Imam Khomeini and a Jurisprudential Defense of the Republic

This study aims to elucidate and defend Imam Khomeini's interpretation of the concept of "republic" within the framework of the "Islamic Republic" while critiquing two contradictory readings of this concept. The central issue of the research is the inconsistencies in prevalent interpretations of Imam Khomeini's thought, which either reduce the notion of the republic to a mere political slogan, thereby stripping Islamic governance of its democratic essence, or present an idealistic interpretation termed "pure republic," contingent upon specific conditions such as the people's spiritual purity. These two readings are not only incompatible with the authenticity of Imam Khomeini's thought but also overlook the potential of his theory for engaging in global dialogue on the compatibility of Islam and democracy. The primary question of this study is: What is the authentic interpretation of the republic in Imam Khomeini's thought, which he defended through jurisprudential reasoning? The research employs a documentary method, analyzing Imam Khomeini's statements and those of his close interpreters, particularly Ayatollah Motahari, during the early years of the Islamic Revolution. The findings reveal that, grounded in jurisprudential principles, Imam Khomeini defended the republic in its conventional, democratic sense, viewing it not as a political tactic but as an inseparable component of his governance theory. According to him, the Islamic Republic is a form of government in which the people determine their destiny through direct participation via mechanisms such as elections, referendums, and public oversight. Furthermore, the study demonstrates that Imam Khomeini's theory of the Islamic Republic, despite certain theoretical and practical challenges, represents a significant advancement beyond
the constitutionalist framework, offering substantial opportunities for Iran's political development. These opportunities include strengthening legal formalism, expanding oversight mechanisms, partially recognizing minority rights, and striving to balance independence and freedom. However, challenges such as prioritizing independence over freedom in cases of conflict, ambiguity in defining the "nation" and its relation to the "ummah," and lack of clarity in articulating the relationship between sharia and national will are also analyzed. In conclusion, the study emphasizes that the authentic interpretation of Imam Khomeini's thought reflects a principled, jurisprudential defense of the republic, positioning it as a viable model for global discussions on Islam and democracy. Reductionist or idealistic interpretations are not only inconsistent with his thought but also foster authoritarian discourse, weakening the theory of the Islamic Republic. Therefore, reviving this authentic interpretation and pursuing innovative ijtihad are essential for reinforcing the foundations of democracy in Iran.