عبدالمطلب عبداله رهیافت انقلاب اسلامی 2980-9118 19 71 2025 09 21 The Role of Islamic System Officials in Presenting an Optimal Governance Model Based on Public Trust نقش کارگزاران نظام اسلامی در ارائه الگوی مطلوب حکمرانی بر مبنا ی اعتماد عمومی 3 20 232056 FA علی حسین شهبازی دانشجوی دکتری گروه علوم سیاسی، واحد لامرد، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، لامرد، ایران غفار زارعی استادیار گروه علوم سیاسی، واحد لامرد، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، لامرد، ایران امین روان بد استادیار گروه علوم سیاسی، واحد لامرد، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، لامرد، ایران Journal Article 2024 12 17 This study aims to examine the optimal governance model concerning the element of public trust in the Islamic system and society. The research question is: What is the role of the agents of the Islamic system in achieving the optimal governance model based on public trust? The results indicate that the performance of the agents of the Islamic system, from the perspective of public trust, plays a significant role in shaping the optimal governance model in two ways: horizontal trust (interactions and relationships among the agents) and vertical trust (relationships between agents and the people). This means that the role and performance of the agents in achieving the optimal governance model in the Islamic system, in its horizontal aspect, require consideration of elements such as consultation and meritocracy, avoidance of division and power-seeking, and realism. Moreover, from the perspective of vertical trust, it requires simplicity and integrity, opposition to oppression, justice, and receptiveness to criticism in order to realize the structure of an ideal society. The practical and theoretical conduct of the infallible Imams (peace be upon them) introduces the dimensions of optimal governance as being contingent upon the application of the aforementioned principles. The experience of the Islamic Republic of Iran has also continued this approach; however, it requires operationalizing these principles within the current conditions of society, accepting criticism in the form of public culture and institutionally, and stating criteria for distinguishing principled, honest, and most suitable elites, so that public trust can serve as a permanent support for the Islamic system. This article employs a theoretical framework for modeling and a descriptive-analytical method. Introduction Every political and social system, for its continuity, provision of services, and meeting the needs of its members, is influenced by structural and agent-related factors. Structural factors refer to historical, political, social, and long-standing conditions that affect the general state and situation of society; agent-related factors refer to the interactions of elites and managers who can change the status of society. Accordingly, a significant part of studies on societal governance focuses on these two factors, aiming to provide an optimal model that both solves societal problems and offers a desirable vision for the future. The Islamic system, in line with its lofty goals, emphasizes overcoming obstacles to achieve an ideal society and, due to the connection between religious laws and the desired political and social society, has formulated and announced related strategies. Among the most important strategies is the examination of the characteristics and behavior of officials, which has been a subject of attention since long ago and can be observed in verses, narrations, religious laws, and most importantly, the practices of the Imams (peace be upon them). Today, with the establishment of the Islamic Republic of Iran, presenting an optimal model for political and social conditions and consequently outlining a vision regarding the role and position of officials has become highly significant and can be done by referencing religious principles and laws. Officials in the Islamic Republic of Iran comprise elites, leaders, managers, and notable individuals who influence the behavior and speech of the people in various domains and are considered as society’s “notables.” The role these officials and elites play in Islamic society ultimately reflects the views and opinions of the people, which can be examined through the concept of public trust in two dimensions: horizontal trust and vertical trust. Horizontal trust focuses on the interaction among elites, while vertical trust pertains to the interaction between the people and elites or political officials. From this perspective, achieving an optimal governance model that goes beyond mere administration and can be appealing to members of society or other societies requires criteria to evaluate officials’ behavior and performance. This means assessing to what extent each action and behavior of officials aligns with the people’s views and to what extent it causes dissatisfaction and distrust. Based on this, the present research aims to discuss the role of Islamic system officials in realizing an optimal governance model through the lens of public trust and related components. The necessity of such research lies primarily in providing criteria to reassess the appropriate behavior of officials towards the people and each other and identifying which characteristics and standards can foster or diminish public trust in the path toward an optimal governance model in the Islamic system. This study is fundamental research that, using the role of officials, seeks to propose an ideal governance model in Islamic society. This model specifically addresses political conditions and societal management and identifies behavioral damages of officials in the Islamic Republic of Iran based on standards presented in the traditions of the Imams or other religious laws. The article employs a theoretical framework of modeling and a descriptive-analytical method. Main Body Achieving an ideal system in Islamic society can be examined from two aspects: First, building trust among elites (vertical trust), so that elites and political officials can implement consultation and meritocracy in selecting societal managers and thus govern society more competently. Another approach discussed here is managing society through synergizing managerial abilities, employing unifying methods, and avoiding division or treating power as an ultimate goal. Realism is also a principle within the duties and functions of managers and officials in Islamic society to perform necessary actions considering internal and external circumstances and solving problems. This means the role of Islamic system officials, based on verses, narrations, and years of experience in the Islamic Republic of Iran, requires considering public feedback. If any of these roles exceed moderation and power becomes an end for officials, achieving the optimal governance model will be impossible. The other aspect of an ideal society can be examined through vertical trust (interaction between people and Islamic system officials). This aspect of the optimal governance model is related to officials’ performance in providing public services while exhibiting qualities such as integrity, simplicity, justice, opposition to oppression, acceptance of criticism, and willingness to reform. If these characteristics are neglected in society’s management, public trust in elites and officials will erode, depriving the people, the main support of the political system, of their role in countering threats and dangers. This will nullify the distinguishing features, goals, and tools of the Islamic system in becoming a model. Therefore, it is necessary to focus on increasing the people’s role in critiquing society and monitoring officials’ performance, promoting public accountability, expanding general oversight on one hand, and establishing independent judicial supervision favoring the people and free from political bias on the other. Conclusion The role and performance of officials and managers in any society are well-known, and societal corruption or integrity is closely linked to their actions. Accordingly, this research aims to examine the optimal governance model concerning the element of public trust in the Islamic system and society. The main question is: What is the role of Islamic system officials in realizing an optimal governance model based on public trust? The study’s results show that the performance of officials, from the perspective of public trust, is crucial in forming the ideal governance model in two dimensions: horizontal trust (relations and interactions among officials) and vertical trust (relations between officials and the people). This means that the role and performance of officials in achieving an optimal governance model in the Islamic system horizontally require consultation, meritocracy, avoidance of division and power-seeking, and realism. Vertically, it requires integrity, simplicity, justice, opposition to oppression, and acceptance of criticism to realize the framework of an ideal society. The practical and theoretical conduct of the Imams (peace be upon them) introduces the dimensions of optimal governance as dependent on applying these principles. The experience of the Islamic Republic of Iran’s governance model continues this path but requires implementing them in the current social conditions, accepting criticism institutionally within the public culture, and defining criteria to distinguish religiously committed, honest, and competent elites. This way, public trust can be established as a permanent support for the Islamic system. در پژوهش حاضر تلاش بر این است تا الگوی مطلوب حکمرانی با توجه به عنصر اعتماد عمومی در نظام و جامعه اسلامی بررسی شود. پرسش مقاله این است که نقش کارگزاران نظام اسلامی از جهت تحقق الگوی مطلوب حکمرانی بر مبنای اعتماد عمومی چیست؟ نتایج پژوهش نشان داد که عملکرد کارگزاران نظام اسلامی از منظر اعتماد عمومی از دو منظر اعتماد افقی (تعامل و روابط کارگزاران با یکدیگر) و اعتماد عمودی (روابط کارگزاران با مردم) نقش مهمی در شکل گیری الگوی مطلوب حکمرانی دارد. بدین معنا که نقش و عملکرد کارگزاران در تحقق الگوی مطلوب حکمرانی در نظام اسلامی در شکل افقی آن نیازمند در نظر گرفتن عناصر مشورت و شایستهسالاری، پرهیز از تفرقه و قدرت طلبی و واقع بینی است. همچنین از منظر اعتماد عمودی نیازمند ساده زیستی و پاک دستی، ظلم ستیزی و عدالت و انتقادپذیری است تا بتوان شاکله جامعه مطلوب را تحقق بخشید. سیره عملی و نظری ائمه معصوم (ع)، ابعاد حکمرانی مطلوب را در گرو کاربست اصول یاد شده معرفی نموده که تجربه الگوی جمهوری اسلامی ایران نیز تداوم همین رویه بوده، اما نیازمند عملیاتی ساختن آنان در بستر شرایط امروزی جامعه، پذیرش نقد و انتقاد در قالب فرهنگ عمومی و به شکل نهادی و بیان ملاکهایی برای تمیز نخبگان شریعت محور، پاکدست و اصلح است تا در پرتو آن بتوان اعتماد عمومی را به عنوان پشتوانه دائمی نظام اسلامی قرار داد. در مقاله حاضر از چارچوب نظری الگویابی و روش توصیفی-تحلیلی استفاده شده است.

https://www.rahyaftjournal.ir/article_232056_9193d2b9a687bae969d646c774284514.pdf

