Government and social justice

Summary

This article is written with an analytical approach and with the aim of stating the duties of the religious government. Justice is always sanctified as an individual and social value, and the political philosopher cannot be indifferent to it. The main question of this article is: Investigating the relationship between political power and justice. To answer this question, there are two approaches; Narrated and documented discussion of verses and narrations, and a comprehensive and comprehensive approach based on its philosophical explanation. This article tries to:

a. The relationship between justice and other social virtues should be explored;

b. What are the requirements for the establishment of justice for the Islamic State?

J. Explaining the realm of social justice and what areas of social interaction are included in justice.

Keywords: justice, social justice, distributive justice, political philosophy, religious government, liberalism.
 

Introduction
 

If, with tolerance, we divide the topics of political philosophy into two main categories, descriptive and normative[0],[1] the discussion about justice and its position among social virtues and its dignity in the political system and the relationship between the government and politics are important axes. And the main part of the second part (normative dimension) is the topics of political philosophy; Because in such discussions, the desired political society is addressed and research is done on what should be done and how to organize the social and political life so that the benefits of the political society increase and social virtues and advantages expand and develop and become deeper and more rooted. . Also, due to the fact that justice as an individual and social value has always been sanctified and the virtue of knowing it is not reserved for a specific age and generation, the political philosopher is obliged to discuss it, even if, based on his individual reflection, he establishes it from He does not know the virtues of political society. The high position of justice in the value system and general and political culture of peoples and nations is such that a political philosopher can never ignore it and not discuss it.

The debate on what is the relationship between political power and justice and what is the mission and duty of the government towards the realization of the virtue of justice at the social level is definitely one of the important topics of political philosophy. However, before entering it, some important issues about justice and social justice must have been explored; In other words, the debate on the relationship between the government and justice should not be considered as the first of a series of debates related to justice in the field of political philosophy, and before that, serious and important discussions about justice, both conceptually and in terms of content, are necessary. Revised and reviewed.

Methodologically, there are two ways to approach the problem mentioned in the title of the article; In the first place, it may seem that the simple way to judge the duties of the religious government in relation to justice is to refer to anecdotal evidence and list the possible duties of the government in realizing justice and eliminating oppression and injustice; Of course, after we have proven the duty of the religious government towards justice by mentioning the verses and traditions. But the reality is that the narrative method, although it shows aspects of the current debate, but it requires a comprehensive and all-encompassing approach to this debate, its analytical and philosophical aspects should also be carefully considered, and referring to narrative evidence should be done after determining the assignment. And the clarification of these dimensions will happen. This article tries to reveal the dimensions and angles of the relationship between the state and justice and to show what contribution the state has in realizing the virtue of social justice in Islamic political philosophy and the space of religious thinking.

Before entering into the discussion, it is also necessary to mention this point that the discussion on the relationship between the state and justice is not one of the specialties of the modern perception of the state, although the “modern state” basically has a more favorable ground for this discussion. Explaining that in the modern perception of the government, the institution of political power is responsible for functions and duties that usually governments did not feel such missions in our pre-modern tradition, or at least in public belief, such expectations of political power were not institutionalized. The modern government must establish a harmonious and unified order in the various and vast fields of the life of its political society. In addition, the creation of social order and its preservation and survival in the modern era, becomes a topic worthy of reflection and study, and as a result, a systematic topic with a structure that can be consciously modified and restored. In our pre-modern governments, social relationships were usually based on custom, tradition and habit, while in the modern government, it is expected that the social system in its various dimensions will be supervised and scientifically managed by the government, the necessary laws and legal institutions in the realization This unified and coordinated order should be organized and defined, the duties and limits of the government’s legal and legal powers should be carefully defined, and the dignity and executive and supervisory role of the government should be clearly explained in each field.

Modern governments, although due to the efforts of the nation and aiming at national interests and the establishment of a national government, in the domestic and international scene, they think less about the category of justice and have made the preservation and strengthening of national interests and the authority of the nation-state their strategic political goal. However, it is an undeniable fact that the tools and mechanisms and the objective and subjective conditions of creating a just social order and consciously changing social relations are based on a specific perception of justice and its principles. Emphasizing the non-dedication of the discussion of the ratio of government and justice to the modern government means that in Islamic teachings, the distribution of justice is considered one of the main duties of religious governance and regardless of the historical developments of the category of government and the change of perceptions about the structure of political power and goals and Its functions have always been raised as a serious religious demand from those in authority in Islamic society; However, except for a few moments in the history of Islamic societies, we have not witnessed a serious and principled effort by the governments of these societies to realize the justice desired by Islam.

