Abstract

The theocratic constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran was approved in December 1979. Accordingly, the “Supreme Leader” has a strong authority over both the religious and political affairs of the nation, dominant to all branches of the state including the publicly “elected” ones. Both Grand Ayatollah Khomeini, the founder of the Islamic Republic, and Ayatollah Khamenei, the current supreme leader, demonstrated their dominant authority over the power of the elected President as well as the national parliament and have intensified the sociopolitical conflicts in Iran since the last presidential election in June 2009. Interestingly, the underlying causes of the current sociopolitical situation in Iran may be found in the philosophical and historical reasons for the division of the Shi’a and Sunni traditions of Islam. First, Shi’a, contrary to Sunni, believes that only Allah, the God, may choose his vicegerent on Earth, and therefore no one else has a choice in the matter. This belief is based on numerous narrations in Shi’a Hadith which describe that the prophet had “selected” his cousin Ali as his successor; however, after the prophet passed away, Abu-Bakr was “wrongly elected” as the first of the four Caliphates to rule over the Muslims. Secondly, Abu-Bakr was only a political leader and would not impose himself on people as the religious intermediary with God. However, the Shi’a view is that Ali should have continued to lead the Muslim nation in both “religious and political” affairs, as the Prophet did. This integration of religion and politics lies at the heart of the political philosophy and the foundation of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Such an interpretation of Shi’a requires that both political and religious affairs be controlled under the jurisdiction of God through the “chosen” Imam. According to the philosophical speculations and interpretations of the Shi’a scholars in the Islamic Republic of Iran, “God would not leave people without an Imam, and in his absence, a rightful successor ”. In this paper, the philosophical framework for such an interpretation and its repercussions on the institution of democracy and peaceful government in contemporary Iran is discussed. By analyzing the underlying ethical theory in Islam, based on pluralistic prima facie ethical obligations, we may realize how the political virtue of protecting the Islamic State may overshadow all other ethical virtues in the ensuing sociopolitical environment