عبدالمطلب عبداله رهیافت انقلاب اسلامی 2980-9118 19 71 2025 08 23 The Role of Institutional Structures in Combating Corruption in Iran and China جایگاه ساختار های نهادی در مبارزه با فساد در ایران و چین 21 50 232057 FA ایمان رمضانی گروه علوم سیاسی، واحد نیشابور، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، نیشابور، ایران اهورا راهبر گروه علوم سیاسی، واحد نیشابور، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، نیشابور، ایران(نویسنده مسئول) حسین شریعتی گروه علوم سیاسی، واحد نیشابور، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، نیشابور، ایران Journal Article 2025 01 14 This article investigates the role and effectiveness of institutional structures in combating corruption in Iran and China, focusing on the relationship between political power, administrative organization, and accountability mechanisms. The study compares how two distinct political systems—an Islamic theocracy and a socialist one-party state—design, manage, and utilize institutional frameworks to control corruption. Employing a qualitative–comparative methodology and document analysis, the research explores the evolution, mandates, and performance of key anti-corruption institutions such as Iran’s Supreme Audit Court, the General Inspection Organization, and the Chinese Central Commission for Discipline Inspection (CCDI). Findings show that while both countries have established extensive institutional networks to monitor financial integrity and public service ethics, the degree of political autonomy and transparency within these structures determines their effectiveness. China’s centralized disciplinary system has achieved relative efficiency through internal party supervision and strong enforcement, whereas Iran’s fragmented oversight model—marked by overlapping authorities and limited inter-agency coordination—undermines accountability. The study concludes that genuine institutional reform requires strengthening independence, transparency, and the rule of law rather than merely expanding the number of anti-corruption agencies. Introduction Corruption remains one of the most persistent challenges undermining governance, public trust, and economic development worldwide. Its institutional dimension—the ability or failure of political systems to design and sustain mechanisms of control—is particularly significant in developing states. Iran and China, despite differing in ideology and political organization, both demonstrate long-standing struggles to regulate bureaucratic behavior and restrain abuse of power. In Iran, anti-corruption discourse has been central to political reform since the 1990s, culminating in the establishment of multiple supervisory bodies under the Constitution, such as the Supreme Audit Court (Divan-e Mohasebat), the General Inspection Organization (Sazman-e Bazresi Koli), and judicial anti-corruption task forces. In China, the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection (CCDI) and later the National Supervisory Commission (NSC) have become pillars of the state’s anti-corruption regime.ذThe question guiding this study is: How do institutional structures in Iran and China differ in design and functionality when addressing corruption, and what factors determine their relative effectiveness? By comparing the two models, the research aims to uncover how institutional configuration, political culture, and administrative centralization shape anti-corruption outcomes. Materials and Methods This study adopts a qualitative comparative institutional analysis, drawing upon constitutional documents, legislative acts, and secondary sources in Persian, Chinese, and English. The research proceeds through three analytical layers: Structural layer – examination of organizational design, hierarchical authority, and coordination mechanisms between agencies; Functional layer – assessment of enforcement capacity, transparency, and accountability in practice; Contextual layer – consideration of political and cultural determinants, such as party dominance, judicial independence, and public participation. In the Iranian context, the research analyzes primary legal sources including Articles 55, 174, and 156 of the Constitution, as well as statutory documents defining the duties of the Supreme Audit Court and the General Inspection Organization. In the Chinese case, the focus is on institutional reforms initiated under Xi Jinping’s “Tigers and Flies” campaign (2013–present), the Supervision Law (2018), and party-state integration through the CCDI–NSC merger. The methodological framework combines documentary analysis with comparative institutionalism, allowing the researcher to assess how variations in institutional design lead to different enforcement outcomes despite similar goals of administrative integrity. Discussion The findings reveal that both Iran and China have developed broad institutional architectures for anti-corruption governance, yet they differ fundamentally in political logic and operational coherence. In China, the CCDI operates within the framework of party discipline, possessing investigative powers that transcend bureaucratic hierarchy. The institutional integration of the CCDI with the National Supervisory Commission (NSC) has established a unified chain of command under the Communist Party’s leadership. This vertical accountability, though politically centralized, has enabled consistent implementation of anti-corruption campaigns and rapid enforcement of sanctions. Public perception surveys conducted by Transparency International and domestic universities indicate improved bureaucratic compliance and deterrence of large-scale graft since 2013. By contrast, Iran’s anti-corruption architecture reflects a pluralistic but fragmented system, with multiple agencies overlapping in mandate and authority. The Supreme Audit Court monitors fiscal discipline within state accounts, the General Inspection Organization oversees legality in administrative conduct, and the Judiciary’s Special Anti-Corruption Task Forces handle prosecutorial enforcement. However, weak coordination, political interference, and limited access to data have constrained their performance. Iran’s legal framework, rooted in Article 174 of the Constitution, envisions broad supervisory powers, yet institutional autonomy is curtailed by political oversight from the judiciary and the executive. The absence of an integrated national anti-corruption database and limited whistleblower protection laws further restricts transparency. From a comparative governance perspective, China’s centralized institutionalization ensures decisiveness but risks politicization and lack of due process, while Iran’s decentralized approach provides formal independence but results in inefficiency. In both cases, institutional legitimacy depends on balancing enforcement with procedural fairness. A key distinction lies in institutional accountability: in China, disciplinary inspection reports directly to the party’s Central Committee, whereas in Iran, audit and inspection agencies report to Parliament and the judiciary, creating multiple, sometimes conflicting, accountability pathways. The study identifies three major determinants of institutional success: Coherence and clarity of mandates – China’s unified disciplinary system contrasts with Iran’s overlapping agencies; Transparency and data integration – centralized monitoring in China enables real-time supervision; Public participation and legal safeguards – Iran’s lack of systematic citizen oversight and press freedom limits social accountability. Ultimately, both systems confront the same dilemma: how to institutionalize control without undermining political stability. While China’s party-based model emphasizes deterrence through hierarchical discipline, Iran’s model remains caught between legal pluralism and bureaucratic inertia. Conclusion The comparative analysis concludes that the effectiveness of anti-corruption institutions depends less on the number of agencies and more on the integrity of institutional design—clarity of authority, operational independence, and legal accountability. China’s anti-corruption institutions demonstrate relative efficiency due to centralized leadership, consistent policy enforcement, and a culture of bureaucratic discipline embedded within party structures. However, their dependence on political will and limited judicial oversight poses challenges to sustainability and fairness. Iran’s framework, although grounded in constitutional oversight and Islamic ethics, suffers from structural fragmentation and limited inter-agency coordination. Genuine reform requires integrating supervisory systems under a coherent national strategy, enhancing data transparency, and guaranteeing the independence of oversight institutions from political influence. The study underscores that institutional reform must be accompanied by normative change—a shift from reactive punishment to preventive governance emphasizing transparency, civic participation, and legal education. By comparing Iran and China, the article contributes to broader debates on governance reform in hybrid regimes, illustrating how institutional architecture mediates the relationship between power, accountability, and justice. Ultimately, sustainable anti-corruption efforts require not only robust institutions but also a culture of responsibility grounded in ethical governance and the rule of law. نهادها نقشی اساسی در شکل‌گیری و اجرای سیاست‌های ضد فساد دارند. میزان استقلال، هماهنگی و کارآمدی نهادهای نظارتی می‌تواند تأثیر مستقیمی بر موفقیت یا ناکامی کشورها در مقابله با فساد داشته باشد. این مقاله به بررسی جایگاه ساختارهای نهادی در مبارزه با فساد در دو کشور ایران و چین می‌پردازد. سؤال اصلی این است که چگونه ساختارهای نهادی در ایران و چین بر مبارزه با فساد تأثیرگذار هستند؟ فرضیه اصلی این است که ساختار حکمرانی متمرکز در چین، با وجود هماهنگی بیشتر بین نهادها، موفقیت‌های بیشتری در مبارزه با فساد کسب کرده است، در حالی که ساختار پیچیده و غیرمتمرکز در ایران، همراه با تضادهای نهادی و فساد گسترده، مانع از اجرای مؤثر سیاست‌های ضد فساد شده است. پژوهش با استفاده از روش توصیفی-تحلیلی، داده‌های بین‌المللی از منابعی همچون بانک جهانی و سازمان شفافیت بین‌المللی را تحلیل کرده است. نتایج نشان می‌دهد که چین به دلیل تمرکز نهادی و برخورد قاطع‌تر با فساد، توانسته است بهبود نسبی در کنترل فساد ایجاد کند، در حالی که در ایران، پیچیدگی نهادی و ضعف نظارتی از موانع اصلی در پیشبرد سیاست‌های ضد فساد بوده است.

https://www.rahyaftjournal.ir/article_232057_5618529c9524f25e3c981221c4a5263d.pdf

عبدالمطلب عبداله رهیافت انقلاب اسلامی 2980-9118 19 71 2025 08 23 The Position of Tolerance and Forbearance in Iranian Society after the Islamic Revolution with Emphasis on the Views of Imam Khomeini and the Supreme Leader جایگاه تساهل و مدارا در جامعه ایران پس از انقلاب اسلامی با تأکید بر آراء امام و آیت الله خامنه ای 51 72 232058 FA سیدمحسن رضایی دانشجوی دکتری علوم قرآن و حدیث، واحد تهران مرکزی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران عبدالرضا مظاهری استاد گروه فلسفه و عرفان، واحد تهران مرکزی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران سیده فاطمه هاشمی استادیار گروه علوم قرآن و حدیث، واحد تهران مرکزی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران Journal Article 2024 12 05 Abstract This study aims to examine the position of tolerance and patience in Iranian society after the Islamic Revolution, specifically focusing on the views of Imam Khomeini (RA) and the Supreme Leader. The research question is: What are the main elements of an ideal Islamic society based on tolerance and patience according to the leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran? The hypothesis of the research is: In the views of Imam Khomeini (RA), tolerance and patience negate violence and coercive behaviors, while in the views of Ayatollah Khamenei, tolerance and patience are not absolute matters but rather relative concepts that require a framework within Islamic society. The results indicate that tolerance and patience in Islamic thought are based on a type of ethical and political approach that necessitates a framework to safeguard the public morality of society and prevent the disregard of Sharia rulings. Therefore, contrary to what is proposed in a secular approach, tolerance and patience are not indifferent to the fate of public morality in society or the promotion of any idea, even the negation of Sharia rulings. These two concepts, like any other principles in political and social arenas, require consideration of public ethics and the responsibility of the Islamic government to support the expression of the opinions and views of the people, while also ensuring that citizens’ activities do not lead to insults, repression, belittlement, or negation of the principles of Sharia and ethics in Islamic society. This article employs descriptive and analytical methods and utilizes library resources, with the theoretical framework being the model of Islamic moral and political tolerance. Introduction The realm of politics and society has always been, and will continue to be, a place of conflict, contestation, diverse opinions, and new perspectives. However, political systems, each in their own way—either through coercive methods or peaceful means and by creating a calm and non-violent political environment—strive to manage these issues. The importance of managing conflicts, viewpoints, and opinions is so significant that political systems are classified into democratic, non-democratic, authoritarian, or populist categories based on the presence and degree of tolerance and forbearance. Accordingly, modern political systems, mostly grounded in law, have recognized the importance and role of tolerance and forbearance in governance. Most democratic systems endeavor to establish a public sphere free of coercion and violence, based on law and equality, so that citizens can express their views both in social relations and in interactions with the government, and witness their effects in personal and social life. Achieving a society based on tolerance and forbearance, however, is not easy; ideally, the system of tolerance and forbearance has always faced challenges arising from violent interactions by citizens or the government’s neglect of citizens’ right to express their opinions. Given the significance of tolerance and forbearance in governance, the Islamic Republic of Iran—emerging from the discourse of the Islamic Revolution of 1979—although not explicitly naming these principles, contains numerous references, related terms, and laws supporting the principles of tolerance and forbearance in different parts of its constitution, as well as in the traditions of Imam Khomeini (may God sanctify his soul) and the Supreme Leader. Clear manifestations of support for these principles include Articles 24 to 27 and Article 56 of the Constitution, among others related to the sovereignty of the nation. Thus, tolerance and forbearance essentially imply acknowledging the role and position of the people, respecting their opinions, and providing a suitable platform for expressing their views free from violence, paternalistic behavior, or narrow-mindedness. Therefore, the importance of forbearance and tolerance is frequently emphasized in the intellectual tradition of Imam Khomeini, the Supreme Leader, and various laws. Since tolerance and forbearance are often considered Western-derived governance concepts, it is particularly important to distinguish and clarify their Islamic approach within managing an Islamic society. In Islamic thought, tolerance and forbearance hold a special status both as social values and as matters grounded in the sacred divine law (Sharia), inseparable from social and political spheres, with practical and tangible expressions similar to other religious concepts and rulings. Hence, this study seeks to discuss the place of tolerance and forbearance in Iranian society after the Islamic Revolution by examining the views of Imam Khomeini and the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei. The necessity and importance of this paper lie in presenting the theoretical foundations of tolerance and forbearance in the opinions of Imam Khomeini, the Supreme Leader, and the Constitution, while also illustrating their practical examples. This aims to highlight the role of tolerance and forbearance and to propose a suitable framework for improving governance in post-revolutionary Iran. The central research question is: What are the characteristics of an ideal Islamic political system in terms of the role of tolerance and forbearance according to Imam Khomeini and the Supreme Leader? The paper employs descriptive-analytical methodology and library research, using the theoretical framework of Islamic moral and political forbearance. Main Body Islamic thought does not view tolerance and forbearance as permissiveness or indifference towards expressing opinions but, distancing itself from secular models of tolerance, sees them as tools to realize the ideal Islamic society based on a monotheistic worldview. The core model of the ideal Islamic society grounded in tolerance and forbearance involves leniency towards people while preventing infringement on the principles of Sharia and societal beliefs. Thus, the model of tolerance and forbearance in the discourse of the Islamic Revolution, including in the views of Imam Khomeini and Ayatollah Khamenei, represents a distinct approach derived from the Sharia perspective—primarily related to the sacred Islamic law and secondly to social relations among community members. From this perspective, tolerance and forbearance are neither absolute nor permanent means of governing society and interpersonal or political relations but are tools to implement Sharia rulings, facilitate easy and hassle-free solutions, and consider effective ideas. The boundaries of tolerance and forbearance are also defined by adherence to Sharia principles, public ethics, and respect for others’ beliefs. Imam Khomeini emphasized that without forbearance, the Islamic political system tends toward corruption; therefore, one key factor in preventing corruption, including authoritarianism, is applying tolerance and forbearance. In Imam Khomeini’s views, tolerance and forbearance are ethical attributes and criteria to gauge rulers' popularity among the people. A government that does not rely on violence or coercion but fosters free dialogue within the limits of Sharia, Islamic values, and authentic religious beliefs will naturally attract others. Thus, applying Imam Khomeini’s ideas in domestic and foreign policy signifies a kind of soft power that uses compassionate methods to resolve political conflicts peacefully, leading ultimately to the flourishing of Islamic society and an ideal governance model based on reason and Sharia. Ayatollah Khamenei’s approach to tolerance and forbearance emphasizes distinguishing between the absolute tolerance in secular Western discourse and the relative tolerance in Islamic thought. This means the Islamic legacy and the vision of an ideal future cannot accommodate absolute tolerance because it undermines the Islamic society’s values and, consequently, the Islamic government built to promote these values. Accordingly, Ayatollah Khamenei’s views involve tolerance combined with firmness and the establishment of clear boundaries by the Islamic government. Ignoring these boundaries and practicing absolute tolerance, as in secular governments, leads to questioning all accepted societal values and paves the way for moral and behavioral chaos in Islamic society. Therefore, tolerance and forbearance require limits to respect Sharia boundaries and prevent paths that ultimately question religious principles and foundations. In this regard, tolerance and forbearance are encompassed by a framework of Sharia rulings, emphasizing citizens’ responsibility and the Islamic government’s accountability to the evolving demands of the people. Conclusion Based on the findings of this study, tolerance and forbearance are fundamental elements in governance and societal management, particularly in political and social realms. In societies lacking tolerance and forbearance, violence, suppression, and disregard for others’ thoughts and beliefs dominate, and there is no social responsibility among citizens or governmental accountability toward the people. This research examined the position of tolerance and forbearance in post-revolutionary Iran, focusing on the views of Imam Khomeini and the Supreme Leader. The central question was: What are the main characteristics of an ideal Islamic society based on tolerance and forbearance according to these leaders? The hypothesis is that Imam Khomeini’s views promote the negation of violence and coercive behavior through tolerance and forbearance, while Ayatollah Khamenei sees these concepts as relative and requiring defined boundaries within an Islamic society. The results show that tolerance and forbearance in Islamic thought rely on an ethical and political approach demanding frameworks that safeguard public ethics and prevent neglect of Sharia rulings. Unlike secular approaches, these concepts do not imply indifference toward societal moral fate or endorsing any ideology, including those that deny Sharia rulings. Like any political and social principle, tolerance and forbearance require consideration of public ethics, governmental responsibility in supporting free expression within limits, and citizens’ actions not leading to insult, suppression, or denial of Sharia and ethics in Islamic society. پژوهش حاضر به دنبال بررسی جایگاه تساهل و مدارا در جامعه ایران پس از انقلاب اسلامی و بهطور مشخص آراء امام خمینی (ره) و مقام معظم رهبری برآمده است. این پرسش مطرح است که عناصر اصلی جامعه مطلوب اسلامی بر مبنای تساهل و مدارا در آراء رهبران جمهوری اسلامی ایران چه مشخصاتی دارد؟ فرضیه پژوهش این است: در آراء امام خمینی (ره)، تساهل و مدارا باعث نفی خشونت و رفتارهای قهری حاکم شده و در آراء آیتالله خامنهای، تساهل و مدارا نه موضوعاتی مطلق، بلکه امری نسبی و نیازمند تعیین چارچوب در جامعه اسلامی هستند. نتایج تحقیق نشان میدهد که تساهل و مدارا در اندیشه اسلامی مبتنی بر نوعی رویکرد اخلاقی و سیاسی است که نیازمند تعیین چارچوب برای حراست از اخلاق عمومی جامعه و جلوگیری از نادیده گرفتن احکام شریعت می باشد. بنابراین مدارا و تساهل برخلاف آنچه در رویکرد سکولار مطرح است، بی تفاوت نسبت به سرنوشت اخلاق عمومی جامعه یا ترویج هر اندیشهای حتی نفی احکام شریعت نیست. این دو مفهوم نظیر هر اصول دیگری در عرصه سیاسی و اجتماعی، مستلزم در نظر گرفتن اخلاق عمومی، مسؤولیت حکومت اسلامی برای حمایت از ابراز عقیده و دیدگاه مردم از یکسو و فعالیت شهروندان در محدودهای است که باعث توهین، سرکوب، کوچکانگاری و نفی اصول شریعت و اخلاق در جامعه اسلامی نشوند. در مقاله حاضر از روش توصیفی و تحلیلی و ابزار کتابخانهای بهره برده میشود و چارچوب نظری مقاله نیز الگوی مدارای اخلاقی و سیاسی اسلامی است.

