Home

The Mandate and Experience of Clerical Rule in Post-revolutionary Iran

The Islamic Republic of Iran provides us with a rather novel, indigenous experiment in political statecraft. Among contemporary political systems, it is unique as a “theocracy” infused with strong democratic elements. As the world’s only theocratic republic, Iran’s political system is organized around the principle that Shiite clergy have a divine right to rule since they are the qualified interpreters of God’s will. The country is led by a chief cleric who has the title of “Supreme Leader” and enjoys rather extensive powers.
 
Iran’s political system, however, also has strong democratic elements. The constitution recognizes the principle of popular sovereignty and separation of powers, makes frequent references to individual rights, and bestows upon the electorate the right to elect the president, members of parliament, and the Assembly of Religious Experts, as well as local city and village councils. This blending of theocratic and democratic features has led to tension over time. The Islamic Republic’s legitimacy rests in part on popular sovereignty and in part on its conformity to a revealed body of religious law.
 
The three papers assembled for this panel critically examine some of the key features and institutions of Iran’s consolidated theocracy. The first paper investigates how the political context in which the Vali Faghih wields his political authority necessitates a specific understanding of ethics that transcends the ways of everyday morality. The second paper delves into Ayatollah Khomeini’s theory of the "Rule of the Jurisprudent" by examining it from the angle of political representation. The author maintains that though Khomeini’s theory of *Velayat-e Motlagheh ye Faqih* is more pragmatic and secular than his theory of *Velayat-e Faqih*, its model of political representation is not significantly different. Finally, the last paper adds an empirical dimension to our deliberations on the experience of clerical rule by looking at the social background of over five hundred Friday Prayer Imams who constitute the front line of the clerical officialdom. The paper reveals interesting insights about their backgrounds and about how they carry out their roles as conduits between the ruling elite and the citizenry. (Alireza Shomali)

