Lawmaking

(3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)

Line 9:

}}

* '''abstract'''

From the point of view of some [[contemporary jurists]], [[legislation]] and the formation of law-making institutions in [[Islamic societies]] were seen to be in conflict with the right of [[divine legislation]]; therefore, they opposed it. On the other hand, some [[jurists]] saw it in line with [[divine legislation]] and a solution for the implementation of the [[Sharia]] and started to internalize it in their jurisprudential system. After proposing the concept of law in its new meaning since the [[Iranian Constitutional Era]] until now, [[jurists]] have agreed on the need of the society and the government for law. However, the difference in attitudes about what law is and by whom and in what scope it should be approved caused confusion about the concept of law, as well as the [[legitimacy]] of the law-making institutions. Answering these questions based on the theoretical foundations that every [[jurist]] believes in has led to the adoption of opposing positions and [[Fatwa|fatwas]] about the [[legitimacy]] of [[legislation]]. The issue of [[legislation]] is not included under the usual chapters of [[jurisprudence]] in [[jurisprudence]] books. However, it has been studied in the form of monographs about topics related to the [[Islamic government]], including the duties of the [[Islamic ruler]] and the legislative power, as well as the relationship between law and the [[Sharia]].

'''Lawmaking (in Persian: [[:fa:قانون‌گذاری|قانون‌گذاری]])''' is subjest of this Articles. From the point of view of some [[contemporary jurists]], [[legislation]] and the formation of law-making institutions in [[Islamic societies]] were seen to be in conflict with the right of [[divine legislation]]; therefore, they opposed it. On the other hand, some [[jurists]] saw it in line with [[divine legislation]] and a solution for the implementation of the [[Sharia]] and started to internalize it in their jurisprudential system. After proposing the concept of law in its new meaning since the [[Iranian Constitutional Era]] until now, [[jurists]] have agreed on the need of the society and the government for law. However, the difference in attitudes about what law is and by whom and in what scope it should be approved caused confusion about the concept of law, as well as the [[legitimacy]] of the law-making institutions. Answering these questions based on the theoretical foundations that every [[jurist]] believes in has led to the adoption of opposing positions and [[Fatwa|fatwas]] about the [[legitimacy]] of [[legislation]]. The issue of [[legislation]] is not included under the usual chapters of [[jurisprudence]] in [[jurisprudence]] books. However, it has been studied in the form of monographs about topics related to the [[Islamic government]], including the duties of the [[Islamic ruler]] and the legislative power, as well as the relationship between law and the [[Sharia]].

[[Legislation]] has been discussed in the two areas of [[customary lawmaking|customary and public matters]], and the [[Converting jurisprudential rules into law|conversion of jurisprudential rules into law]]. [[Shia jurists]] have provided several opinions about the [[legitimacy]] of [[legislation]] in the area of public affairs. Some [[jurists]], believing in the exclusiveness of the right to legislate to the Lawmaker, have considered the establishment of legislative bodies, including the [[parliament]], to be against religious teachings. On the other hand, some [[jurists]] consider it necessary to legislate in the area of matters that are not mentioned in textual contents (Manṭiqah al-Firāgh). After the victory of the [[Islamic Revolution of Iran]], believing in the exclusiveness of the right to legislate to the Lawmaker, the [[jurists]] influential in this victory rejected independence in [[legislation]]. However, due to the government's need for laws, they have accepted the existence of legislative institutions, such as the [[parliament]], under titles such as the planning and consultation council. The conversion of jurisprudential rules into binding law or the reflection of [[jurisprudence]] in the approved laws is also considered as one of the necessities of governance in the contemporary era. Creating a guarantee of execution for jurisprudential rulings is considered the main reason for turning [[jurisprudence]] chapters into binding laws. Nonetheless, some [[jurists]] did not consider it permissible to convert the rules of [[Sharia]] into law; because, in their opinion, the laws of Islam are clear and practicable and there is no need to re-legislate them.

Assuming the permissibility of forming legislative institutions, to ensure the compatibility of approved laws with the [[Sharia]] and also to resolve the conflict between law and [[jurisprudence]], solutions have been presented such as the [[first-rank law]], the formation of institutions such as the [[Guardian Council]] and the [[Expediency Discernment Council]] and also settlement of the conflict with the [[governmental ruling|governmental law]].