https://www.rahyaftjournal.ir/article_232058_18f9658e1d71083a4451dce4a135f4b9.pdf

عبدالمطلب عبداله رهیافت انقلاب اسلامی 2980-9118 19 71 2025 08 23 A Sociological Analysis of Generational and Cultural Crisis in Iran after the Islamic Revolution (with Emphasis on the Poems of Ahmad Azizi) تحلیل جامعه‌ شناختی بحران نسلی و فرهنگی در ایران پس از انقلاب (با تاکید بر اشعار احمد عزیزی ) 73 98 232059 FA سلمان کرمی دانشجوی دکتری گروه جامعه شناسی،واحد تهران مرکزی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران مصطفی اکبریان استادیار گروه جامعه شناسی،واحد تهران مرکزی،دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران(نویسنده مسئول) عالیه شکربیگی استادیار،گروه جامعه شناسی،واحد تهران مرکزی،دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران Journal Article 2024 11 05 The present study aims to provide a sociological analysis of the generational and cultural crisis in Iran after the Islamic Revolution, focusing on the poems of Ahmad Azizi. His poetry reflects the troubled mental structures in both the language and content of his works. The main research question asks how Azizi’s poems represent the social, cultural, and value-based experiences of a generation confronted, in the midst of post-revolutionary transformations, with crises of identity, generational rift, the conflict between tradition and modernity, moral despair, and cultural domination. The hypothesis of this research is that Ahmad Azizi’s poetry, through its symbolic, paradoxical, and satirical language, embodies a form of collective awareness of the contemporary social and cultural crises in Iran. The research method is qualitative, based on interpretive content analysis with the framework of genetic structuralism. Data were purposively collected from selected verses and lines of Azizi’s works and analyzed through three stages of open, axial, and selective coding. Findings reveal that Azizi’s poetry not only mirrors the social conditions of the post-revolutionary era but also functions as a resistant discourse against cultural domination and the collapse of meaning. Introduction The Islamic Revolution of 1979 marked a watershed moment in Iran’s social and cultural history, producing profound transformations in identity, values, and intergenerational relations. These transformations generated tensions that scholars have described as a “generational and cultural crisis,” manifested in struggles over tradition, modernity, spirituality, and social cohesion. Literature—particularly poetry—has long served as a mirror of Iranian collective experience and as a platform for resistance against cultural domination. Among contemporary poets, Ahmad Azizi occupies a unique position. His works deploy symbolic, paradoxical, and satirical language to capture the lived experiences of a generation shaped by revolution, war, reconstruction, and cultural uncertainty. This study focuses on Azizi’s poetry as both a literary artifact and a sociological document, aiming to reveal how his texts embody collective awareness of post-revolutionary crises. By adopting Lucien Goldmann’s theory of genetic structuralism, the research investigates the dialectical relationship between the poet’s individual worldview and the social structures of his time, demonstrating how Azizi’s artistic expression reflects the cultural ruptures, identity dilemmas, and generational divides of contemporary Iran. Materials and Methods This study employed a qualitative research design, grounded in interpretive content analysis and guided by Goldmann’s genetic structuralism. The data consisted of purposively selected verses and passages from Ahmad Azizi’s major collections, particularly Shenasname-ye Roya (The Identity of a Dream) and Ghatl-e Bid (The Killing of the Willow). Selection criteria focused on poems that explicitly or symbolically engage with social, cultural, and historical themes relevant to the post-revolutionary experience. The analytical process followed three stages of coding: 1. Open coding – extracting initial concepts directly from the text without pre-imposed categories. 2. Axial coding – clustering concepts into thematic categories based on semantic and symbolic connections. 3. Selective coding – synthesizing central themes that reflect the underlying mental structures of a generation in crisis. To strengthen validity, the study employed triangulation by integrating sociological theory, cultural studies, and literary criticism. Goldmann’s concept of “structural homology” provided a framework to interpret parallels between the internal structures of Azizi’s poetry and the broader social structures of post-revolutionary Iran. Discussion The analysis yielded five interrelated themes that illuminate the generational and cultural crises articulated in Azizi’s poetry: 1. Crisis of Identity and Generational Isolation Azizi repeatedly portrays figures caught in existential solitude, reflecting the alienation of post-revolutionary youth confronted with conflicting traditions and modern realities. His symbolic imagery of exile, fragmented selfhood, and “yellow hues of sorrow” captures the absence of stable identity and the erosion of intergenerational trust. 2. Generational Gap and Historical Disorientation The poems highlight a sense of rupture between the revolutionary generation, imbued with ideological commitment, and subsequent cohorts shaped by globalized media, consumer culture, and skepticism. Azizi’s use of paradoxical time markers—“two hours” and “two centuries”—exposes the simultaneity of immediacy and estrangement, dramatizing the perception of being “left behind by history.” 3. Tradition versus Modernity Azizi stages a critical dialogue between hollowed-out tradition and commodified modernity. In his verses, the sacred becomes trivialized, while modern consumer culture emerges as a “monster of consumption.” This dual critique resonates with Max Weber’s concept of disenchantment and with critical theory’s analysis of cultural commodification. 4. Social Despair and Moral Disintegration Through satirical and mystical language, Azizi portrays a society in moral decline, where once-sacred institutions are reduced to parody and spiritual rituals lose their transformative depth. These depictions resonate with Durkheim’s notion of anomie, revealing a collapse of shared ethical frameworks and collective hope. 5. Critique of Cultural Domination and Alienation Azizi’s most radical contribution lies in his unveiling of cultural domination through irony and grotesque imagery. By juxtaposing national icons such as Cyrus the Great with imagery of degradation, he exposes the manipulation of history and memory for ideological control. His poems thus function as resistant discourses that challenge official narratives and reclaim cultural meaning. Taken together, these themes suggest that Azizi’s poetry should not be reduced to mystical reverie or ornamental rhetoric; rather, it constitutes a sociological text that encodes the collective anxieties, ruptures, and resistances of an era. Genetic structuralism proves particularly apt for this analysis, as it uncovers the structural homologies between poetic language and social crisis. Conclusion This study demonstrates that Ahmad Azizi’s poetry serves as a symbolic repository of the generational and cultural crises that emerged in Iran after the Islamic Revolution. Through a qualitative, interpretive analysis grounded in genetic structuralism, the research identified five thematic dimensions—identity crisis, generational disjunction, tension between tradition and modernity, moral despair, and critique of cultural domination. These dimensions reveal the dialectical interplay between the poet’s worldview and the collective consciousness of a society grappling with rapid historical transformations. By foregrounding the sociological dimensions of Azizi’s verse, the study underscores the capacity of literature to document, critique, and resist cultural breakdown. More broadly, the findings highlight the value of interdisciplinary approaches that bridge sociology, cultural studies, and literary criticism in the study of modern Iranian literature. Ahmad Azizi emerges not merely as a mystical poet but as a cultural critic whose language of paradox, satire, and symbolism transforms poetry into an archive of resistance and collective memory. پژوهش حاضر با هدف تحلیل جامعه‌شناختی بحران نسلی و فرهنگی در ایران پس از انقلاب اسلامی، با تمرکز بر اشعار احمد عزیزی، به بررسی بازتاب ساختارهای ذهنی بحران‌زده در زبان و محتوای آثار این شاعر پرداخته است. سؤال اصلی تحقیق آن است که چگونه اشعار احمد عزیزی بازتاب‌دهنده تجربه‌های اجتماعی، فرهنگی و ارزشی نسلی است که در دل تحولات اجتماعی پس از انقلاب با بحران هویت، گسست نسلی، تضاد سنت و مدرنیته، یأس اخلاقی و سلطه فرهنگی مواجه شده است. فرضیه پژوهش بر این مبنا استوار است که شعر احمد عزیزی به‌واسطه زبان نمادین، شطح‌آمیز و طنزآلود، حامل نوعی آگاهی جمعی از بحران‌های اجتماعی و فرهنگی ایران معاصر است. روش تحقیق به‌صورت کیفی و مبتنی بر تحلیل محتوای تفسیری با رویکرد ساختارگرایی تکوینی انجام شده است. داده‌ها از میان ابیات و سطرهای منتخب آثار عزیزی به‌صورت هدفمند گردآوری شده و در سه مرحله کدگذاری باز، محوری و انتخابی تحلیل شده‌اند. نتایج نشان می‌دهد که شعر احمد عزیزی نه‌تنها بازتاب ادبی وضعیت اجتماعی دوران پساانقلاب است، بلکه به‌مثابه گفتمان مقاوم، در برابر سلطه فرهنگی و فروپاشی معنا نیز ایفای نقش می‌کند.