Chair
name: 
Mojtaba Mahdavi
Institutional Affiliation : 
University of Alberta
Academic Bio: 
Dr. Mojtaba Mahdavi is an assistant Professor of Political Science and Middle East & African Studies at University of Alberta, Canada. His research interests include post-Islamist Islam, Islamism and democratization, new theories of secularism and modern Islamic political thought. His writing has appeared in the Canadian, U.S. and Iranian academic journals. He is currently working on a project on post-Islamism and democratization in the Muslim world. Dr. Mahdavi’s forthcoming book examines problems and prospects for democratization in the post-revolutionary Iran.
Discussant
Name: 
n/a
Institutional Affiliation : 
n/a
Academic Bio : 
n/a
First Presenter
Name: 
Alireza Shomali
Institutional Affiliation : 
Wheaton College, Massachusetts
Academic Bio : 
Alireza Shomali is assistant professor of political science at Wheaton College in Massachusettes. He earned his PhD at Syracuse University's Maxwell School of Citizenship & Public Affairs (2006) and was a Postdoctoral fellow at Harvard University's Center for Middle Eastern Studies(2006-2007). He is interested in political philosophy in general and in Comparative Political Theory, in particular.
Concise Paper Title : 
Political Mysticism and Post-Revolutionary Iran
Paper Abstract (maximum of 400 words) : 
Comparative Political Theory (CPT) initiates dialogue among western and non-western branches of political thought. As an instance of the deployment of CPT, this paper compares the political philosophies of two jurists, Carl Schmitt (1888-1985) and Ruhollah Khomeini (1902-1989), on the concept of sovereignty. The similarity of their political theory, I argue, stems from similarities in the socio-political contexts of their work. Schmitt and Khomeini both experienced the “exception,” the existential threat to the State, and their intellectual reactions to crisis are almost identical. World War I taught Schmitt to see the State before the ever-present possibility of conflict. Similarly, the experience of statecraft in post-revolutionary Iran (1979-1989) taught Khomeini to see his nascent State as exposed to an ever-present possibility of conflict and existential threat: as examples, the internal upheavals of a revolutionary society, separatist movements, international economic embargos, and the Iraqi invasion of Iran. If the State is governed by the possibility of conflict, there is a need for resolute action before the threats can impact the State’s integrity. The existential threat results in a situation that is called the “crisis.” The exception/crisis dynamic escapes constitutional pre-established definitions. Before the untamable exception/crisis, the constitution discloses its incompetence and gets suspended. As Schmitt states, “the Sovereign is he who decides on the exception.”In other words, at the exception/crisis, the authority of the sovereign recognizes absolutely no legal limit. This paper explicates how Khomeini’s theory of the Absolute Guardianship of the Jurist harbors the above understanding of sovereignty. According to Khomeini, at the time of existential threat to the Islamic State, his absolute authority/sovereignty as the personal vali faghih (the supreme religious jurist) enabled him to suspend not only the Iranian Constitution, but also the whole Islamic shari’a, the sacred Islamic legal system. The paper detects the roots of this political philosophy in Khomeini’s mystical understanding of the vali’s authority. Political mysticism informs Khomeini’s theory of the absolute Sovereignty of the Jurist. Finally, the paper investigates the differences between Schmitt’s “political theology” and Khomeini’s political mysticism.
Second Presenter
Name: 
Ebrahim Soltani
Institutional Affiliation : 
Syracuse University
Academic Bio : 
Ebrahim Khalifeh Soltani is a PhD candidate in Political Science at Syracuse University, after obtaining an MA in this discipline from the same institution. He is also an M.D. of Medicine, having graduated from the University of Medical Sciences, Tehran. His research interests cover contemporary normative theories of justice His doctoral dissertation focuses on value pluralism and liberal egalitarianism (Berlin, Rawls, Dworkin, and Sen). He investigates and evaluates the way that liberal egalitarians seek to resolve the liberty/equality tension. Select publications: “Is Islamic Political Philosophy Possible?”, Bonyan, 21, 2002; “Soroush on Religion and Politics”, Aftab, 1, 2001; “The New Generation of Muslim Intellectuals in Iran: A Copernican Revolution”, Intellectual Change and the New Generation of Iranian Intellectuals, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Washington DC, 2000; “Religious Pluralism”, Rahavard, 11, 1999; “Religious Reformist Intellectuals”, Kiyan, 51, 1999; “Tolerating Others”, Kiyan, 45, 1998; “Religious Intellectuals and Religion as Culture”, Rahe-Nou, 13, 1997; “Freedom of Speech and Political Opposition”, Iran, 1997; “Religious Diversity and the Essence of Religion”, Rahe-Nou, 6, 1997; “Relativism”, Rahe-Nou, 4, 1996. He is also an experienced translator of specialized literature from English into Persian, with several book titles to his credit.
Concise Paper Title : 
Ayatollah Khomeini and the Idea of Political Representation
Paper Abstract (maximum of 400 words) : 
