Law and Governance In the political structure of Islam and Democracy

Stability of the system and basically every social phenomenon is related to components and its constituent members. Iran's political system has some structures and institutions that borrowed its dynamism and reliability from this structure. In fact, this is the structure of the system which will ensure the sustainability and efficiency of it. Therefore, this article seeks to do a short and limited comparing between the structure of Islamic governance and Western democratic (the structure of the political system of the West) until in the light of it, become clear that political system of Iran based on what structures could emerged in the modern system of the world and even as a considerable power in politics and government, attract attention to itself and a ray of hope in the hearts of the world Believers create that not only a Mahdavi world government is possible, but also it is inevitable and inviolable.
Keywords: structure, government, politics, democracy, law, rule.

Law and its origin

Since the political system is a phenomenon that is social and social phenomena in the micro and macro structures are found, knowing the characteristics of the political system will be based on recognition of its structure. In fact, every structure are formed from a series of components and institutions that system with relying on them pave the way to achieve the desired goals. the component is Fundamental of any structure, because it is the only factor that could restrict and make desires and "law" of various asked of people in the community systematically, and guarantee social cohesion and stability and continuity of collective life, in such a way that if there is not the law, people are confused and do not know what tasks they are and how to play them. In fact, this is the law that determine the duties and the necessary norms. So not only the community need to the law for their existence and survival, but also the social structures survival are indebted their viability and effectiveness to the law. Now that the need for law in society and social structures turned out, this question raised that where is the source of this law and who is the legislature and the drafters of the law?
In response to the question that who can do the legislature, talks a lot, and several theories have been proposed. Some believe that the person or persons can legislate that they have some advantages such as the strength intelligence and or high power of economic and natural, such a way that through it, take the members of society to their command willingly or with fear and compulsion.
In response to this view have said that the real interests and corruption are not such as the fact that the unable intellect of men could not surrounded them. Because, firstly, their interfering with each other and interaction and effectiveness are so much that person become surprised and the diversity and multiplicity of issues that human social behavior is linked with them so that surrounding on them for a common human intellects is not possible; Secondly, the legislature for this reason that can able to order a certain social function, he must authenticate that this practice does not conflict not only with the interests of the people of the world, but also with the interests of their otherworldly. Authentication the lack of opposed to the social behavior with the eternal happiness of human, is something that none of the normal human intellect cannot complete it and this affair is important from the Islamic point of view; some believe that the purpose of the law in the Islamic viewpoint is not the ultimate goal, but is the average one that provides the field of the ultimate goal which is the eternal happiness and satisfaction and closing of the God. Even if it became regardless from the Islamic view and the ultimate goal is known that social welfare of this world, in addition to that the human intellect without the help of revelation resources cannot offer a favorable legal system and the Law of providing the worldly interests, because it cannot properly discover the amount and the type of an effect of a certain social action in the providing the worldly interest. The most obvious reason that can be stated on this claim is that after thousands of years, mankind still could not write a good system that at least solves the problems of this world of man and provides a quiet and comfortable life for him. Despite tremendous advances in the field of science and technology, he still cannot solve many simple problems. Even with his technological advances, he increased on the complexity of life and not only failed to provide a source of calm, but also more problems have been diagnosed. The mystery of this affair has come in the holy book Quran in the surah Isra, Verse 85.
Law in the political structure of democracy, though it is concerned more as a political regime, but in this article with the same purpose, its structure will be evaluated with the political structure of the Islamic system, this political regime is based on a series of principles of knowledge and human cognitive itself that its understanding helps us to understand better its political structure. Of course, we are not unaware of this point that democracy in some speeches like the state of the Greek cities could be subject to further criticism and in this paper that kind of democracy is desired which considers the self- foundation wisdom with enlightenment approach in the rule and law as criteria and in other words, modern democracies is desired for the author. From the perspective of democracy, human happiness, is enclosed in this world and believes that man is able that with the guidance and help of his self- foundation wisdom and his human’s experience and without helping of the eternal guidance, creates good life for themselves that the first condition and base of accessing to the good life in this world, is to free the thought from the bondage of ignorance and superstition and to drop people from the social oppression. This view, based on this foundations of knowledge, is based on the principle which relativism is the most important of it. Democracy does not believe to the fixed and absolute truths, especially in the legislative. In other words, no opinion and values is as eternal truth and instead of believing to an absolute truth believes to the relativity of opinion and values. In such a system, the law, comes from the demand of people and is the product of human wisdom and has no communication with beyond.
In this way, all human beings and everyone who has the intellect, has the right of legislation and according to the principle of equality, every adult citizen has equal opportunity compared to any other citizen to participate in the decision-making process and on the basis of agreement and mutual association form society and its institutions and structures. But due to this fact that present societies have population more than before, agreement in it is virtually impossible, citizens involve in legislative through indirect participation. It means through a majority vote choose a group as their representative and consider the vote of that group as their vote and assumed their statute as their status. thus, this law has credibility and legitimacy which the vote of the people support it and also the vote of the people are valid for two reasons:
First of all is this fact that the owner of social life are the people and profit and loss of it comes to them; Therefore they should be expressed their views about the quality of regulation and organizing the social affairs and distribution pattern and the division of diverse products of the community. Second is that practically there is no choice except of accepting the vote of the people, because if the most favorable social legislation does not agree with people, so it does not have the community support and cannot acceptable in society and only its work will be disputes and conflicts in social situations, and society is undergoing a lot of stress. In this case, the intention of the legislature which was establishing a social order, will be overturned. On the other hand, force and coercion and impose the law, even if it is appropriate and desirable, cannot be long-term, so there is virtually no alternative except of accepting the vote of the people and we must admit that the origin of the law is the people and this is the people who have the right of legislation and they can get this right through partnerships.