https://www.rahyaftjournal.ir/article_232059_9c3136568f1ed9dceb9e551a99e0274b.pdf

عبدالمطلب عبداله رهیافت انقلاب اسلامی 2980-9118 19 71 2025 09 21 Sport as an Instrument of Social Control: Analyzing the Regulatory Functions of Sport and the Jurisprudential–Legal Assessment of Article 158 of the Islamic Penal Code of Iran ورزش به مثابه ابزار کنترل اجتماعی: تبیین کارکردهای فقهی-حقوقی ماده ۱۵۸ قانون مجازات اسلامی 99 124 232060 FA محمدرضا جلیلی دانشجوی دکتری گروه فقه ومبانی حقوق اسلامی دانشگاه پیام نور،تهران،ایران سیدمحمد صدری دانشیار گروه آموزشی فقه ومبانی حقوق اسلامی دانشگاه پیام نور،تهران،ایران محمدصادق جمشیدی راد دانشیار گروه آموزشی فقه ومبانی حقوق اسلامی، دانشگاه پیام نور،تهران،ایران حیدر امیرپور دانشیار گروه آموزشی فقه و مبانی حقوق اسلامی، دانشگاه پیام نور، تهران، ایران Journal Article 2025 02 08 This study explores sport as a mechanism of social control and its legal implications under Iranian law, focusing on the jurisprudential and legal analysis of Clause (th) of Article 158 of the Islamic Penal Code. From a sociological perspective, sport contributes to the internalization of norms, emotional regulation, and collective solidarity, functioning as an informal institution that reinforces social order. Legally, however, sports-related incidents raise complex issues concerning civil and criminal liability. Employing a descriptive–analytical method and library-based data collection, the research investigates how Article 158 delineates the boundary between lawful sports conduct and criminal behavior. The findings reveal that while the Article excludes sports-related injuries from criminal liability if rules are observed and religious principles are not violated, civil liability may persist unless informed consent and risk acceptance are proven. Comparative analysis with Canadian law highlights that the “assumption of risk” doctrine operates as an independent defense in common law, whereas in Iran, similar effects derive from Islamic legal principles such as idhn (permission) and iqdam (voluntary action). The study concludes that sport functions as both a field of moral education and a component of Iran’s criminal policy, demanding more consistent judicial interpretation and clearer legal guidelines to balance freedom, responsibility, and social order. Introduction In modern societies, sport has evolved from a recreational activity into a vital instrument of social control and normative regulation. It cultivates discipline, respect for authority, and lawful behavior—qualities essential for the maintenance of social order. In Iran, where the interaction between law, religion, and social norms is deeply intertwined, sport operates not only as a cultural phenomenon but also as a legally regulated activity. The study explores how Iranian law—especially Clause (th) of Article 158 of the Islamic Penal Code (2013)—reconciles the social value of sport with its potential for physical harm.Article 158 explicitly states that sports-related acts do not constitute crimes if performed according to the rules of the sport and not in contradiction with Islamic norms. This clause reflects Iran’s broader criminal policy to prevent over-criminalization while recognizing the educational and disciplinary roles of sport. The research thus investigates sport simultaneously as a social regulator and a legally framed field, bridging sociology, jurisprudence, and law. Materials and Methods The research employs a descriptive–analytical method based on library and documentary sources. Primary legal texts—such as the Islamic Penal Code (2013), the Civil Liability Act (1959), and constitutional provisions on physical education—form the core legal framework. Jurisprudential sources, including discussions on idhn (permission), iqdam (voluntary exposure to risk), and la darar (no harm), are analyzed to identify Islamic foundations relevant to sports liability. Complementary sociological theories by Coakley (2017), Bourdieu (1990), and Hirschi (2017) provide conceptual grounding for understanding sport as a form of normative and emotional regulation. Comparative analysis draws upon foreign legal systems, particularly Canadian and British case law, where the “assumption of risk” doctrine functions as a distinct exculpatory defense. Iranian and comparative studies—such as those by Safaei (2024), Hosseini & Eshaqi (2015), and Hajizadeh & Shadmani (2021)—inform the contextual and doctrinal evaluation. This interdisciplinary method allows the research to connect three analytical levels: (1) sport as a mechanism of informal social control; (2) sport as a reflection of Islamic jurisprudential reasoning; and (3) sport as a component of Iran’s criminal policy framework. Discussion Sport serves as a social regulator, channeling individual energies into structured, rule-bound activities that encourage self-discipline and lawful behavior. Through training and competition, athletes internalize social values such as fairness, respect for authority, and cooperation. From a sociological viewpoint, this aligns with Hirschi’s social bond theory, which identifies attachment, commitment, involvement, and belief as key elements binding individuals to social order. However, the same activities often lead to physical injuries, raising questions about legal responsibility. Article 158 of Iran’s Penal Code provides a nuanced legal mechanism: sports-related injuries are not crimes if caused during lawful, rule-based conduct consistent with Islamic norms. Yet, when negligence, excessive force, or violation of technical regulations occurs, both criminal and civil liability may apply. This legal duality demonstrates the balance between freedom of athletic activity and the protection of bodily integrity. From a jurisprudential perspective, three Islamic legal principles underpin this approach: 1. Idhn (Permission): When an individual willingly participates in an activity with inherent risks—such as sports—their consent can negate the criminal liability of others, provided the act remains within lawful boundaries. 2. Iqdam (Voluntary Exposure to Risk): A person who knowingly exposes themselves to a potential harm may be precluded from claiming compensation unless misconduct or excessive deviation is proven. 3. La darar (No Harm): If the act exceeds ordinary risk or involves negligence, compensation becomes obligatory, reaffirming the protection of human integrity in Islamic law. This tripartite framework mirrors the Western notion of “assumption of risk,” but is rooted in indigenous Islamic reasoning. It supports the moral legitimacy of sport while ensuring accountability.Beyond doctrinal law, sport functions as an element of Iran’s criminal policy—a preventive, educational, and rehabilitative instrument. The Penal Code’s approach to sport demonstrates a shift from punitive to normative regulation, consistent with global trends emphasizing restorative and educational justice. The field of sport thus becomes a microcosm of lawful social behavior, where respect for rules substitutes’ coercion with self-control.At the institutional level, the legal recognition of sport’s autonomy under Article 158 reduces unnecessary judicial intervention, strengthening the internal disciplinary systems of sports federations. Yet, inconsistencies in judicial interpretation and lack of specialized training for judges and referees remain major challenges. The analysis of Iranian court decisions reveals divergent applications of Article 158—sometimes overly expansive, other times restrictive—indicating the need for procedural guidelines and clearer definitions of “lawful sport behavior. “Moreover, the legal responsibility of referees, coaches, and sports organizations extends beyond the athletes themselves. Negligence in enforcing rules, providing proper equipment, or ensuring safety may lead to civil liability under the 1959 Civil Liability Act. Likewise, the malfunction of sports facilities or improper medical supervision can constitute grounds for compensation. This interconnected web of responsibilities transforms the sports field into a system of shared governance—an institutionalized form of social control integrating legal, moral, and technical norms. Conclusion This study demonstrates that sport in the Islamic Republic of Iran operates simultaneously as a social institution, a juridical domain, and a component of criminal policy. Clause (th) of Article 158 of the Islamic Penal Code crystallizes this duality by exempting lawful sports acts from criminalization while maintaining conditions of accountability. Rooted in both Islamic jurisprudence and modern legal principles, the Article encapsulates a hybrid model of social regulation where freedom and responsibility coexist. Sport thus contributes to national criminal policy not merely by preventing deviance but by cultivating a disciplined, law-abiding citizenry. It serves as a field for translating abstract legal and moral norms into embodied practice—where respect for rules, fairness, and moderation are learned experientially. Nevertheless, persistent challenges—including inconsistent case law, insufficient legal training for sports officials, and the absence of specialized sports liability codes—limit the Article’s effectiveness. Legislative reforms should clarify the scope of lawful conduct, define standards for negligence, and institutionalize legal education for coaches, referees, and judges. In the broader perspective, integrating sociological theories of control with Islamic jurisprudence enables a richer understanding of how law and sport mutually reinforce social order. Article 158, therefore, is not merely a technical legal clause but a cornerstone of Iran’s hybrid governance model—where law, morality, and sport converge to foster a disciplined and cohesive society. این پژوهش به بررسی نقش نظم‌بخش و کارکردهای کنترل اجتماعی ورزش با تکیه بر تحلیل فقهی-حقوقی بند «ث» ماده ۱۵۸ قانون مجازات اسلامی می‌پردازد. از یک‌سو، ورزش به عنوان پدیده‌ای اجتماعی، نقشی مؤثر در بازتولید نظم، هنجارسازی و پیشگیری از انحراف اجتماعی ایفا می‌کند و از سوی دیگر، حوادث ناشی از آن در چارچوب قواعد حقوق کیفری و مدنی نیازمند تحلیل‌های دقیق است. در این راستا، پژوهش حاضر با روش توصیفی-تحلیلی و بهره‌گیری از منابع کتابخانه‌ای، تلاش دارد ضمن تبیین کارکردهای اجتماعی و حقوقی ورزش، مبانی مسئولیت کیفری و مدنی ناشی از فعالیت‌های ورزشی را در نظام حقوقی ایران، با تأکید بر ماده ۱۵۸ قانون مجازات اسلامی، مورد بررسی قرار دهد. یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهد که اگرچه ماده یادشده در موارد خاص، مسئولیت کیفری را منتفی می‌داند، اما مسئولیت مدنی همچنان پابرجا می‌ماند؛ مگر در شرایطی که عنصر رضایت و پذیرش خطر از سوی ورزشکار ثابت شود. این پژوهش بر ضرورت شناسایی جایگاه ورزش در نظام نظم اجتماعی، تدوین قواعد روشن‌تری برای تشخیص مسئولیت، و تبیین رویه قضایی منسجم در این زمینه تأکید دارد.

https://www.rahyaftjournal.ir/article_232060_ae6c736f1024b825a56d51989be2debd.pdf

