The Authority of the Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist [Velayat-e Faqih] and its Limits of Power in the Thought of Dr. Beheshti with a Look at the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran

‌ ∴ Introduction ∴ ‌
The legal framework and governance of a nation are profoundly influenced by its foundational theories and intellectual bases, which are often encapsulated in the nation’s constitution. This is particularly evident in the Islamic Republic of Iran, where the concept of the authority of the supreme leader [Velayat-e Faqih] has been a cornerstone of its legal and political system since the Islamic Revolution of 1979. The principle, deeply rooted in Islamic law, posits that the governance of Muslims should be under the guidance of a qualified jurist during the era of Imam occultation. This concept was institutionalized through the Iranian Constitution, particularly with the ratification of article 5, marking a significant departure from prior constitutional frameworks. Martyr Dr. Sayyed Mohammad Hosseini Beheshti (1928-1981), a pivotal figure in the revolution and the establishment of the new constitution, played a central role in articulating and implementing this principle. This paper aims to delve into Beheshti's contributions and perspectives on the authority of the supreme leader, examining the evolution of this concept and its practical implications within the framework of the Iranian Constitution.
‌ ∴ Research Question ∴ ‌
The primary inquiry of this paper revolves around the conceptualization of the authority of the supreme leader as articulated by Martyr Beheshti. Specifically, it seeks to address whether Beheshti's discourses and writings support the notion of the absolute authority of the supreme leader during the era of Imam occultation. Additionally, it questions how Beheshti justified the necessity of this absolute authority and the extent to which he envisioned the scope of the supreme leader’s powers within society. This exploration is crucial for understanding the theoretical underpinnings of Iran's political system and the constitutional legitimation of the supreme leader’s authority.
‌ ∴ Research Hypothesis ∴ ‌
It is hypothesized that Martyr Beheshti’s intellectual and juridical endeavors significantly contributed to the conceptualization and institutionalization of the Authority of the supreme leader in the Iranian political and legal systems. Beheshti, leveraging his scholarly background and political activism, posited that the absolute authority of a qualified supreme leader is essential for guiding the Islamic community in the absence of the Imam. This hypothesis further suggests that Beheshti envisioned a broad scope of powers for the supreme leader, aiming to ensure the governance of society aligns with Islamic principles. This study seeks to affirm these hypotheses by examining Beheshti's contributions to the theoretical foundation and practical application of Velayat-e Faqih.
‌ ∴ Methodology & Framework, if Applicable ∴ ‌
The methodology employed in this research is content analysis, focusing on a systematic examination of Beheshti’s speeches, writings, and the constitutional texts. This method allows for an in-depth analysis of the discourse, enabling the extraction of key concepts and viewpoints without imposing external interpretations. The research utilizes library resources, including primary and secondary sources, to construct a comprehensive understanding of Beheshti’s thoughts and the legal-rational structure of the Authority of the supreme leader in Iran. The framework for analysis involves categorizing and tabulating the data to facilitate a clear, systematic presentation of findings. This approach not only highlights Beheshti’s influence on the development of Iran’s constitution but also provides insights into the dynamic interplay between religious authority and state power in the context of modern Islamic governance.
‌ ∴ Results & Discussion ∴ ‌
The research meticulously explores Martyr Beheshti’s profound contributions to the constitutional law of the Islamic Republic of Iran, particularly focusing on the authority of the supreme leader [Velayat-e Faqih] and its operational limits within the state’s governance. The findings underscore Beheshti’s pivotal role in articulating a vision where the supreme leader’s authority, grounded in Islamic jurisprudence and the collective will of the Muslim community, serves as the linchpin for the governance of an Islamic society. His interpretations emphasize the balance between divine guidance and the community’s welfare, advocating for a leadership model that, while authoritative, fundamentally differs from autocratic or tyrannical governance.
     Beheshti’s perspective on the supreme leader’s authority elucidates a governance model that is neither democratic in the conventional Western sense nor autocratic. It highlights a unique framework where the supreme leader, meeting stringent qualifications and enjoying broad public support, leads with an authority derived from both divine law and the consent of the governed. This model proposes a symbiotic relationship between the jurist’s leadership and the community's welfare, advocating for decisions that prioritize the collective good over individual interests.
     Further, the analysis reveals that the absolute authority of the supreme leader [Velayat-e Motlaqe-ye Faqih], as envisaged by Beheshti, inherently contains checks against tyranny. Beheshti's distinction between tyranny and the supreme leader’s governance lies in the voluntary acceptance and religious obligation of the community towards the supreme leader's leadership, reinforced by the latter's adherence to Islamic principles and the public interest.
     The constitutional place of the guardianship of the Islamic jurist, as articulated by Beheshti, is central to the Islamic Republic’s governance philosophy. Beheshti champions the necessity of an informed, divinely guided leader to ensure the Islamic character of the state's governance. This principle, he argues, is paramount, forming the constitutional bedrock of the Islamic Republic.
     Beheshti's discussions on the limits of the supreme leader’s authority indicate a nuanced understanding of governance. While the constitution delineates the framework within which the supreme leader operates, Beheshti acknowledges the flexibility required to address the community's needs and the public interest, suggesting that in exceptional circumstances, the supreme leader’s authority can extend beyond constitutional stipulations, as exemplified by Imam Khomeini's actions prior to the 1989 (1368 SH) constitutional amendment.
‌ ∴ Conclusion ∴ ‌
This study concludes that Martyr Beheshti’s contributions to the conceptual and practical understanding of the authority of the guardianship of the Islamic jurist in Iran's constitutional law are both foundational and transformative. Beheshti's vision delineates a governance model that integrates Islamic jurisprudence with the principles of collective welfare and leadership accountability. His interpretations advocate for a leadership that, while authoritative, is fundamentally anti-tyrannical, grounded in the community's welfare and the principles of Islam.
     Beheshti’s elucidation of the guardianship of the Islamic jurist’s role and authority within the Islamic Republic's constitution provides a critical framework for understanding the balance between divine guidance and the societal contract in Islamic governance. The nuanced portrayal of the supreme leader’s authority, with its inherent limits and responsibilities, offers a unique perspective on the governance of an Islamic society, highlighting the dynamic interplay between religious authority, constitutional law, and the public interest.
     In essence, this research underscores the enduring relevance of Beheshti’s thought in the discourse on Islamic governance, presenting his work as a cornerstone in the development of the Islamic Republic of Iran's constitutional and legal framework. Beheshti’s legacy, as examined through this study, offers invaluable insights into the implementing Islamic principles in the governance of a modern state, reflecting a profound engagement with the challenges of religious authority and political power.