MINDANEWS

MARGINALIA: Legitimacy and Acceptability in Iran’s Islamic Republican System

Mansoor L. Limba on January 23, 2020

(A modified transcript of twenty-minute presentation for the Social Sciences Lecture Series on
January 22, 2020, Ateneo de Davao University, Davao City, Philippines.)

Salamun ‘alaykum and good afternoon to all of you!

At the outset, I would like to thank the organizers for letting me be part of this regular academic
conversation.

Introduction

In my recent lecture tour to different Mindanao universities and colleges on media reporting and
peace journalism, this question was thrown to me not just once – but twice – during the open
forum:

“We know that you graduated from Iran. How do you differentiate its Islamic Republic from the
Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS)?”

Before directly answering the question, I told the young audience that the “state-ness” of the ISIS
is actually a misnomer from the post-Westphalian understanding of the term “state” because it is
transnational group backed by some global and regional powers, and whose perceived territory is
not just Iraq and Syria, but the entire globe – including Mindanao, which they considered the
capital of what they called “Wilayat al-Mashriq” or Eastern Province.

On the other hand, the Islamic Republic of Iran is a founding member of the United Nations
Organization and a longtime member of the Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT), of which Mr.
Trump’s darling in the Middle East – Israel – has never been a member. Unlike the self-
proclaimed champion of democracy and defender of human rights in the world, Iran is a country
which has never invaded another country for the past 250 years. Not an inch was added to its
current territory.

Storytelling

So, this afternoon, don’t expect me to give you a classroom lecture. I would rather tell you the
story of my answer to that single question. To begin with, let me quote Sūrat al-Ḥadīd 57:25 of
the Qur’an:

“Certainly We sent Our apostles with manifest proofs, and We sent down with them the Book and
the Balance, so that mankind may maintain justice.”

Whenever there is a Government, individual freedom tends to be curtailed by a more powerful

entity, which is the government apparatus. Therefore, there is a continuing tension between
individual freedom, on one hand, and the government authority, on the other.

As such, one of the fundamental questions in political philosophy is: what is the source of
authority of the government? Or, what is the government’s legitimacy of power?

In one end of the spectrum – one may say – is monarchy in which sovereignty resides in the
person of who eventually becomes the king or monarch. As they say, “Might is right.” At the
other end of the spectrum is liberal democracy in which sovereignty emanates from the people
themselves.

1
Legitimacy

In the Islamic political thought, however, God is seen as the Sole Legislator and law-giver
because He is the All-knowing and the All-powerful. Since He is Al-Samad, the Unique, He is
neutral vis-à-vis any subject and object of the law. As such, He is the true Source of authority, and
the legitimacy of power emanates from Him.

Seen from this perspective and in the light of the Qur’anic passage quoted earlier, the Divine
Prophets were sent with the Book and the Balance – WA ANZALNĂ MA‘AHUM AL-KITĂB
WA’L-MIZĂN – to govern people so that they may maintain justice – LIYAQUMAN-NĂSU
BI’L-QIST.

Sent to a family, a clan, a village, a community, or a nation, the Prophets were legitimate and
bona fide prophets, whether the people believe them or not. Such was the case of Noah, Hud and
Salih, Zakariyya and Yahya (John Baptist), and other prophets who were rejected by the majority
of their people.

There was another group of prophets – prophets who were able to effectively politically govern
their own people. Belonging to this group were such prophets as Moses, David and Solomon
(‘alayhimus-salam – on whom be peace), among others.

Acceptability

At this juncture, the question is: What element did the latter group of prophets had which the
former group did not have? Was it legitimacy or mashrū‘iyyah? Definitely NOT because all these
prophets, as we have stated earlier, were legitimate rulers in the eyes of God.

The missing element was actually maqbuliyyah or acceptability of the people, which the latter
group of prophets possessed but not by the former. In other words, from day one, the prophets
were legitimate rulers or governors but they need the people’s acceptability so as to be able to
establish a political rule or government.

Along this spirit, when Prophet Muhammad was still in Makkah where the majority of people
rejected him, no Islamic government could ever be imagined. It was only after the Second Pact of
‘Aqabah in which the tribal leaders of Madinah invited him to their city and sworn allegiance to
him to be their absolute leader that the Madinah constitution was written and the Islamic
government established.

Some 25 years after the Prophet’s demise, Hadrat ‘Alī assumed the office of khilāfah or caliphate
only after the unanimous insistence of the masses. In depicting the public unanimity, history tells
us that if Hadrat ‘Alī were standing, he could not be able to sit down, and if he were sitting down,
he could not be able to stand up due to the huge number of people who threw themselves toward
him. Simply put, true khilāfah is a product of the legitimacy of imamah and maqbuliyyah or
acceptability by the people.

At this point, we can already identify two (2) essential elements of Islamic Government which
must go hand in hand; namely (1) legitimacy (mashrū‘iyyah) and (2) acceptability (maqbūliyyah).

Legitimacy and Acceptability in the Islamic Republican System

Taking into account these two inseparable elements of Islamic Government, when the epic-
making Iranian nation recognized Ayatullah al-‘Uzma Sayyid Ruhullah al-Musawi al-Khomeini
as their marja‘ al-taqlīd (religious authority) and Supreme Leader – that is, their spiritual as well
as political guide – he did not arbitrarily impose his will concerning the form of government to be

2
established, although he could have easily done so as he had the overarching authority and
legitimacy in the eyes of the people.

Instead, he entrusted to the masses as to what form of government they wanted. And the 1979
referendum that was done for that purpose gave an astounding result of 98.22% votes for the
establishment of “Islamic Republic” as the form of government; hence, the Constitution of the
Islamic Republic of Iran was ratified soon afterward.

In summary, in the Islamic Republican system, the word “Islamic” represents the element of
“legitimacy” or mashrū‘iyyah while the word “Republic” symbolizes the element of
“acceptability” or maqbūliyyah. These two elements must go hand in hand like the two wings of a
bird.

Conclusion

In conclusion, in the world today where the seclusion of the so-called “ascetics” serves as a moral
carte blanche to the bullies while the militant extremism of the
so-called “puritans” victimizes the innocents, reading the text of the Constitution of the Islamic
Republic of Iran, which combines religious legitimacy and people’s acceptability, is a recipe for
moderation and rationality.

I am now ready to entertain your questions. And bear in mind that in any academic venue such as
this one, there is no such thing as irrelevant or silly question. What is irrelevant or silly is to say
that a particular question is irrelevant or silly.

I thank you!

[MindaViews is the opinion section of MindaNews. Mansoor L. Limba, PhD in International

Relations, is a writer, university professor, blogger, chess trainer, and translator (from Persian
into English and Filipino) with tens of written and translation works to his credit on such subjects
as international politics, history, political philosophy, intra-faith and interfaith relations, cultural
heritage, Islamic finance, jurisprudence (fiqh), theology (‘ilm al-kalam), Qur’anic sciences and
exegesis (tafsir), hadith, ethics, and mysticism. He can be reached at mlimba@diplomats.com, or
http://www.mlimba.com and http://www.muslimandmoney.com.]

Tags: Iran, Islamic republic, Islamic government, Islamic political thought, legitimacy,
acceptability