عبدالمطلب عبداله رهیافت انقلاب اسلامی 2980-9118 19 71 2025 08 23 The Interaction of Social and Cultural Factors in Shaping Postmodern Values: A Case Study of Kermanshah City برهمکنش عوامل مختلف در شکل گیری ارزش های پست مدرن در شهر کرمانشاه 125 152 232062 FA مریم منصوری دانشجوی دکتری گروه جامعه شناسی، واحد دهاقان، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، دهاقان، ایران منصور حقیقتیان دانشیار گروه علوم اجتماعی، واحد دهاقان، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، دهاقان، ایران (نویسنده مسئول) محمدعلی چیت ساز استادیار گروه جامعه شناسی، واحد دهاقان، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، دهاقان، ایران Journal Article 2025 02 08 This study aims to examine the role of various factors in shaping postmodern values in the city of Kermanshah and seeks to answer the question of which social and cultural factors have the greatest impact on the formation of such values. The main hypothesis of the research is that factors such as media consumption, cultural capital, family relations, attitudes toward class values, and the public sphere exert a positive influence on postmodern values, whereas religious background and ethnic identity have an inverse effect. The research was conducted using a descriptive-survey method with a researcher-designed questionnaire. The statistical population consisted of citizens over 18 years of age in Kermanshah, from which 384 individuals were selected through cluster sampling. Findings reveal a tension between tradition, modernism, and postmodernism in Kermanshah, particularly among younger generations who, under the influence of globalization and new technologies, tend to embrace values such as individualism and relativism. This study highlights the necessity of analyzing cultural and social transformations in transitional societies and suggests that policymakers should undertake more effective planning to manage these shifts. Introduction The transformation of social values in transitional societies remains one of the most pressing issues of contemporary sociology. Postmodernism, emerging as a cultural and intellectual current from late 20th-century France, challenges traditional and modernist paradigms by emphasizing pluralism, relativism, and the rejection of meta-narratives. The city of Kermanshah provides a compelling case study due to its unique demographic, ethnic, and cultural composition, where Kurdish, Lur, and Persian groups intersect with strong religious traditions. Recent processes of globalization, urbanization, and digital communication have exposed Kermanshah’s population—especially its youth—to diverse global discourses, creating fertile ground for postmodern values. Against this backdrop, this research addresses the central question: Which social and cultural factors significantly influence the formation of postmodern values in Kermanshah? Materials and Methods The study employed an applied, descriptive-survey methodology. The statistical population included all citizens above 18 years of age in Kermanshah, totaling 946,651 individuals based on the 2022 census. Using Cochran’s formula, a sample size of 384 was determined. Cluster sampling was applied across the city’s eight municipal districts, with households selected via postal codes. Data collection was conducted through a researcher-designed questionnaire, measuring variables such as media consumption, cultural capital, family relations, gender attitudes, class values, orientation to the public sphere, religious background, and ethnic identity. Data analysis utilized SPSS and structural equation modeling. Reliability and validity were confirmed through KMO (0.883) and Bartlett’s test (χ² = 1292.564, p < 0.001), indicating strong suitability for factor analysis. Discussion The findings reveal a complex interplay of reinforcing and resistant factors in the acceptance of postmodern values. Media consumption emerged as the most powerful predictor, reflecting the centrality of mass and digital media in disseminating pluralistic and relativistic worldviews. Social media and satellite channels expose individuals to diverse cultural narratives, thereby eroding the authority of traditional grand narratives and fostering multi-vocality. Cultural capital also demonstrated a strong positive effect. Individuals with higher levels of education, cultural participation, and access to intellectual resources are more capable of questioning entrenched traditions and embracing cultural diversity. In line with Bourdieu’s theory, cultural capital functions as a gateway for openness to postmodern discourses, particularly among youth and educated groups. Family relations, traditionally a bastion of value transmission, have shifted toward dialogical and pluralistic practices. This change indicates that even within the private sphere, negotiation and diversity of viewpoints replace rigid hierarchical authority. Such transformation aligns with Hicks’s interpretation of the family as a multi-vocal postmodern unit. Class attitudes and engagement with the public sphere were also positively associated with postmodern values. As individuals become increasingly sensitive to class inequalities and public debates, they align with postmodern critiques of power and authority, echoing Foucault’s notion of power-knowledge relations. These findings underscore the role of social awareness in fostering skepticism toward universalist claims and hierarchical systems. Conversely, religious background and ethnic identity were found to negatively correlate with postmodern values. Religion and ethnicity serve as sources of grand narratives and communal cohesion, often resisting relativism and pluralism. In Kermanshah, where religious and ethnic identities remain strong, these elements act as counter-forces, reinforcing traditional cohesion and resisting cultural fragmentation. Gender attitudes, however, did not significantly affect postmodern values, suggesting that gender roles in this context are mediated by a complex intersection of tradition and modernity, leaving them in a transitional and ambivalent state. Overall, the findings depict Kermanshah as a society negotiating multiple layers of identity and value systems, where global cultural flows intersect with local traditions. The younger generation tends to align more with postmodern values, whereas older and more traditional groups remain anchored in religious and ethnic frameworks. Conclusion The study concludes that the rise of postmodern values in Kermanshah is neither uniform nor absolute but emerges through the interaction of modernizing forces and traditional anchors. Media consumption, cultural capital, and public engagement act as accelerators of postmodernism, while religion and ethnicity act as stabilizers of tradition. This dual dynamic reflects the broader Iranian context, where rapid modernization and globalization coexist with strong cultural and religious traditions. Policy implications suggest that effective cultural management should balance the preservation of valuable traditional elements with openness to pluralism and diversity. Initiatives in media literacy, cultural capital development, and intergenerational dialogue can facilitate this balance, enabling societies like Kermanshah to navigate the complexities of value transformation in the age of postmodernity. این پژوهش با هدف بررسی نقش مولفه های مختلف در شکل گیری ارزش ‌های پست‌ مدرن در شهر کرمانشاه انجام شده و به دنبال پاسخ به این سؤال است که کدام عوامل اجتماعی و فرهنگی بیشترین تأثیر را بر شکل‌گیری ارزش‌های پست‌ مدرن در این شهر دارند؟ فرضیه اصلی تحقیق بر این استوار است که عواملی همچون مصرف رسانه‌ای، سرمایه فرهنگی، مناسبات خانوادگی، نگرش به ارزش‌های طبقاتی و حوزه عمومی تأثیر مثبت بر ارزش‌های پست‌ مدرن دارند، در حالی که پایگاه مذهبی و هویت قومی تأثیری معکوس خواهند داشت. پژوهش به روش توصیفی-پیمایشی و با استفاده از ابزار پرسشنامه محقق‌ساخته انجام شده است. جامعه آماری شامل شهروندان بالای 18 سال کرمانشاه است که 384 نفر از آنان با روش نمونه‌گیری خوشه‌ای انتخاب شدند. یافته ‌ها نشان‌ دهنده تعارض میان سنت، مدرنیسم، و پست‌ مدرنیسم در کرمانشاه است، به‌ویژه در نسل جوان که تحت تأثیر جهانی‌شدن و فناوری‌های نوین، گرایش بیشتری به ارزش‌هایی نظیر فردگرایی و نسبیت‌گرایی دارند. این پژوهش بر ضرورت تحلیل تحولات فرهنگی و اجتماعی در جوامع در حال گذار تأکید می‌کند و پیشنهاد می‌دهد که سیاست‌گذاران برای مدیریت این تحولات، برنامه‌ریزی‌های مؤثرتری انجام دهند.

https://www.rahyaftjournal.ir/article_232062_e77bd614aff331c9a160df002c870d96.pdf