Evaluation of the perspective of social contract

This view from certain aspects is controversial. First is this that the majority vote, although it has less loss from the minority, however, It will not have the main objective which is the public satisfaction. In addition, in speech we can speak about the "free vote", but in practice, at least it has not happened so far. In almost in any country, people do not vote by force and no one does not want from them that they vote to the benefit of a particular social law or a special person, but in almost all countries are a minority that with the tools and advertising and etc. dictate their opinion on the people. Eshpilinger says about this: The truth is that with the expansion of the public vote to all people in the society, election has lost its original meaning because the bulk of the electorate are caught in the grip of the new power, which they are the party leaders and these leaders in a such way imposed his will by all advertisers and advertising system on people who the crowd in any way will not be able to perceive and understand it. If we ignore this damage and what that is withdrawn from the boxes will treat them as the real will of the people and placed the principle on truth, other forms will arise and it is this that because people do not know that their elected representatives about what opinions has about each issue, it happened so much that a group of people elect a person and then find that he has against vote with them in all or some issues. In such cases, what should we do? On the one hand people choose the representatives that they act as their spokesman and formulate the law that they desire and they do not like that they do in a way that they want that in this case, the only way that they can prevent the possible risk is that the people relieve their representatives, but this way is closed in fundamental rights and common political world and people have no right to dismiss their representative, because they have parliamentary immunity. These problems are from the most important bugs that have been discovered by philosophers of Rights and they emphasized on them and the followers of the system of democracy also have not said the persuasive answer about it.
But another major drawbacks that we can say about this theory from the Islamic point of view, , is that firstly, we cannot accept that the purpose of law is only providing the public order and preventing from chaos until they claim that this objective achieved with the general agreement, but the goal is the real interests of human beings; Therefore, if all members of society, have agreed on sexual freedom and chaos does not happen, such a law is invalid because the real interest of the people has not provided. From the view of Islam, when a law is appropriate that it is within the framework of ethics and proportionate to the objective of system that is the eternal happiness means closing to God. Secondly, the perspective of the social contract has mixed two concepts of acceptance and legitimacy together, sometimes, speaking is about this that what law can be implemented in the society that in which case, such an argument is related to sociology and in response to it must be said, Every legal system whether is just or is unjust, whether based on facts or not, For this that they can establish a society and obtain the government, should be acceptable to everyone or at least they be an important part of society. For this reason, prophets despite the truth and carrying the best legal system from God, people did not accept them and because their system did not agree with the sensual desire, the people turned away from it.
But sometimes discussion is about this that what law has legitimacy, i.e. what system and rules must prevail in a society that in this case we say that the law is appropriate that has proportion with the real interest of people and includes their eternal happiness, and such this law needs a legislation who knows all the real interest of humans. Thirdly, in the view of the social contract, it was obvious that if a person living alone does not have any obligation and responsibility, however, in the religious perspective, an alone man does not have full freedom, but he faces with a lot of ethical rules and terms and he must do his moral imperatives . A value and legal system when it is desirable that consider all aspects of human existence completely and the purpose is this that human beings can achieve their ultimate perfection and eternal happiness. Such a system, in any case, does not release man on his own, whether he has a social life, or individual life, because any action at any time and place with any degree of large and small about its apparent, will have positive or negative effect on receipt to the beatification and final perfection of human, therefore, it must subject to a true verdict that even it does not slightly miss the main goal.

