The Purposivism of the Interpreter of the Constitution in light of the rule of Sharia

Abstract

There have been and still are many approaches among jurists in how to interpret the constitution, which are generally divided under the two general headings of originalist and non-originalist. One of the sub-branches of non-originarianism is called the Purposive interpretive approach, in which the goals of writing the law are extracted from the text and other sources and interpreted based on the goals and values governing the constitution. On the other hand, one of the fundamental goals of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran is the rule of Sharia standards over legal norms and other acts and legal situations. The main question of the current research is about the possibility or refusal to identify the goal of Sharia rule by adopting the interpretive approach of finalism in the interpretation of the Constitution and its efficiency compared to other interpretive approaches. The findings of the research using the descriptive-analytical method and using library sources indicate that the Guardian Council in its interpretive comments regarding "Sharia supervision of laws and regulations from the judiciary", "permission to receive compensation for late payment from foreign parties", "Inclusion of the concept of Sharia standards in secondary rulings" and "Effective time of revocation of anti-Sharia approvals" have benefited from this interpretation approach. Also, in this approach, new interpretations can be issued such as "the ability to delegate Shariah supervision", "Shariah supervision over the approvals of institutions established by the leadership's decree" and "Shariah supervision over the approvals of the Expediency Council."

Keywords

• interpretation of the constitution
• purposive interpretation
• guardian council
• rule of sharia
• objectives of the constitution