واکاوی دلایل نارسایی‌های حکمرانی متعالی اسلامی در ایران بر پایه نظریه‌پردازی زمینه‌ای

Purpose: The primary goal of this research investigation was to identify and thoroughly analyze the difficulties that hinder Iran from attaining Islamic exalted governance.

Methodology: The research utilized a qualitative framework rooted in Strauss and Corbin's grounded theory approach to identify obstacles to the implementation of Islamic exalted governance. Semi-structured interviews were carried out with 24 academic specialists, alongside the use of official documents, religious texts, and political discourses for data gathering. Theoretical sampling persisted until data saturation was achieved. Data analysis was conducted in three separate phases: open coding, then axial coding, and finally selective coding. A grounded model of the research along with its main concepts developed as the conclusion of the study. The study incorporated participant input alongside expert evaluations to improve the validity of the findings.

Findings: The research results illustrate that the primary obstacle to realizing Islamic exalted governance, or what we describe as the core code, is the mismatch between Islamic political theory and contemporary governance. The original core code of Sharia and the contemporary efficiency to which it corresponds together and simultaneously ruptured with reality due to weak practical reason in political jurisprudence and the lack of institutional models caused decision-making entities to end up using secular instrumental rationality, when the overall societal intent is Islamic political ethics. Rigid traditionalist interpretations took precedence over all elements of governance, while the intentional rejection of the temporal—or time-bound—nature of governmental rulings and impulse for structural innovation create limits for regulatory reversal. This is very problematic because the theoretical subject and dynamics are multi-faceted, especially conflicts between religious idealistic and pragmatic realistic governance—as well as the dominance of individual ethics over institutional rationality beneath the countless contradictions and the absence of a single conceptual frame which can adequately illustrate the relationship between jurisprudence and power structures. Because of this inconsistent intellectual framing, this inevitably creates distress and confusion amongst elites and ultimately alienation within greater segments of society. The interaction between jurisprudence and political science also became increasingly complicated due to the emergence of secular authoritarianism. To be explicit, there exists an interaction between the treatment of Islamic juristic idealism, positivism, and political science and this intersects with multiple layers of the same fixation on discipline over participation, along the lines of denial of agency and the fragmentation and disarray between religious elites and secular political power-owners inadvertently creates competition which inevitably establish a baseline of distrust. The democratic expectations have shifted from duty-based understandings to rights-based understandings that add pressure on religious governance for accountability, however the current structures have limited capacity to adjust to this shift. The uncoupling of the desacralization of executive rationality from the rentier economy and structural inequality and contradictory governance discourses resulted in the negation of transparency and coherence in decision-making. The existing approaches have focused on securing identity and delaying efficiency and implementing practices of securitization and removing societal participation in the process of legitimacy. The results include spiritual capital loss for the Islamic system with the growth of creeping-secularism and stagnation of theoretical advancement in religious political science and citizen alienation and unproductive monopolistic governance.

Conclusion: The biggest impediment to Islamic exalted governance is the political environment because it is only partially supplying Sharia principles and never turning them into functional institutions and systems and act of policy making. The forward momentum of governance is sabotaged because religious and customary institutions refuse to change and there is a structural schism between religious discourse and reality. The present situation exists because there is no widely accepted theory of jurisprudential and power relations and Sharia and politics are not clearly understood. Governance effectiveness is diminished by superficial rituals that subordinate institutional development and because of strategic differences between state institutions and religious institutions. Governance contradicts itself as socio-cultural decline occurs with loss of spiritual capital, as well as with disconnection between citizens and others in society where there are shared bonds. Governance structures fail over time which leads to stagnation, and ultimately collapse. The evidence in this research indicates that these differences can only be resolved through deep engagement with the intentions behind religious teachings, and institutional change in the governance landscape as well.

Keyword: Islamic exalted governance, Islamic Supreme Governance, Crisis of Religious-Institutional Compatibility, Islamic Civilization, Grounded Theory