The law in the political structure of Islam

As it was told, democracy views about the origin of law is based on its anthropological principles, understanding the political structure of Islam also is based on its ontology which of course it has its anthropological foundations also is based on its ontology. Demands of the Islamic perspective is this that all of the universe are created by Almighty God and God is the true owner of everything which is in the universe. As a result, it must be accepted that for any seizure in the universe must be gotten allow from him. Man is not so free that could grab in any way that he wants in the various objects, including other human beings that God created them. So if we ever speak about the human weakness and were saying that he cannot be a legislator due to the lack of awareness and full surround about the materials, now we are going beyond the past and say that basically people are not allowed and never can to enact a law for himself arbitrarily.
Thus, in the Islamic perspective, man has no right to do something in the life that his work be against with the God who is the real property of the universe. Each credit and work has a lot of consequences on people's personal and social life and credit shall not be such that its real consequences is contradicting with the ownership and divinity of Almighty God. To express more clearly, no one has the right of credentials and composition of the commands and prohibitions; even a consensus of all people or all people on earth cannot create a law. Only a person has the right to command to the man who is the true owner of all the world that is the God that with his legislative divinity, be a legislative, because in the view of Islam, belief system is not isolated from the values and legal system, but these two together have close and direct relationship and principally the belief system is the origin of value system.
In short, the fact that such laws and regulations, whether individual or social, should be consistent with the interests of the other world and with real materials and human intellect is impotent from discovery of existence and lack of both adjustment, in particular the second adaptation; So human cannot and should not legislate, and only is God who has the right of legislation because, firstly, he is the knower of the unseen and the visible and considers all materials of the world and the Hereafter and eternal of the human beings and knows the nearest and best way of studying of the material. Secondly, he is not located under the influence of sensual desires and private purposes, thirdly, he is the creator of the universe and true owner of them.

Wrappers area

Thus what had been said, there is not a place to the legislation for the human in the political structure of Islam and he will be only executive of the orders and laws of God. But Allama martyr Mohammad Baqer Sadr has considered an area to enact the law for Muslims and he has called it. Is it not true that any fabrication and forgery was called as “Wrappers area from the religion "? Is it not true that any enacting the legislation is from authority of God and man does not have to allow the credit of imperative?
In response to this question we must first understand the Wrappers area which was the purpose of the martyrs, and then consider its terms. According to the Martyr Sadr, an area that comes in the interaction of human relationships with each other and their relationship with nature, in terms of canonization, is an area that its rules and regulations pertaining does not have the stability and permanence and therefore is subjected to the conditions of variable times. In the fact, we can say that this part of human social life is a sophisticated part; hence it needs sophisticated rules and called this area. "Wrappers area from the religion”.
From the view of Sadr: First, existence of such a zone is natural and necessary work because the needs and circumstances of human life in this area is constantly changing and a sign of immortality of Islam is this that area has been laid free in terms of legislation.
Second, legislation in this area is from authorities of religious governor or Islamic state.
Thirdly, teaching and changing laws from the initial provisions and based on the requirements and the public interest are imposed.

