The political systems of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and the Islamic Republic of Iran: a comparative study

Abstract

Comparative research was conducted on two Islamic republics – Pakistan and Iran – which represent models, albeit imperfect, closest to „ideal. modern Islamic political systems. Their constitutions, and political systems have been assessed to identify strengths, shortcomings and obstacles to becoming true Islamic states. Both constitutions contain admirable Islamic provisions but suffer abuse in implementation by elites - feudal landlords and the military in Pakistan, and the conservative ‘Ulama’ in Iran. To rectify this, Islamic principles that emphasis social rights of the citizenry to basic housing, food, health, education and justice as well as freedom to “call for the good and forbid the bad” and participate in free elections, termed in the West „democratic rights.. In uplifting the “oppressed”, Iran has achieved greater success than in Pakistan although Iran is deficient in civic freedoms. Compared with Iran.s popular revolutionary movement, Zia ul-×aq.s 1980s. Islamisation program suffered from a „top-down. approach without alleviating conditions of the oppressed peasants (musta.‘afin). Urgent actions in Pakistan are land reforms and reforming corrupt courts and police in rural areas, ensuring allegiance of the military to civilian rule, and greater efforts on the part of Ulama’ in building Muslim unity, and enhancing ijtihad skills. The 1973 Pakistan Constitution is now improved through the 18th Amendment 2010 with a parliamentary-style system. With some changes it would represent a good template for many Muslim countries. One proposed amendment would facilitate help to parliamentarians by fuqaha’ in drafting new laws. In Iran the Wilayat-i Faqih (Guardianship of the Jurist) system of Ayatullah Khumayni, with Supreme Leadership of the State (Faqih) and its powerful Councils filled by fuqaha’, has considerable merit but transgresses Islamic principles in the low level of consultation with parliamentary members, lack of accountability, non-acceptance of criticism, and unfair elections. Khumayni.s original designate to succeed him, Ayatullah Montazeri, highlighted Khumayni.s errors, his absolutist view of the Faqih.s role and the 1989 extra-judicial killings, while calling for constitutional reforms: reducing the Faqih.s role, while fuqaha’ leaders, he argued, should be publicly elected from candidates vetted by the maraj’-i-taqlid scholars council.