نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسنده
گروه حقوق اسلامی ، دانشکده حقوق - دانشگاه شهید بهشتی
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسنده [English]
The terminological resemblance between "Absolute Guardianship of the Jurist" (Velayat-e Motlaqeh-ye Faqih) and "absolute monarchy,"—a form of governance historically associated with the most degenerate and inhumane regimes—has, on one hand, tarnished the perception of the former in public discourse, while on the other, it risks paving the way for despotic or authoritarian rule. Employing a descriptive-analytical approach, this article argues that the similarity between the two concepts is merely lexical. The notion of "absolute" or "comprehensive" guardianship in the context of Velayat-e Faqih pertains to the jurist's authority in managing public affairs—an authority that is inherently bound by multiple constraints. These include:
Public acceptance of the jurist’s guardianship through free elections,
Accountability of the jurist and direct/indirect officials under their supervision,
The jurist’s authority being confined to the covenant between the people and the state, typically enshrined in the constitution,
The obligation of the jurist to consult and avoid unilateral decision-making, autocracy, or personal rule.
Thus, Velayat-e Faqih is not an unchecked dominion but a structured governance model operating within defined legal and ethical boundaries.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)