عبدالمطلب عبداله رهیافت انقلاب اسلامی 2980-9118 19 71 2025 09 21 Political Philosophy and Reformist Theology in the Thought of Ayatollah Na’ini and John Locke: A Comparative Reflection on the Legitimacy of Power and the Limits of Religious Sovereignty فلسفه سیاسی و کلام اصلاح‌ گرایانه در اندیشه آیت‌الله نائینی و جان لاک: تأملی تطبیقی در مشروعیت قدرت و حدود حاکمیت دین 153 176 232063 FA احمد طیبی عضو علمی گروه معارف اسلامی دانشگاه پیام نور، تهران، ایران Journal Article 2025 02 08 This article offers a comparative analysis of the political philosophy and reformist theology of Ayatollah Mohammad-Hossein Na’ini (1860–1936) and John Locke (1632–1704), two thinkers who, despite emerging from vastly different intellectual and theological traditions, converge on the question of limiting power and legitimizing governance. The main purpose is to examine how both thinkers—Na’ini through Islamic reformist theology and Locke through Enlightenment rationalism—sought to reconcile divine authority with popular sovereignty. The study employs an analytical-comparative methodology, drawing on textual analysis of Na’ini’s Tanbih al-Ummah wa Tanzih al-Millah and Locke’s Two Treatises of Government. Findings show that while Locke’s legitimacy of power rests on natural rights, consent, and the social contract, Na’ini articulates legitimacy through divine trusteeship (amanat) and collective supervision (nazar-e omumi). Both perspectives establish moral and legal boundaries against tyranny, emphasizing accountability and the protection of human dignity. The article concludes that Na’ini’s synthesis of religious reform and political constitutionalism represents a unique indigenous framework comparable to Locke’s liberal constitutionalism, both aiming to restrain absolute rule and secure justice within their respective civilizational contexts. Introduction The intersection of theology and political philosophy represents a critical frontier in both Islamic and Western intellectual traditions. In the context of modernity, few figures exemplify this intersection as clearly as Ayatollah Mohammad-Hossein Na’ini in Iran and John Locke in England. Both thinkers, facing contexts of despotism and theological domination, articulated frameworks for reconciling divine authority with rational limitations on political power. Na’ini’s Tanbih al-Ummah wa Tanzih al-Millah (1909), written during Iran’s Constitutional Revolution, sought to ground constitutionalism within Shi’a theology by redefining governance as a divine trust (amanat) rather than absolute sovereignty. Locke’s Two Treatises of Government (1690), written after the Glorious Revolution, similarly aimed to limit monarchical power through the idea of the social contract and natural rights. This study explores how both systems—Islamic reformist theology and Protestant rational philosophy—constructed theoretical models of legitimate governance, emphasizing moral responsibility, the consent of the governed, and the accountability of rulers. Materials and Methods This research adopts an analytical–comparative approach combining philosophical hermeneutics and theological exegesis. The primary sources analyzed are Na’ini’s Tanbih al-Ummah wa Tanzih al-Millah and Locke’s Two Treatises of Government. Secondary materials include works by political theorists such as Dunn (1984), Strauss (1953), Kadivar (2001), and Abrahamian (2008), as well as Islamic constitutional studies concerning the Qajar era. The methodological framework proceeds in three stages: 1. Conceptual analysis – examining key notions such as hakimiyyat-e elahi (divine sovereignty), amanat (trusteeship), nazar-e omumi (public oversight), natural rights, and consent; 2. Doctrinal comparison – identifying theological underpinnings in Na’ini’s Shi’a rationalism versus Locke’s Protestant empiricism; 3. Contextual synthesis – exploring how sociopolitical crises (despotism in Qajar Iran, absolute monarchy in Restoration England) shaped each thinker’s political theology. This structured comparison allows for understanding not only theoretical convergences but also the distinct epistemic foundations that distinguish Islamic reformist discourse from Enlightenment liberalism. Discussion Both Na’ini and Locke respond to the problem of legitimacy under divine sovereignty, yet they do so from divergent metaphysical and epistemological assumptions. Locke’s political philosophy emerges from natural theology and rational empiricism, asserting that human beings, created equal by God, possess inalienable rights to life, liberty, and property. Sovereignty arises from the social contract; rulers hold power conditionally, based on the consent of the governed. Political tyranny thus violates divine will, as it disrupts the natural order and individual conscience. Na’ini, by contrast, grounds legitimacy in a theology of trusteeship (amanat)—the ruler is not a divine agent with unbounded authority but a trustee accountable to God and the community. His model transforms velayat from an absolute claim of domination into a conditional, moral responsibility. Through the concept of nazar-e omumi (public supervision), Na’ini introduces a proto-democratic mechanism of accountability compatible with Islamic jurisprudence. Both thinkers share a moral–political teleology: governance exists to prevent tyranny and preserve human dignity. However, Locke achieves this through the rational autonomy of individuals and secular institutional checks, while Na’ini articulates it through divine law (Shari‘a) and communal obligation. From the standpoint of political theology, Locke secularizes the covenantal model, locating legitimacy in rational human consent, whereas Na’ini sacralizes rational governance by interpreting consultation (shura) and justice (adl) as divine imperatives. In both frameworks, despotism is equated with moral corruption and deviation from divine justice. In sociopolitical function, Locke’s constitutionalism leads to the establishment of representative democracy, while Na’ini’s reformism provides the theoretical foundation for Islamic constitutionalism in Iran’s 1906 Revolution. Despite differing metaphysics, both construct a vision of limited government, rule of law, and moral accountability—demonstrating a convergent evolution between reformist theology and liberal philosophy. Furthermore, Na’ini’s rationalist jurisprudence (usuli) anticipates modern ideas of separation of powers and citizen supervision, arguing that “tyranny over creation is tyranny against the Creator.” His thought can thus be seen as an indigenous articulation of what Locke conceptualized as the moral contract between ruler and ruled. Conclusion This comparative inquiry shows that Ayatollah Na’ini and John Locke, each within their religious and philosophical horizons, converge on a shared pursuit: the moral limitation of power and the legitimation of authority through responsibility and consent. Both reject divine-right absolutism and advocate a model of governance grounded in trust, justice, and public accountability. Na’ini’s theological reformism transforms Shi’a jurisprudence into a framework for political participation and public oversight, while Locke’s rational philosophy inaugurates modern liberal constitutionalism. Their synthesis illustrates two parallel pathways in the global history of political thought—one proceeding from faith to reason, the other from reason to faith. For Islamic political philosophy, Na’ini’s model provides a bridge between divine sovereignty and people’s agency, allowing an ethical reinterpretation of governance that remains deeply relevant to contemporary debates on religious democracy and legitimacy. For Western thought, Locke’s influence endures as a template for secular limitation of power rooted in moral individualism. In the final analysis, the dialogue between Na’ini and Locke reveals that genuine legitimacy arises not from authority alone but from the mutual recognition of duty, consent, and moral accountability—a principle that transcends the boundaries of civilization, culture, and faith. این پژوهش به بررسی تطبیقی اندیشه سیاسی آیت‌الله نائینی و جان لاک در باب مشروعیت قدرت و حدود حاکمیت دین می‌پردازد. هدف اصلی تحقیق، تحلیل نقاط اشتراک و افتراق این دو متفکر در تبیین مبانی مشروعیت سیاسی و نسبت دین و سیاست است. سؤال محوری پژوهش آن است که چگونه نائینی و لاک، هر یک در بسترهای متفاوت معرفتی و اجتماعی، به مفهوم مشروعیت قدرت پرداخته‌اند و چه تفاوت‌هایی در تلقی آنها از نقش دین و مردم در حاکمیت سیاسی وجود دارد. فرضیه تحقیق بر این اساس استوار است که با وجود اختلاف مبنایی در نسبت دین و سیاست، هر دو متفکر در تأکید بر تحدید قدرت حاکم و حق نظارت و مقاومت مردم اشتراک دارند. روش تحقیق، کیفی-تحلیلی و مبتنی بر تحلیل مفهومی منابع اصلی و ثانویه است. نتایج پژوهش نشان می‌دهد که نائینی با تفسیر دینی از حکومت مشروطه و تأکید بر عدالت و نظارت مردم، و لاک با نظریه حقوق طبیعی و قرارداد اجتماعی، هر دو به سوی مقیدسازی قدرت و تضمین آزادی‌های عمومی حرکت کرده‌اند، اگرچه مبانی معرفتی و نسبت آن با دین متفاوت است.

https://www.rahyaftjournal.ir/article_232063_8179b1cdbfb8ba781463acf0a61ff8bf.pdf

عبدالمطلب عبداله رهیافت انقلاب اسلامی 2980-9118 19 71 2025 08 23 The Reflection of Shi‘i Epic Literature in the Islamic Revolution: A Comparative Study of Ibn Hessam Khosafi and Tahereh Saffarzadeh بازتاب ادبیات حماسی شیعی در انقلاب اسلامی: بررسی موردی ابن حسام و طاهره صفار زاده 177 202 232064 FA فرزانه دستمرد استادیار گروه زبان و ادبیات فارسی، دانشگاه پیام نور، تهران، ایران(نویسنده مسئول). فتانه رستمی استادیار،گروه زبان و ادبیات فارسی، واحد کرمانشاه، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، کرمانشاه، ایران توران رزمجو استادیار گروه زبان و ادبیات فارسی، دانشگاه پیام نور، تهران، ایران. Journal Article 2024 12 05 This article explores the reflection and transformation of Shi‘i epic literature in the context of the Islamic Revolution of Iran, focusing on the works of Ibn Hessam Khosafi (15th century) and Tahereh Saffarzadeh (20th century). It examines how religious-mythical narratives of martyrdom, justice, and resistance, rooted in the Karbala paradigm, evolved from classical Persian poetry to revolutionary discourse. Using an analytical-comparative method, the study investigates thematic continuity and aesthetic transformation between medieval Shi‘i epic verse and contemporary revolutionary poetry. Findings indicate that while Ibn Hessam’s Khavaran-nama integrates the heroic ethos of Imam Ali and his descendants within a mystical-epic framework, Saffarzadeh’s poetry reinterprets the same archetypes as metaphors for political awakening and anti-imperialist struggle. Both poets employ the Ashura narrative as a symbolic structure that fuses spirituality with socio-political commitment. The research concludes that Shi‘i epic literature not only shaped the cultural consciousness of the Islamic Revolution but also provided a theological and aesthetic language for resistance, martyrdom, and eschatological hope. Introduction The Islamic Revolution of Iran (1979) was not only a political transformation but also a cultural and symbolic upheaval deeply rooted in Shi‘i religious imagination. Among the most powerful sources of revolutionary discourse was the heritage of Shi‘i epic literature, which had for centuries sustained collective memory through narratives of sacrifice, divine justice, and resistance against oppression. This study examines the continuity and reconfiguration of that tradition by comparing Ibn Hessam Khosafi’s Khavaran-nama—a Persian Shi‘i epic from the Timurid period—with the revolutionary poetry of Tahereh Saffarzadeh, one of the most prominent intellectual poets of post-1960s Iran. The key research question asks: How did the Shi‘i epic tradition, as embodied in classical poetry, re-emerge in the literary and ideological discourse of the Islamic Revolution? By analyzing thematic and symbolic patterns across two temporal contexts, the article reveals how literature functions as a cultural bridge between theological myth and socio-political action. Materials and Methods This study employs a comparative analytical method combining literary hermeneutics, religious semiotics, and discourse analysis. The primary corpus includes Ibn Hessam’s Khavaran-nama, a Persian epic depicting the heroic battles of Imam Ali and his companions, and selected poems from Tahereh Saffarzadeh’s collections The Red Shroud, The Message of the Soil, and Revelation. The analysis proceeds in three stages: 1. Thematic identification – tracing motifs of martyrdom, divine justice, and eschatological victory; 2. Structural analysis – examining narrative form, diction, and use of Quranic and Ashura imagery; 3. Discursive interpretation – situating the works within their respective socio-political contexts. Ibn Hessam’s epic, written in the 15th century, belongs to a period when Shi‘ism was marginalized within Persian literary canon, yet it elevated the ahl al-bayt as archetypal warriors of faith. In contrast, Saffarzadeh’s modernist poetry, emerging during Iran’s struggle against Western domination and internal tyranny, revives the same motifs through a new semiotics of resistance, combining modernist aesthetics with Qur’anic allegory. The study also draws upon theoretical frameworks of mythic archetypes (Eliade, Frye) and Shi‘i symbolism (Shariati, Motahhari) to elucidate how sacred narrative transforms into political discourse. Discussion The findings reveal a profound continuity between classical and modern Shi‘i epic expression, despite differences in form and historical setting. 1. Epic Continuity and Transformation: Ibn Hessam’s Khavaran-nama constructs a mytho-historical cosmos where divine justice is realized through heroic struggle. His Imam Ali is not merely a historical figure but a cosmic hero who embodies both mystical perfection and moral resistance. Through allegory and hyperbole, Ibn Hessam creates a Shi‘i alternative to the Shahnameh tradition, replacing mythic kingship with sacred leadership (imamate). 2. In contrast, Saffarzadeh’s poetry transforms the same archetype into a voice of revolutionary conscience. Her language, condensed and prophetic, merges Qur’anic revelation with contemporary political urgency. The Imam, in her verse, becomes a timeless symbol of rebellion against injustice—transcending historical time and national boundaries. 2. Martyrdom and Aesthetic of Resistance: Both poets use the Karbala paradigm as a narrative matrix. In Khavaran-nama, martyrdom signifies transcendence; the warrior achieves spiritual victory through sacrifice. In Saffarzadeh’s poetry, martyrdom is politicized as a form of active resistance, the ultimate act of moral defiance. Her verse echoes the revolutionary reinterpretation of Ashura by thinkers such as Ali Shariati and Morteza Motahhari, turning tragedy into a mobilizing myth. 3. Language and Symbolism: Ibn Hessam’s epic follows classical Persian diction with abundant Arabic religious terminology, creating a sacred poetic register. Saffarzadeh, while modernist in style, employs a similar symbolic lexicon—blood, light, the sword, and the covenant—infused with Qur’anic rhythm. Both poets rely on ta’wil (spiritual interpretation) to elevate historical events into universal metaphors. 4. Literature as Cultural Mediation: The study demonstrates that Shi‘i epic literature served as a cultural continuum that transmitted ethical values—justice, sacrifice, and divine leadership—into Iran’s revolutionary ideology. By preserving and renewing symbolic language, poets like Ibn Hessam and Saffarzadeh linked collective memory to contemporary mobilization. Furthermore, while Ibn Hessam wrote in an era of political disempowerment, Saffarzadeh composed within a climate of awakening; yet both articulate hope through struggle. Their works embody what can be called a “sacralized humanism,” where divine mission and human freedom converge. This transformation of Shi‘i epic from mythic narration to revolutionary discourse underscores the dynamism of Iranian literary-religious tradition. Conclusion The comparative analysis of Ibn Hessam Khosafi and Tahereh Saffarzadeh reveals that Shi‘i epic literature functions as both a theological framework and a political language of resistance. Across centuries, it has provided the moral grammar of defiance against tyranny—transforming historical grief into collective action. Ibn Hessam’s Khavaran-nama offers an early Shi‘i epic worldview where divine justice is achieved through spiritual valor and devotion to the ahl al-bayt. Saffarzadeh, revitalizing the same tradition in modern verse, redefines epic heroism as moral agency and revolutionary faith. Through this continuity, the Islamic Revolution inherited not only political ideals but also an aesthetic of resistance grounded in sacred narrative. In broader terms, Shi‘i epic literature illustrates how religious mythology evolves into cultural praxis. By merging devotion and dissent, it reaffirms that poetry in the Shi‘i tradition is not merely artistic expression but a form of ethical testimony. Thus, the literary legacy of Ibn Hessam and Saffarzadeh stands as a testament to the enduring vitality of Shi‘i thought—where the sword of words defends justice as powerfully as the sword of battle. این پژوهش با هدف بررسی تطبیقی بازتاب ادبیات حماسی شیعی در آثار ابن‌حسام خوسَفی و طاهره صفارزاده انجام شده است. پرسش اصلی تحقیق آن است که این دو شاعر چگونه مفاهیم کلیدی عاشورا، شهادت، انتظار، ظلم‌ستیزی و مهدویت را در قالب‌های شعری خود بازتاب داده و به چه نحو کارکرد اجتماعی شعر حماسی شیعی را در زمینه‌های تاریخی متفاوت بازتعریف کرده‌اند؟ فرضیه پژوهش آن است که ابن‌حسام خوسَفی از منظری سنتی و مبتنی بر روایت‌های مقدس، ادبیات حماسی را در خدمت تقویت حافظه تاریخی–مذهبی به‌کار گرفته، در حالی‌که طاهره صفارزاده با رویکردی نوگرا و انقلابی، شعر را به رسانه‌ای برای کنش سیاسی، بیداری اجتماعی و ساخت گفتمان مقاومت بدل کرده است. روش تحقیق، تحلیل محتوای تطبیقی بر مبنای متون شعری و منابع ثانویه معتبر است. یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهند که تفاوت در زمانه، جنسیت، تجربه زیسته و مخاطب، موجب تحول در زبان، ساختار، کارکرد اجتماعی و گفتمان شعری این دو شاعر شده است. این تحقیق همچنین نشان می‌دهد که شعر حماسی شیعی نه‌تنها سنت‌ساز، بلکه سنت‌گریز نیز می‌تواند باشد؛ بسته به زمینه‌های تاریخی و اهداف شاعر.