Line 68:

==Footnotes==

==Bibliography==

* Ardabīlī, Muhammad Ali, Ḥuqūq-i Jazā-yi ‘Umūmī, Tehran, Mīzān, 2017

* Khomeini, Sayyid Rūḥullāh, Ṣaḥīfi-yi Imam, Tehran, Mu’assisi-yi Tanzīm va Nashr-i Āthār-i Imam Khomeini, 2000

Line 136:

Line 138:

[[fa:قانون‌گذاری]]

[[Category:Contemporary Jurisprudence Articles]]

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 }}
 * '''abstract'''
-From the point of view of some [[contemporary jurists]], [[legislation]] and the formation of law-making institutions in [[Islamic societies]] were seen to be in conflict with the right of [[divine legislation]]; therefore, they opposed it. On the other hand, some [[jurists]] saw it in line with [[divine legislation]] and a solution for the implementation of the [[Sharia]] and started to internalize it in their jurisprudential system. After proposing the concept of law in its new meaning since the [[Iranian Constitutional Era]] until now, [[jurists]] have agreed on the need of the society and the government for law. However, the difference in attitudes about what law is and by whom and in what scope it should be approved caused confusion about the concept of law, as well as the [[legitimacy]] of the law-making institutions. Answering these questions based on the theoretical foundations that every [[jurist]] believes in has led to the adoption of opposing positions and [[Fatwa|fatwas]] about the [[legitimacy]] of [[legislation]]. The issue of [[legislation]] is not included under the usual chapters of [[jurisprudence]] in [[jurisprudence]] books. However, it has been studied in the form of monographs about topics related to the [[Islamic government]], including the duties of the [[Islamic ruler]] and the legislative power, as well as the relationship between law and the [[Sharia]].
+'''Lawmaking (in Persian: [[:fa:قانون‌گذاری|قانون‌گذاری]])''' is subjest of this Articles. From the point of view of some [[contemporary jurists]], [[legislation]] and the formation of law-making institutions in [[Islamic societies]] were seen to be in conflict with the right of [[divine legislation]]; therefore, they opposed it. On the other hand, some [[jurists]] saw it in line with [[divine legislation]] and a solution for the implementation of the [[Sharia]] and started to internalize it in their jurisprudential system. After proposing the concept of law in its new meaning since the [[Iranian Constitutional Era]] until now, [[jurists]] have agreed on the need of the society and the government for law. However, the difference in attitudes about what law is and by whom and in what scope it should be approved caused confusion about the concept of law, as well as the [[legitimacy]] of the law-making institutions. Answering these questions based on the theoretical foundations that every [[jurist]] believes in has led to the adoption of opposing positions and [[Fatwa|fatwas]] about the [[legitimacy]] of [[legislation]]. The issue of [[legislation]] is not included under the usual chapters of [[jurisprudence]] in [[jurisprudence]] books. However, it has been studied in the form of monographs about topics related to the [[Islamic government]], including the duties of the [[Islamic ruler]] and the legislative power, as well as the relationship between law and the [[Sharia]].
 [[Legislation]] has been discussed in the two areas of [[customary lawmaking|customary and public matters]], and the [[Converting jurisprudential rules into law|conversion of jurisprudential rules into law]]. [[Shia jurists]] have provided several opinions about the [[legitimacy]] of [[legislation]] in the area of public affairs. Some [[jurists]], believing in the exclusiveness of the right to legislate to the Lawmaker, have considered the establishment of legislative bodies, including the [[parliament]], to be against religious teachings. On the other hand, some [[jurists]] consider it necessary to legislate in the area of matters that are not mentioned in textual contents (Manṭiqah al-Firāgh). After the victory of the [[Islamic Revolution of Iran]], believing in the exclusiveness of the right to legislate to the Lawmaker, the [[jurists]] influential in this victory rejected independence in [[legislation]]. However, due to the government's need for laws, they have accepted the existence of legislative institutions, such as the [[parliament]], under titles such as the planning and consultation council. The conversion of jurisprudential rules into binding law or the reflection of [[jurisprudence]] in the approved laws is also considered as one of the necessities of governance in the contemporary era. Creating a guarantee of execution for jurisprudential rulings is considered the main reason for turning [[jurisprudence]] chapters into binding laws. Nonetheless, some [[jurists]] did not consider it permissible to convert the rules of [[Sharia]] into law; because, in their opinion, the laws of Islam are clear and practicable and there is no need to re-legislate them.
 Assuming the permissibility of forming legislative institutions, to ensure the compatibility of approved laws with the [[Sharia]] and also to resolve the conflict between law and [[jurisprudence]], solutions have been presented such as the [[first-rank law]], the formation of institutions such as the [[Guardian Council]] and the [[Expediency Discernment Council]] and also settlement of the conflict with the [[governmental ruling|governmental law]].
@@ Line 68: / Line 68: @@
 ==Footnotes==
+{{Footnotes}}
 <references />
 ==Bibliography==
+{{references}}
 * Ardabīlī, Muhammad Ali, Ḥuqūq-i Jazā-yi ‘Umūmī, Tehran, Mīzān, 2017
 * Khomeini, Sayyid Rūḥullāh, Ṣaḥīfi-yi Imam, Tehran, Mu’assisi-yi Tanzīm va Nashr-i Āthār-i Imam Khomeini, 2000
@@ Line 136: / Line 138: @@
 [[fa:قانون‌گذاری]]
+[[Category:Contemporary Jurisprudence Articles]]

Lawmaking: Difference between revisions