such as [[Mohammad Momen\|Mohammad Mu’min]] and [[Mohammad-Taqi Mesbah-Yazdi\|Mohammad Taqī Miṣbāḥ Yazdī]] consider [[legislation]] in public affairs to be a matter under the [[Wali al-Faqih\|guardian]]'s control and a form of [[guardianship of the jurist\|guardianship]] by him. According to them, legislative institutions are bodies under the [[Wali al-Faqih\|guardian]]'s control, and their enactments become law only with the [[Wali al-Faqih\|guardian]]'s approval.		Also, [[jurists]] such as [[Mohammad Momen\|Mohammad Mu’min]] and [[Mohammad-Taqi Mesbah-Yazdi\|Mohammad Taqī Miṣbāḥ Yazdī]] consider [[legislation]] in public affairs to be a matter under the [[Wali al-Faqih\|guardian]]'s control and a form of [[guardianship of the jurist\|guardianship]] by him. According to them, legislative institutions are bodies under the [[Wali al-Faqih\|guardian]]'s control, and their enactments become law only with the [[Wali al-Faqih\|guardian]]'s approval.

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:16, 29 March 2026
Line 11:		Line 11:
	'''Customary legislation''' (in Persian: [[:fa:قانون‌گذاری_عرفی\|قانون‌گذاری عرفی]]) is subject of this Article. From the point of view of some [[jurists]], whether during [[Iranian Constitutional Era\|Iran’s constitutional era]] such as [[Mohammad Hossein Tabrizi\|Mohammad Hussein Tabrīzī]] and [[Fazlullah Nuri\|Faḍlullāh Nūrī]], or in the era of the [[Islamic Republic of Iran]] such as [[Sayyid Mohammad Hossein Hosseini Tehrani\|Sayyid Mohammad Hussein Husseinī Tehranī]], '''Customary legislation''' or the writing of constitutional and ordinary laws by legislative bodies is considered to be against the [[Sharia]]. To prove their claim, they have cited reasons such that Muslims do not need new [[legislation]], particularly a [[Constitution]], with the existence of the [[divine comprehensive law]]; that [[legislation]] contradicts the [[Prophethood]] and finality of the [[Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)\|Prophet of Islam (PBUH)]]; that non-Muslims have domination over Muslims; and that the [[majority vote]] is considered a false belief.		'''Customary legislation''' (in Persian: [[:fa:قانون‌گذاری_عرفی\|قانون‌گذاری عرفی]]) is subject of this Article. From the point of view of some [[jurists]], whether during [[Iranian Constitutional Era\|Iran’s constitutional era]] such as [[Mohammad Hossein Tabrizi\|Mohammad Hussein Tabrīzī]] and [[Fazlullah Nuri\|Faḍlullāh Nūrī]], or in the era of the [[Islamic Republic of Iran]] such as [[Sayyid Mohammad Hossein Hosseini Tehrani\|Sayyid Mohammad Hussein Husseinī Tehranī]], '''Customary legislation''' or the writing of constitutional and ordinary laws by legislative bodies is considered to be against the [[Sharia]]. To prove their claim, they have cited reasons such that Muslims do not need new [[legislation]], particularly a [[Constitution]], with the existence of the [[divine comprehensive law]]; that [[legislation]] contradicts the [[Prophethood]] and finality of the [[Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)\|Prophet of Islam (PBUH)]]; that non-Muslims have domination over Muslims; and that the [[majority vote]] is considered a false belief.
