Article excerpt


There have been different and sometimes conflicting viewpoints regarding Human Rights in Iran from the years after the revolution so far. New and enlightening views have been publicized regarding the relation between Human Rights, Islam, Iran, and the Constitution in recent years including fundamentalists, religious modernists and secular modernists. They have different interpretations on Human Rights based on their positions. This article explains their opinions and differences in interpreting relation between religion and human rights.

Keywords: Human Rights; Juridical; Traditionalists; Reformists; Seculars

Resumé: Il y a eu des points de vue différents et parfois contradictoires concernant les droits de l'homme en Iran après la révolution. Ces dernières années, des points de vue nouveaux et éclairants ont été rendus publics en ce qui concerne la relation entre les droits de l'homme, l'Islam, l'Iran et la constitution. Ce sont des points de vue des fondamentalistes, des modernistes religieux et des modernistes laïques, qui ont des interprétations différentes sur les droits de l'homme en fonction de leurs positions. Cet article tente à expliquer leurs opinions et différences dans l'interprétation de relation entre la religion et les droits de l'homme.

Mots-clés: droits de l'homme; juridique; traditionalists; réformistes; laïques


There have been different and controversial ideas about relations between Human Rights and Shari'a (Shiite interpretation on Islam) in Iran since Islamic revolution. These ideas can be categorized into three main approaches including traditionalists, reformists, and secular modernists. The mentioned approaches try to interpret the relations between Human Rights and Shari'a on the basis of religious foundations but their opinions about priorities are different. This article explains In following of the article, I will explain the main ideas of the approaches and clarifies the differences among their ideas.


After the victory of Islamic Revolution of Iran, different approaches of interpreting human rights have been conducted by jurists and religious scholars. Thinkers explain the existence approaches on Human Rights in Iran from different aspects. For example, Hussein Farastkhah, as a university professor and religious writer that has studied the different kinds of Iran's cultural progress in one of his articles titled "Human Rights Challenging after Iran Islamic Revolution", argues that the only reason for challenging nature of human rights' discourse in Iran is based on the contrast between religious modernism and traditional fundamentalism. He has divided the theorists into three main groups including fundamentalists, religious modernists and secular modernists.

A. Fundamentalists who believe that religion principals and laws should not be ignored just because of modem world and justification of new wisdom (Ayatollah Mohammad Taghi Mesbah Yazdi is in this group).

B. Religious modernists who believe in basic principles of modernization such as rationality, humanism, Human Rights and freedom, except the religious beliefs as well. However, they are interpreting the religion by using modernism elements (Mohammad Mehdi Bazargan who emphasized on new combination of modernism and religion with pragmatism is in this group).

C. And Secular modernists that believe government or other entities should exist separately from religion and religious beliefs (Dariush Shaygan who although accepts modernism, but does not deny traditionalism completely, is in this group) (Farastkhah 2002).

Ahmad Gabel is another Shi'a' theorist who has a different division in his article namely "Shi'a's Leaders Political Tendencies and Human Rights. He argues that there are two major approaches:

A. The people who have not granted any natural rights and privileges to human. …


An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.