https://www.rahyaftjournal.ir/article_232064_6aa51b0d81fbdc200c901ab69d8eda2e.pdf

عبدالمطلب عبداله رهیافت انقلاب اسلامی 2980-9118 19 71 2025 09 21 Foundations of State Civil Responsibility in the Legal Systems of Iran and the United States مبانی مسؤولیت مدنی دولت در نظام حقوقی ایران و آمریکا 203 224 232065 FA قاسم فلاح ساعی گروه حقوق خصوصی، واحد تهران مرکزی، دانشگاه آزاداسلامی،تهران،ایران محمد بهمنی گروه حقوق خصوصی، واحد تهران مرکزی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران،ایران بختیار عباسلو گروه حقوق خصوصی، واحد تهران مرکزی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران-ایران صادق سلیمی گروه حقوق خصوصی، واحد تهران مرکزی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران-ایران Journal Article 2025 02 08 The civil responsibility of the state is one of the key topics in public law that examines the principles and rules for compensating damages resulting from the actions or omissions of the state. In the legal system of Iran, this responsibility is defined based on civil laws and the Civil Liability Act (approved in 1960). In contrast, the legal system of the United States operates under the principle of sovereign immunity and provides a limited framework for lawsuits against the government through the “Federal Tort Claims Act.” This research compares these two systems through a case study of Huawei’s case, which is related to violations of U.S. economic sanctions against Iran. The Huawei case exemplifies the conflict between domestic law and international law; the United States views sanctions as a legitimate tool for foreign policy, whereas Iran perceives these actions as violations of national sovereignty and free trade. The research question investigates the differences in the foundations of state civil responsibility in these two legal systems and their impact on international interactions. The hypothesis is that state civil responsibility in Iran is based on codified laws and is absolute in certain cases, whereas in the United States, it is limited to specific conditions under the aforementioned law. Using a comparative analysis method, the results indicate that the differences in these approaches significantly affect international lawsuits and the rights of individuals, with the Huawei case serving as a prominent example of these impacts. <span dir="RTL" lang="FA" style="font-size: 11.0pt; font-family: 'B Zar'; mso-ascii-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-hansi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: FA;">مسؤولیت مدنی دولت یکی از موضوعات کلیدی حقوق عمومی است که اصول و قواعد جبران خسارت‌های ناشی از اقدامات یا ترک فعل دولت را بررسی می‌کند. در نظام حقوقی ایران، این مسؤولیت بر اساس قوانین مدنی و قانون مسؤولیت مدنی (مصوب 1339) تعریف شده است. در مقابل، نظام حقوقی ایالات متحده تحت اصل مصونیت حاکمیت عمل کرده و از طریق قانون « قانون دعاوی خسارت علیه دولت فدرال » چارچوب محدودی برای دعاوی علیه دولت ارائه می‌دهد. این پژوهش با مطالعه موردی پرونده شرکت هوآوی، که به نقض تحریم‌های اقتصادی ایالات متحده علیه ایران مرتبط است، به مقایسه این دو نظام می‌پردازد. پرونده هوآوی نشان‌دهنده تعارض بین حقوق داخلی و حقوق بین‌الملل است؛ ایالات متحده تحریم‌ها را ابزاری مشروع برای سیاست خارجی می‌داند، در حالی که ایران این اقدامات را نقض حاکمیت ملی و تجارت آزاد تلقی می‌کند. سؤال تحقیق بررسی تفاوت مبانی مسؤولیت مدنی دولت در این دو نظام حقوقی و تأثیر آن بر تعاملات بین‌المللی است. فرضیه این است که مسؤولیت مدنی دولت در ایران مبتنی بر قوانین مدون و در مواردی مطلق است، در حالی که در ایالات متحده محدود به شرایط خاصی تحت قانون مذکور است. با روش تحلیل تطبیقی، نتایج نشان می‌دهد که تفاوت این رویکردها تأثیر قابل‌توجهی بر دعاوی بین‌المللی و حقوق اشخاص دارد و پرونده هوآوی نمونه بارزی از این تأثیرات است

https://www.rahyaftjournal.ir/article_232065_86bc796cb47d0ae0ee4450f5bfe72806.pdf

عبدالمطلب عبداله رهیافت انقلاب اسلامی 2980-9118 19 71 2025 09 21 Mechanisms for Dispute Resolution in Environmental Regulations of Iran’s Oil Contracts: A Case Study of the Hawizeh Marsh Crisis سازوکار های حل اختلافات در مقررات زیست محیطی قراردادهای نفتی ایران(مطالعه موردی بحران هورالعظیم) 225 248 232066 FA سیامک آرین پور دانشجوی دکتری حقوق خصوصی،گروه حقوق، دانشگاه پیام نور ، تهران، ایران حسین آل کجاف دانشیار گروه حقوق، دانشگاه پیام نور، تهران، ایران اصغر محمودی دانشیار گروه حقوق، دانشگاه پیام نور، تهران، ایران Journal Article 2025 01 04 This study examines the legal and political mechanisms for resolving environmental disputes arising from oil contracts in Iran, focusing on the ecological crisis of the Hawizeh (Hoor al-Azim) Wetland. The main research question asks how existing legal and political frameworks can effectively manage environmental conflicts between the parties to oil contracts. The study hypothesizes that despite the existence of legal frameworks and international standards, weak enforcement, insufficient monitoring, and lack of transparency have made dispute resolution highly complex. Using a document-based legal content analysis and comparative study with international environmental standards, the paper evaluates the ecological degradation caused by oil extraction activities in the region. Findings indicate that effective prevention and resolution of environmental disputes in oil projects require revising domestic laws, strengthening enforcement, enhancing transparency, and expanding diplomatic and cross-border cooperation—particularly with Iraq. The study underscores the necessity of contractual environmental clauses, international arbitration mechanisms, and environmental diplomacy as tools for achieving sustainable and legally balanced outcomes. Introduction Environmental issues within oil contracts represent one of the most critical challenges faced by oil-producing nations, particularly those whose extraction zones overlap with fragile ecosystems. Iran, as a major oil producer, faces persistent conflicts between economic interests and environmental protection obligations. The Hawizeh Marsh (Hoor al-Azim), a transboundary wetland shared by Iran and Iraq, epitomizes this tension. Extensive oil exploration in the Azadegan oil field has led to oil spills, water contamination, and loss of biodiversity. This research explores how Iran’s legal and political mechanisms address environmental disputes arising from oil operations, especially in the context of the Hawizeh Marsh crisis. The study situates the issue within broader international frameworks, including the Ramsar Convention, the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the Paris Agreement, emphasizing the interplay between national governance and global environmental obligations. The research aims to reveal both the structural deficiencies in Iran’s environmental governance and the opportunities for policy reform through legal, institutional, and diplomatic means. Materials and Methods The study employs a qualitative legal content analysis grounded in comparative environmental law. Primary sources include Iran’s national legislation—such as Article 50 of the Constitution and the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act (1974)—and international treaties to which Iran is a party. In addition, contract models like Iran’s IPC framework and environmental clauses of buy-back contracts were reviewed to determine the extent to which they internalize sustainability obligations.The methodology also incorporates a case study approach, focusing on the Hawizeh Marsh crisis as a microcosm of the broader tensions between industrial expansion and environmental stewardship. Legal documents, policy reports, and environmental impact assessments (EIA) were systematically analyzed alongside relevant academic literature and precedents in international environmental dispute resolution. The research process involved triangulating sources to capture the convergence of legal, administrative, and diplomatic dimensions in addressing oil-related ecological harm. Discussion The analysis reveals that while Iran has established a robust constitutional and legislative foundation for environmental protection, the implementation gap remains substantial. Article 50 of the Constitution defines environmental protection as a public duty, prohibiting any activity that leads to irreversible ecological damage. Yet, enforcement remains weak due to institutional fragmentation, insufficient inter-agency coordination, and the prioritization of economic gain over ecological welfare.Within Iran’s oil contracts, environmental clauses are often general and declaratory, lacking operational precision or binding sanctions. For instance, while the buy-back model includes a reference to “environmental damage,” it fails to define its scope comprehensively or impose clear liability on contractors. The absence of detailed environmental performance indicators and independent monitoring mechanisms has hindered effective compliance. From a dispute resolution perspective, Iran’s current system offers three main mechanisms: (1) internal negotiation and mediation, (2) domestic judicial review, and (3) international arbitration. Internal negotiation can resolve minor technical disputes, but complex transboundary cases—such as oil leaks affecting Iraq’s territory—demand international cooperation. Although Iran’s domestic courts have jurisdiction over national projects, foreign contractors often prefer international arbitration bodies such as ICC, UNCITRAL, or ICSID, which ensure procedural neutrality and enforceability.The research also highlights the relevance of political and diplomatic tools. Environmental diplomacy, through joint Iran–Iraq committees or cooperation under UN environmental programs, can serve as a complementary mechanism to legal processes. In cases like the Hawizeh Marsh, cross-border ecological degradation transforms a domestic environmental issue into an international concern. The study thus identifies an urgent need for integrated governance—linking legal accountability with diplomatic negotiation and international collaboration.Moreover, international legal instruments such as the Ramsar Convention and the Paris Agreement impose obligations that extend beyond national sovereignty, demanding transparency, shared data, and public participation. However, Iran’s limited implementation of environmental information disclosure laws undermines compliance with these global standards. The Hawizeh crisis demonstrates how this opacity exacerbates mistrust between stakeholders, weakens enforcement, and impedes preventive measures. Conclusion The study concludes that effective resolution of environmental disputes in Iran’s oil sector requires a multi-level reform strategy integrating legal, institutional, and diplomatic dimensions. Domestically, Iran must update its oil contract templates to include mandatory Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA), establish independent monitoring agencies, and impose strict liability clauses for ecological damage. The government should align its legislation with international conventions and adopt best practices from global environmental governance frameworks. Regionally, Iran and Iraq must institutionalize a joint transboundary environmental committee for the Hawizeh Marsh, supported by technical cooperation and data sharing mechanisms. Internationally, Iran’s active engagement with the UN Environment Programme and other multilateral initiatives can facilitate access to funding, technology, and expert assistance for wetland restoration. Ultimately, the case of the Hawizeh Marsh illustrates the critical intersection between environmental justice, contractual governance, and international diplomac. Strengthening dispute resolution mechanisms within environmental clauses of oil contracts not only ensures ecological sustainability but also enhances Iran’s international credibility and compliance with global environmental norms. The research underscores that sustainable resource management in the oil industry can only be achieved through the harmonization of law, policy, and diplomacy in addressing environmental challenges. موضوع این تحقیق بررسی سازوکارهای حقوقی و سیاسی حل اختلافات در مقررات زیست ‌محیطی قراردادهای نفتی ایران با تأکید بر مطالعه موردی نشت نفت در تالاب هورالعظیم است. این تحقیق با تمرکز بر این بحران، سئوال اصلی را مطرح می‌کند که چگونه سازوکارهای حقوقی و سیاسی موجود می‌توانند به‌طور مؤثر اختلافات زیست‌محیطی میان طرفین قراردادهای نفتی را حل کنند؟ فرضیه تحقیق این است که علی‌رغم وجود چارچوب‌های قانونی و استانداردهای بین‌المللی، محدودیت در اجرای مقررات، ضعف در نظارت، و نبود شفافیت، حل این اختلافات را با پیچیدگی همراه کرده است. روش تحقیق مبتنی بر تحلیل محتوای اسنادی و حقوقی است که با بررسی مقررات زیست‌محیطی ایران و مقایسه آن با استانداردهای بین‌المللی، به تحلیل بحران هورالعظیم و چالش‌ های حقوقی آن می‌پردازد. نتایج تحقیق نشان می‌دهد که برای پیشگیری و حل مؤثر اختلافات زیست‌محیطی ناشی از قراردادهای نفتی، نیاز به بازنگری و تقویت قوانین داخلی، بهبود نظارت و شفافیت، و استفاده از ظرفیت‌ های دیپلماتیک و سازوکارهای بین‌المللی است. همچنین، اجرای تعهدات زیست ‌محیطی پیمانکاران و ایجاد سازوکارهای نظارتی مشترک با کشورهای هم‌مرز، از جمله عراق، از اهمیت ویژه‌ای برخوردار است.