Fourthly, these variable rules are binding.

Thus, it became clear that the wrappers area of Martyr Sadr are not inconsistent with what is said on the legislative in the political system of Islam because this area firstly, is not limited, but the limits of this area, are included all acts and actions that are allowed from the view of religious and there is no text on them; So any activities and operations that is not stipulated in the religion on its prohibition or the existence of it, But the affair is allowed that with issuing a legal ruling, banned it or order to do it. So if Imam forbids from a work that is naturally permissible, it becomes forbidden act and if he order to do that, it becomes obligatory. Of course the acts that are forbidden by religion explicitly, such as usury cannot be changed. Similarly, the acts that the religion of Islam stipulates it as a obligatory one, must be done.
In addition, legislation in this area is from jurisdiction of the infallible Imam and in the absence of them is from the authority of qualified jurist. It is clear that due to many rational and traditional reasons, God has given some permission to legislation. A point that should not be neglected is this fact that the wrappers area that God has given, he has not ordered to forbidden or obligatory something in it. In fact, he say that this decree is permissible and have lost the necessity and leave it to the circumstances of time and place and its requirements on the one hand and the diagnosis of the leadership who he has chosen it, on the other hand. That this is a sign that Islam is forever and in fact, that is a God's law, nor a Law that the human manipulate it.

The Governance

The second essential element of the political structure is the governance. The governance means "the right of command and superior and higher reign”. The superior command that requires domination, leadership, and also is considered as the essence of the policy and even the sovereignty is the center of the political authority and is the basis of government. Jurists such as Lane Rir and zhorzhol listed some specifications for the Governance. Some of which include:

1-It is a legal power that means it is not the manifestation of the force and sheer power, but its faces has been appeared among the legal order of the society and based on the norms and rules of it.
2-It is the origin and source, it means that the characterized is qualified by the Governance and the rules comes from the source of it to be imposed on others;
3-Existence of it is not subject to external norms or other pre norm;
4-It is superior, in this sense that all other norms are located in the following of it. As it is clear life of the community is for providing of the material and spiritual demands and which can be achieved through the help and mutual cooperation of the people and this mutual cooperation, requires rules and regulations which determines the share of individuals and groups from the total varied and diverse products of the community and for the difference that may arise within the society, shows some Solutions, and guarantees the social provisions. This powerful system, the same system of governance is considered the rule of the key elements of its structure; because the basic following cases that only in the shadow of the government can be realized:
1. Preserving security and order which is within the community;
2. The tenure of those affairs and social affairs which has no special authority;
3. providing the scientific and spiritual needs of people, in other words, education and training;
4. Make proportional and balanced of all economic activity and people's material;
5. The competent defense of society against external enemies;
6. To resolve differences and disputes of each individual or group and to obtain the rights of each of them;
7. To enact the component of laws and regulations in the social.

It is not deniable and we cannot say any question that the governance is the needs of each community and society, but the main question is here that what is the origin of this governance and why the citizens must obey from its orders and rules which he is established them? And whether anyone can apply the rule or the sovereignty has some specification? In response to these fundamental questions, several approaches have been proposed. The present article is examined two views of Islam and democracy.