	On the other hand, [[jurists]] such as [[Mirza Mohammad-Hossein Gharavi Na'ini]], [[Sayyid Muhammad Baqir Sadr]] and [[Mohammad Beheshti\|Sayyid Muhammad Husseinī Bihishtī]] divided the duties of the [[Mukallaf\|obligees]] into the two areas of those about which there is a text and about which there is none. They acknowledge the existence of comprehensive and complete divine rules in the area about which there are texts and believe that the society requires some legislative body; because, in a wide range of permissible matters and in explaining secondary rules about which there is no text, the responsibility of decision-making has been entrusted to human beings. According to them, there is a need for [[legislation]] in the areas about which there is no text as well as in those areas of [[Sharia]] rulings over which [[jurists]] differ. They consider the enactment of laws to be of the rational ways that have been approved by the Lawmaker and that is obligatory as the prelude to obligation.		On the other hand, [[jurists]] such as [[Mirza Mohammad-Hossein Gharavi Na'ini]], [[Sayyid Muhammad Baqir Sadr]] and [[Mohammad Beheshti\|Sayyid Muhammad Husseinī Bihishtī]] divided the duties of the [[Mukallaf\|obligees]] into the two areas of those about which there is a text and about which there is none. They acknowledge the existence of comprehensive and complete divine rules in the area about which there are texts and believe that the society requires some legislative body; because, in a wide range of permissible matters and in explaining secondary rules about which there is no text, the responsibility of decision-making has been entrusted to human beings. According to them, there is a need for [[legislation]] in the areas about which there is no text as well as in those areas of [[Sharia]] rulings over which [[jurists]] differ. They consider the enactment of laws to be of the rational ways that have been approved by the Lawmaker and that is obligatory as the prelude to obligation.
	After the victory of the [[Islamic Revolution of Iran]], the [[jurists]] that were influential in Iran’s Islamic victory, including [[Imam Khomeini]] and [[Hossein-Ali Montazeri\|Hussein Ali Muntaẓirī]], considered lawmaking in Islam to include the three stages of [[legislation]], recognition and planning. According to them, in Islam, the right to legislate belongs to God, and after its transmission by the [[Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)\|Prophet (PBUH)]], divine decrees are extracted from the sources of religion by the [[Imams (AS)]] and the [[ijtihad]] of [[jurists]]. According to them, the [[parliament]] in the [[Islamic government]] does not have the right to legislate. Rather, its special task is to discover the issue, advise and plan on how to implement the [[Sharia]] and adapt new events to its standards.		After the victory of the [[Islamic Revolution of Iran]], the [[jurists]] that were influential in Iran’s Islamic victory, including [[Sayyid Ruhollah Musavi Khomeini\|Imam Khomeini]] and [[Hossein-Ali Montazeri\|Hussein Ali Muntaẓirī]], considered lawmaking in Islam to include the three stages of [[legislation]], recognition and planning. According to them, in Islam, the right to legislate belongs to God, and after its transmission by the [[Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)\|Prophet (PBUH)]], divine decrees are extracted from the sources of religion by the [[Imams (AS)]] and the [[ijtihad]] of [[jurists]]. According to them, the [[parliament]] in the [[Islamic government]] does not have the right to legislate. Rather, its special task is to discover the issue, advise and plan on how to implement the [[Sharia]] and adapt new events to its standards.
	Also, [[jurists]] such as [[Mohammad Momen\|Mohammad Mu’min]] and [[Mohammad-Taqi Mesbah-Yazdi\|Mohammad Taqī Miṣbāḥ Yazdī]] consider [[legislation]] in public affairs to be a matter under the [[Wali al-Faqih\|guardian]]'s control and a form of [[guardianship of the jurist\|guardianship]] by him. According to them, legislative institutions are bodies under the [[Wali al-Faqih\|guardian]]'s control, and their enactments become law only with the [[Wali al-Faqih\|guardian]]'s approval.		Also, [[jurists]] such as [[Mohammad Momen\|Mohammad Mu’min]] and [[Mohammad-Taqi Mesbah-Yazdi\|Mohammad Taqī Miṣbāḥ Yazdī]] consider [[legislation]] in public affairs to be a matter under the [[Wali al-Faqih\|guardian]]'s control and a form of [[guardianship of the jurist\|guardianship]] by him. According to them, legislative institutions are bodies under the [[Wali al-Faqih\|guardian]]'s control, and their enactments become law only with the [[Wali al-Faqih\|guardian]]'s approval.