https://www.rahyaftjournal.ir/article_232066_c4c5059acf170a90467f1f98500180f9.pdf

عبدالمطلب عبداله رهیافت انقلاب اسلامی 2980-9118 19 71 2025 08 23 Iran and the Environmental Challenges of the GAP Project: Examining Turkey’s Civil Liability under International Environmental Law ایران و چالش های زیست‌محیطی ناشی از پروژه گاپ: بررسی ضمانت مدنی دولت ترکیه در حقوق بین الملل محیط زیست 249 277 232103 FA آلاله ده منش دانشجوی دکتری تخصصی، گروه مدیریت محیط زیست،گرایش حقوق، دانشکده کشاورزی آب ،غذا وفراسودمندها، واحد علوم و تحقیقات،دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران عسکر جلالیان استاد، گروه حقوق، دانشگاه پیام نور، تهران، ایران محمدرضا تابش استادیار گروه مدیریت محیط زیست، دانشکده منابع طبیعی و محیط زیست، دانشگاه آزاد واحد علوم و تحقیقات، تهران، ایران علی اکبر رودباری دانشیار، مرکز تحقیقات سلامت محیط و کار/ دانشکده بهداشت، دانشگاه علوم پزشکی شاهرود، شاهرود، ایران منصور پورنوری استادیار گروه حقوق بین الملل دانشکده حقوق،دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد تهران مرکزی،تهران، ایران Journal Article 2024 12 18 This study, entitled Iran and the Environmental Challenges of the GAP Project: Examining Turkey’s Civil Liability under International Environmental Law, analyzes the non-criminal liability of the Republic of Turkey for the transboundary environmental impacts of the GAP project on the Islamic Republic of Iran. The central research question is to what extent Turkey can be held legally responsible, within the framework of international environmental law and based on the theory of civil liability, for the environmental harms inflicted upon Iran. The hypothesis posits that even in the absence of binding bilateral agreements between the two countries, core principles such as strict liability, the precautionary principle, and the no-harm rule provide a legal basis for holding Turkey accountable. The research follows a descriptive-analytical methodology, drawing on international legal instruments, judgments of the International Court of Justice, and empirical data concerning the environmental consequences of the GAP project for Iran. The findings reveal that Turkey has neglected its obligations arising from civil liability, failing to implement compensatory measures, conduct joint environmental assessments, or engage in preventive cooperation. Consequently, the Islamic Republic of Iran is legally entitled to pursue international legal remedies and seek compensation for the environmental damages incurred. Introduction The interaction between national development projects and transboundary environmental protection remains one of the most contentious issues in international law. The Southeastern Anatolia Project (GAP), launched by Turkey in the 1970s, exemplifies this challenge. Designed as a massive multi-dam and irrigation initiative on the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers, GAP has altered hydrological flows and ecosystem stability across the Middle East. For Iran—though not a direct riparian state—its ecological consequences have been severe. The desiccation of border wetlands such as Hoor al-Azim, the intensification of dust storms in Khuzestan and Ilam provinces, and the loss of agricultural productivity have undermined environmental security and public health. This study investigates Turkey’s civil (non-criminal) liability for these transboundary damages under international environmental law. It argues that Turkey’s unilateral conduct violates the principles of equitable and reasonable utilization, due diligence, and non-harm that govern shared natural resources. The paper situates its argument within the broader evolution of international law from fault-based state responsibility to strict liability mechanisms, emphasizing the preventive and compensatory dimensions of environmental governance. Materials and Methods The research adopts a descriptive–analytical and comparative legal methodology. It relies on doctrinal analysis of international legal instruments, including the 1997 UN Convention on the Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses, the ILC Draft Articles on Prevention of Transboundary Harm (2001), and case law from the International Court of Justice (ICJ)—notably Gabčíkovo–Nagymaros (1997), Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (2010), and Costa Rica v. Nicaragua (2018).Domestic and regional studies were reviewed to assess ecological, social, and economic impacts of GAP on downstream environments. Iranian academic and governmental reports—particularly those from the Department of Environment—provided empirical evidence of the project’s transboundary effects. The analysis triangulates these findings with secondary literature from international scholars (Birnie, Boyle, Sands, Redgwell, Crawford, Simma) to evaluate the normative evolution of civil liability in environmental law.Through this approach, the research distinguishes civil liability from state responsibility: the former centers on compensation for damages irrespective of fault, while the latter depends on proving breach of an international obligation. The GAP case thus becomes a legal laboratory for testing the boundaries between these two regimes. Discussion The study finds that Turkey’s conduct satisfies the elements necessary to invoke strict civil liability under international environmental law. The first element—occurrence of environmental harm—is established through measurable loss of water flow, wetland shrinkage, and increased air pollution in western Iran. The second element—causal connection—is supported by hydrological data showing a 40–80% reduction in the downstream flow of the Tigris and Euphrates following dam construction. The third element—failure to take preventive measures—is demonstrated by Turkey’s refusal to conduct joint Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) or to engage in cooperative consultation with affected states.Unlike classical responsibility, civil liability does not require proof of wrongful intent or negligence. It suffices that the activity—here, large-scale dam construction and diversion of international rivers—was inherently hazardous and that its consequences transcended national borders. This aligns with the principle of objective responsibility reflected in the CLC 1992 (Civil Liability for Oil Pollution), the Vienna Convention on Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage, and the EU Environmental Liability Directive (2004/35/EC). Moreover, Turkey’s actions contravene the precautionary principle, which obliges states to take preventive action even in the absence of full scientific certainty. The failure to assess potential harms before constructing massive hydraulic infrastructures exemplifies disregard for Principle 15 of the Rio Declaration (1992). The no-harm rule, recognized as customary international law, reinforces this obligation; as the ICJ held in Pulp Mills and Gabčíkovo–Nagymaros, states must ensure that activities within their jurisdiction do not cause significant environmental harm to other states. By continuing the GAP project without prior notification or cooperative management, Turkey has breached both procedural and substantive environmental duties. This neglect not only undermines regional ecological stability but also threatens human security—manifested in public health crises, displacement, and agricultural decline across Iran’s western provinces. In light of the civil liability doctrine, Turkey bears an obligation to compensate for the transboundary damages resulting from GAP. Compensation mechanisms may include direct financial payments, ecological restoration projects, or the establishment of a bilateral environmental compensation fund. Such measures correspond with Article 36 of the ILC Draft Articles on State Responsibility (2001), which mandates full reparation—material or in-kind—for injury caused by internationally wrongful acts or harmful consequences of hazardous activities. Conclusion This study concludes that Turkey’s implementation of the Southeastern Anatolia Project (GAP) has generated transboundary environmental harm to Iran that meets the criteria for civil liability under international environmental law. The principle of strict (objective) responsibility, reinforced by the precautionary principle and the no-harm rule, establishes a compelling legal basis for holding Turkey accountable even in the absence of explicit bilateral treaties. Iran, therefore, possesses both legal and diplomatic instruments to pursue redress. Possible strategies include: 1. Invoking the customary principles codified in the 1997 Watercourses Convention and the ILC Draft Articles; 2. Presenting scientific documentation of harm to international organizations such as UNEP, ESCWA, and the International Court of Justice; 3. Initiating regional cooperation with Iraq and Syria to establish a joint transboundary water management regime; 4. Proposing a bilateral compensation and restoration fund modeled on international precedents like the International Oil Pollution Compensation Funds (IOPCF). Ultimately, the case underscores a critical evolution in international environmental governance: from reactive state responsibility to proactive civil liability emphasizing prevention, restoration, and cooperation. For Iran, pursuing Turkey’s liability under this framework not only advances environmental justice but also strengthens its normative position within the international legal system dedicated to protecting shared ecological resources. پژوهش به تحلیل مسئولیت غیرکیفری دولت ترکیه در قبال آثار زیست‌محیطی فرامرزی این پروژه بر جمهوری اسلامی ایران می‌پردازد. مسئله اصلی تحقیق آن است که دولت ترکیه، در چارچوب حقوق بین‌الملل محیط زیست و بر پایه نظریه ضمانت مدنی، تا چه حد در برابر آسیب‌های وارده به ایران مسئول تلقی می‌شود؟ فرضیه پژوهش بر آن است که حتی در نبود تعهدات قراردادی الزام‌آور میان دو کشور، اصولی نظیر مسئولیت عینی، اصل احتیاط، و قاعده عدم ورود ضرر می‌توانند مبنای الزام‌آور مسئولیت ترکیه نسبت به ایران را شکل دهند. روش تحقیق توصیفی‌ـ‌تحلیلی بوده و بر پایه اسناد بین‌المللی، آرای دیوان بین‌المللی دادگستری و داده‌های تجربی درباره آثار پروژه گاپ بر محیط زیست ایران استوار است. یافته‌های پژوهش نشان می‌دهد که دولت ترکیه از اجرای الزامات ناشی از ضمانت مدنی در قبال ایران خودداری کرده و با ادامه سیاست‌های سدسازی، عدم شفافیت، و بی‌توجهی به همکاری پیشگیرانه، اصول بنیادین حقوق بین‌الملل محیط زیست را نقض نموده است. بر این اساس، جمهوری اسلامی ایران می‌تواند با استناد به قواعد بین‌المللی، نسبت به پیگیری حقوقی و مطالبه جبران خسارات زیست‌محیطی اقدام نماید.

https://www.rahyaftjournal.ir/article_232103_a7451cafdee18fcddd1833bd6d1c99bf.pdf