The governance in the structure of democracy

Theory of popular sovereignty after ancient Greece was presented by Catholic thinkers such as St. Tomadakon and his followers for the first time since the beginning of the middle Ages, and then in the subsequent period, was developed by the opponents of the monarchy. In the seventeenth century, the school of natural law and international give it more precision and then was entered Jean-Jacques Rousseau and French writer of encyclopedias under the influence of his own. Belarman who was a Catholic theologian, in the seventeenth century by relying on the principle of equality of human beings, said: There is no reason that in the mass of equal human, one of them has dominance over others, so the power belongs to everyone. In terms of Jean-Jacques Rousseau and his followers, the rule of the people is the sum of the parts of the rule that every section of it is belongs to an individual. After Rousseau's political experts, found that direct and immediate intervention of all people or the majority of them and even half of them in the government is not practical; therefore, they offered a new interpretation of democracy and defend it and they became successful in this work. As todays this theory is accepted in almost all societies, even gradually, has been reflected as a transcendental value and as a "principle" in politics and law. Many Muslim authors also under the influence of the culture of the West mentioned from "democracy" with the bow and Strengthening and try to introduce the Islamic system of government as a democratic system. In this view because no sensible reason from the individuals or groups of people have no preference over others that justify and prescribe the government and sovereignty of them on other people. It is true that all members of society involved in the management and administration of social affairs and persons who the people preferred them, install their implementing laws; Thus, in both fields of legislation and its implementation, the people themselves must have the power, but because their direct involved are not practical in any of these areas, should their involvement be done with the "substitution" and "lawyers".
What is suggested among the discussions of the democracy supporters on the origin of the rule is this that the source of sovereignty is the vote of the majority of the people. Anyone can get the vote o the most of the people, even though apparently, his government is legitimate and he has the right of ruling over others, and others are bound to obedience, even the minority who did not vote for him should be obliged to his order.
This theory, which todays is the basis of many of the governments in the world, In addition to it that could not provide desirable law and governance and could not solve the issues of the community which it claimed to solve them, also theoretically has been disputed. Rene Guenon who is French, knows democracy as a paradox involves and said if we define democracy as the government of the people on the people, this definition is the symbol of the impossibility itself and an affair that cannot have real simple existence truly in our time and in the other, we must not let it to deceive us with words and if we accept that a single person can be a sentenced and also a governor at the same time, we have been contradicted; Because if we speak with the so-called of Aristotle, the existence of unit Cannot exist both "actual" and "potential" from the aspect of unit. Toffler in his book The Third Wave said that democracy is not a deceived more and believes that such a thing are not materialized at least until the present day. He said about this: Nowadays despite the messenger centers in the form of satellite and so on, mass of million people are placed under the bombardment of information and in such a system the message is one-way, there is no such thing as a vote and thinking of the masses; Because the power governing on the media is governing on the masses and people and contacts, are passive in front of them and passive people are mirrors of this production centers of messages and in such a system How can know democracy as a possible work?
Professor Mesbah Yazdi also says about the rejection of this theory: basically the government created for this purpose which based on the real interests and corruption sets the rules and want from the people its implementation and act according to them and if individuals or groups refuse from these legal information brings them into the way with the obligation and force and perhaps punish them. Therefore, in all human societies, existence of the government requires a series of constraints and obstacles and limitations in the lives of each individual in society. Now speak is in this that all or most of the people from where they have gained the sovereignty on the people and who has granted to them such a right? Who get to the majority of the ruling on the minority and occupy on their right and their property and their souls? If this is said that law has given such a right, ask what the reason that this law is correct, you that indicate that the law is the demands of all or most of the people, and this is like this that we say that the vote of the most of people has given the right to the majority of people and question still remains that why a popular vote must be obeyed. As previously mentioned, the true owner is God and only he has the right about human dignity and world affairs, and human even in their personal affairs are taken into account. Even not only he is not immune in his mentally thought from examination, but also he cannot answer about the other people. So who has the sovereignty? For the correct answer to this question, we pay attention to the Islamic views.