Ruhollah Khomeini offered two politico-theological theories: the Rule of the Jurisprudent (Velayat-e Faqih) and the Absolute Rule of the Jurisprudent (Velayat-e Motlagheh ye Faqih). This paper compares these two theories from the perspective of political representation. Political representation has been defined as an essential component of modern democracy. Democratic theorists characterize political representation in terms of a reciprocal activity on behalf, or, in the interest, of someone else. The idea of political representation implies a creative and autonomous role for the representative. Political representation is different from various kinds of individual, “one-to-one,” or “person-to-person” representation. A political representative acts for an “unorganized group” of citizens who do not have a single, unique, and objectively determinable “interest.” The role of the political representative is not just to be the agent of a constituency. In other words, the active and relatively independent role of a political representative is somehow the result of the substantive part of political representation, on the one hand, and the ambiguous and undetermined nature of an unorganized group of constituents on the other. And finally, political representation is a “public” and “institutional” kind of relationship, not a “personal” and “intersubjective” one. Political representation involves many people and groups and operates with the complexity of large-scale social arrangements and institutions. In the theory of Velayat-e Faqih, God is the only ruler and no one has any intrinsic legislative right. An Islamic ruler only has the power of executing divine laws. Faqih, the most competent individual for establishing and leading an Islamic government, is God’s choice, and people’s votes do not play any role in the selection of Faqih or in his resignation from the leadership of the Islamic government. He is the people’s guardian, not their representative. Khomeini’s second, post-revolutionary theory constitutes a radical departure from the views of mainstream Shiism. The theory breaks the exclusive sovereignty of God and entrusts the jurist with the power of initiating, not just interpreting or implementing, the Islamic law. The jurist is a sovereign power whose ability to initiate laws surpasses the limits of the traditionally-known divine law. However, the paper argues that although Khomeini’s second theory is much more pragmatic and secular than the first, its model of political representation is not significantly different.
Thid Presenter
Name: 
Koroush Rahimkhani
Institutional Affiliation : 
Independent researcher
Academic Bio : 
Kourosh Rahimkhani’s current research is on the political elite of post-revolutionary Iran and the centralization of the clerical network in contemporary Iran. He holds a Bachelor of Arts in Administration and Management from Iran, and a Master of Arts in Political Science from Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York (2004). He started his professional career as a journalist in the early 1990s, as the Iran-Iraq war came to an end and Ayatollah Khomeini passed away. He managed to cover these watershed events and many others during the course of the 1990s. The highlight of this era was the 1997 electoral victory of a reformist presidential candidate, Mohammad Khatami, which sent shock waves through the Iranian political establishment. He has extensive experience as an editor and reporter in the Iranian reformist press, having worked –between 1997 and 2002--as political and economic editor and reporter for the following dailies: Jame’eh, Toos, Asr-e Azadegan, Akhbar-e Eqtesad, and Neshat. Kourosh Rahimkhani has also served as a managing editor of Aftab (a monthly political magazine) and Economic Hamshahri (an economic daily), as an economic editor at Bonyan (a political daily), and as an editor and reporter of Khordad ( a political daily). Kourosh Rahimkhani is the editor of the book Perestroika va Eslahat (Perestroika and Reform), Tehran: Jame’eh Iranian, 2001, 219 pp. In addition to above, he has written numerous reports and analyses published in various publications.
Concise Paper Title : 
The institutionalization of clerical establishment in post-revolutionary Iran; The Case of Friday Prayer
Paper Abstract (maximum of 400 words) : 
The 1979 revolution not only changed Iran’s structure of political domination, but it fundamentally altered the relationship between religion and politics. As several scholars have pointed out, the emergence of theocratic rule ended the dual structure of political authority and religious authority that characterized the post-Safavid era. However, the post-revolutionary structure has maintained its own contradictions which manifest in the formation of parallel institutions and the dual structure of Supreme Leader versus Popular sovereignty. In a sense, there are dual governments, as one set of institutions is based on the legitimacy of the Supreme religious authority and another set of formal institutions derives legitimacy from elections. In other words, the revolution ended the dual structure of authority, but it has led to a structure of dual sovereignty. Since February 1979, impressive amounts of research have been devoted to analyzing and illustrating the institutionalization of clerical establishment in post-revolutionary Iran. Yet, ironically enough, our knowledge of the clerical elite in Iran remains limited to a few leading figures (e.g., the Supreme Leader and the leading clerics in Tehran and Qom). Scholars know very little about the characteristics of the middle and lower clerical elites, and three decades after the clergy became the state elite par excellence, no comprehensive empirical study exists that examines the recruitment, composition, and circulation of the clergy in the governmental and parallel institutions. To understand the nature of one such parallel institution, this paper will analyze the institution of Friday Prayer that is part of the Supreme Leader’s network in various cities and provinces. It examines the structure of this institution and the social background of more than five hundred Friday Prayer Imams. The study will address the following group of questions: What are the social backgrounds of the Friday Prayer Imams? What percentage of the Friday Prayer Imams come from urban areas as compared to rural areas? How frequently are these clerics appointed by the Supreme Leader? What percentage of the Friday Prayer Imams studied in the main seminaries? The paper maintains that, contrary to popular belief, many Friday Prayer Imams are from rural backgrounds and that their appointments were rarely the result of the traditional mode of mujtahed-student relationships.
Fourth Presenter
Name: 
n/a
Academic Bio : 
n/a
Concise Paper Title : 
n/a
Paper Abstract (maximum of 400 words) : 
n/a

Posted in