The rule in the political structure of Islam

According to the Islamic view, the sovereignty is only belongs to Allah. God created all man and man have no role in the creation of the universe and its continuity. Therefore, man has no sovereignty over any other human being, even human possessions in the existence of himself and in the benefits and the blessing that God has bestowed to him, also must be with the permission of God. Because God towards all thing in the universe has ownership, property, sovereignty and authority, each work should be with the permission of him. As a result, the rule of human beings to other human beings, without the permission of God, in fact is usurpation and illegitimate. Therefore, the legitimacy of the rule is belongs to one that firstly, his knowledge is infinite and has information about the all the material and spiritual dimensions of human and knows well how to achieve them. Secondly, he must be an absolute needless and is not influenced by trends and finally, the government belongs to his leadership.
Due to this fact that it is said the legitimacy of government in Islam have emanated from God, even the government of the Prophet (PBUH) in beginning of Islam had a divine permission. Although some Muslims ignore this fact that if the rule has the divine origin, then why the Prophet (PBUH) is not formed the government. Of course the weakness of this approach, according to historical evidence extremely is clear. For this reason on the other way, they denied the divine legitimacy of sovereignty. This group claimed that the authority and the government, is based on the will of the people and is not based on the will and delegation of God and in fact, the government of the Prophet had been legitimated by popular vote.

Deniers of the divine legitimacy of the sovereignty

The most important reason of the opposition of the divine legitimacy of the rule of the Prophet (PBUH) is this that in several historical event, some of the Muslims have allegiance with the Prophet, Such as the allegiance of the people of Yathrib in the thirteenth Besat and allegiance of pedigree or Radwan which is indicating that the people gave the sovereignty to the Prophet. In response to this claim, it must be said that firstly, the real owner is only God and He has just the power of the authority and can transfer to another one, as it has mentioned in the Quran.
Second, it is enough to have a little knowledge about the Islamic history, then we will find that the allegiance of the representatives of the people of Yathrib with the Prophet (PBUH) in the thirteenth Besat has been to express the support from the Messenger of Allah against the threats of the idolaters of Mecca, and it has no indication on the selection of the prophet as the political leadership. And this fact can be found in the content of the prophet’s statement at the time of signing of this covenant which has come in the book “the biography of the Prophet” that Ibn Hisham has written it. The theme of the allegiance was this that it is obligatory for the Muslims who did allegiance that support the Prophet in the fighting with the disbelief and polytheism and endure in the problems and tragedies of this struggle. The Muslims who did allegiance also in reply said: we swear to God that as we defend from our honor and our family, we will defend from the Prophet. About the Pledge of the Radwan that was in the year of sixth of migration, it should be said that this allegiance was done a few years after the establishment of the political authority of the prophet in Medina and not at the beginning of the migration. In addition, the provisions of this allegiance is also readiness for war with idolaters, and does not have any relation with the issue of voting and electing the political leader. Basically, the rule in Islam is an essential work that in addition to hadiths and nature of the sentences and laws of Islam, also wisdom indicates the need of it. Man is a social creature and also Islam is a faith that has answered the legitimate needs and demands of the community. It is obvious that if the community does not have the government, the struggle and impaired is found in the public life; because for law is necessary for removing this differences and law is not enough alone, but it needs to someone to implement. Also it was said that the rule, firstly and essentially belongs to God, and only he has the right to seize on the property and the population, but the Almighty God for the execution of orders, has sent prophets.

The role of the people in the sovereignty of God

Undoubtedly, the rule of the true religion and the Islamic system, like any other system, cannot fulfill with wishes, but it requires the presence of people and their unity on the center of the right. The people by accepting the authority of the Islamic rulers fulfill the religion of God in the community. So the Islamic rule, would be never realized without the will of the people. The main difference between the Islamic states with oppressive governments is this that the Islamic government is the government of the people and is not based on force and coercion, but occurs on the base of the people's interest to the religion and Islamic rule and whatever the people have more benefits from the religious moral and teachings and whatever they act more religious orders and whatever they have more unity and solidarity and divine affection, the Islamic government become more stronger and more successful in achieving toward its objectives and if the people are not with the Islamic regime and also do not help the Islamic regime, it is not hopeful to fulfill the goals; As we have seen in the history of Islam that no one on the ground was as the same as Ali ibn Abi Talib about the great scientific and practical and also he has been unique in the courage and brave hearts and military policy, but when The people were not coordinated with him, on the other words, they refused him, he was martyred and applying the rule of God was stopped.
So although the absolute sovereignty of God, but the Almighty God has given the government to the Imams after permission, but people prevent from the applying the rule of the Prophet of God with the lack of cooperation, but when the people accepted the sovereignty of God, the sovereignty of God has been achieved and this work also was flowing after the Imams; This means that if the people accept the divine rule through the qualified jurist, the God’s rule will be continued. Whether at the time that people are deprived from the infallible leader and ruler in reality, or the Almighty God should be regardless from the implementation of the social provisions of Islam or let it run into someone who is the fittest of others until the affairs are done by a person who is the best choice. It means that we found from the way of wisdom that such permission and consent has been issued from the God and the innocent Imams; Even if a clear quoting is not arrived to us in this regard. The qualified jurist, is that fittest person who knows the laws of Islam better than others and also has had more moral competence to implement them and in the provision of interests of society and manage the affairs of the people has been more efficient. Under these conditions (the period of absence) people can play their role in two aspects; First is this that with the acceptance of God's rule in the qualified jurist, may make the implementation of the God's sovereignty, Second is this that when the qualified jurists are numerous, who is more popular among the people can lead the society of Islam and implement the rule of God, so in the Islamic state, the role of the people is very effective.
In this way, it became clear that the rule in the political structure of Islam has the divine root and it belongs to the Almighty God and only he has the right to seizing in the affairs and human dignity; Because he is the true owner of all things and is familiar with real materials of them. Of course this rule with permission of the Imams in the period of presence and absence was applied by the qualified jurist, of course if he has the acceptance of the people.

The conclusion of the discussion

This article began with this question that the political system of Islam with relying on the what structure can in an age where politicians and rulers of the West played drums of victory, and shouted "God is dead", with the world religious man and association of religious people based and after three decades continue with strength and power and paved the way of its life and become a light for the other world religious people; In contrast, the West's political system which is called democracy, from what structure use that despite its long life not only has not fulfilled the promise of prosperous world, but also has faced with more complex problems and instead of relying on the intellect of itself, there is no alternative except to the domination of the lands and resources of others and under the pretext of spreading democracy, occupied countries such as Iraq until it can with the black oil of Iraq becomes hopeful and solve its problems. Undoubtedly, what could do a structure as a progressive one and provides its security and peace is legislation and enforcement mechanism that means the rule. The law which do progressive the structure of the political system of Islam has the sacred source and feeds from the divine source, and arises from an existence that not only is the creator and owner of the universe and the man and does not have any demands in this creativity, but as well knows interests of the human and the world and the way to achieve them and has the power of giving. But the law which formed the structure of the political system and democracy, not only has the human origin and arises from a creature with demands and personal desires, but also has not caused from the all humans; although it claims the will of the majority, but in reality and external reality this is the minority of main workers who have counterfeited the legislation and its implementation includes the benefit of the community. The second element of the political structure of Islam is the government that as the same as the law has divine origin and only is come from the pure essence of God, because he is the true owner and holder of real options and allows to seize to all things. But what is in the current society as the divine rule, in fact is the divine legislation. The things which with the permission of God dominates in society is the law. So in reality, the government in the political structure of Islam is the rule of the God’s law and government in this structure is a task and is not a concession, if for example a jurist separates himself from the God’s law, this suspect caused that he falls from leadership. The Government for righteous jurist is nothing except the duty and responsibility. This is as the same as this that the Prophet (PBUH) and Imams support the limitation of God. This is because people do not have more than a true "leadership" that is God and his religion and no one can reduce or increase anything from religion; not only in the period of infallible Imams, but also in the period of the supreme leader that in fact, jurisprudence and justice rules not the supreme leader. But in the West's political structure and or democracy, the government belongs to the people and who can obtain the people’s vote with him, whether truly or by force and deceit, he is the ruler and this government is a privilege for him until where he puts above the law and could legislate, and even he can change the constitution that he has been selected on the basis of it and forge a new law and also does not implement for himself.
So in short, what has the survival and development of the political structure is the rule and law of God. Islam this reality, has viable and efficient government, of course with the condition of accurate and delicate implementing of the divine law, Westerners as long as form their political structure with the humanitarian law and their rule of human, should not have hope for solving their political and social problems.