۱٫ The relationship between justice and other social virtues
Before determining the duties of the religious government regarding the objective realization of justice at the level of the Islamic society, it is necessary to review some important aspects of the discussion of justice. One of these topics is clarifying the position of justice among other virtues of political society. The main question in this context is whether social justice is the only virtue of a desirable political society or whether other virtues are conceivable and justice is only one of the social virtues. And if we accept that justice is one of the social virtues, then this important question is raised that whether justice is among other virtues or whether it is the main and highest social virtue, in such a way that other virtues are placed along this virtue and after the gap. From the realization of the virtue of justice, we can talk about their virtue.

Aristotle’s view on the category of justice, especially in the field of ethics and individual justice, provides him with the possibility to consider justice as a comprehensive of all virtues, but in the field of society and the subject of social justice, it can never be claimed that justice is a virtue that contains and It includes all the imagined virtues of a political society, and a just society means a society in which all social virtues are realized. The key to this point is that, of course, a “perfect society” is not devoid of the virtue of justice, and if social justice does not dominate the network of social relations of a society, that society is incomplete and far from the desired society, although other social virtues such as security, prosperity, Effectiveness, legality and the like should be established and established; In other words, “just society” cannot be considered synonymous with “ideal and perfect society”.

To clarify the matter, we will limit ourselves to this example that realizing distributional justice in the field of economy, by itself and without considering other factors and conditions, does not lead to the establishment of welfare. Suppose a society suffers from a small and insignificant gross national product due to the global recession, the weakness of industrial and production infrastructures and the damages caused by drought and the lack of fertile agricultural land. But the same amount of income is fairly distributed and spent on the basic needs of the society. The fair distribution of economic benefits in this assumption cannot require the realization of well-being and turn that society into a prosperous society; It cannot even guarantee the all-round security of the members of the society, although compared to the unfair distribution of wealth, it brings more and wider relative prosperity. This is also the situation of the establishment of justice in other social areas, such as judicial justice, political justice, educational justice and the like, which by themselves will not create other virtues envisioned by society. Therefore, social justice is one of the virtues of the political society, not that it is the only imagined virtue or comprehensive of all social virtues.

There are two main opinions about the relationship of social virtues with each other; The first point of view is that there is a hierarchy among social virtues, and it is not like that, everything that is called social virtue has the same level and degree of credibility and value. John Rawls, the famous political philosopher of the late 20th century, should be considered as belonging to this first group. In his book Theory of Justice, he clearly emphasizes: although justice is not the only virtue of political society, it is the main and most important social virtue, in such a way that the final and main indicator of judging a “well-organized society” is having the virtue of justice. According to him, the position of the virtue of justice in human society is the same as the position of truth and truth in the field of issues and education. Just as knowledge and case are judged by the criterion of being honest or not, they measure societies in terms of whether they are desirable and well-organized or not by the index and criterion of whether they are fair or not.[2]

The second view is the pluralist approach to social virtues; That is to say, without considering ranking and hierarchy among social virtues, they consider justice as one of the social virtues among other virtues, which naturally does not have a special place and importance, and along with other virtues, it is appropriate in a desirable and complete society. reach Based on this attitude, justice cannot be called the main and highest social virtue, and naturally, it will not be the only indicator for determining a well-organized society.

Considering what has been said, it is necessary to examine the conflict between the religious state and justice from the point of view of religious sources, in order to find out whether Islamic sources place justice at the top of social virtues or whether it is realized among several other virtues. They demand from the believers and the Islamic system. In the form of an article, it is not possible to accurately and deeply address this question and other important issues that the current discussion depends on their solution and arrive at the final answer, but from a brief overview of religious sources, this point can be obtained that if Let’s not say that spreading justice is the main social virtue, but there should be no doubt that it is one of the most important social virtues, which the Islamic system is responsible for.

In verse 25 of Surah Mubarakah Hadid, the people’s rise to justice is introduced as the social goal of the mission of God’s prophets, and in the continuation of it, it is mentioned about the strength of iron, which is an allusion to the need to use power against oppressors and social rebels, and this combination shows that The political power and the authoritative rule of the government is the executive guarantor of the development of justice and the uprising of the people for justice in all its dimensions in the context of society: )لَقَدْ أَرْسَلْنا رُسُلَنا بِالْبَيِّناتِ وَ أَنْزَلْنا مَعَهُمُ الْكِتابَ وَ الْمِيزانَ لِيَقُومَ النَّاسُ بِالْقِسْطِ وَ أَنْزَلْنَا الْحَدِيدَ فِيهِ بَأْسٌ شَدِيدٌ وَ مَنافِعُ لِلنَّاسِ(؛ “ما رسولان خود را با دلايل روشن فرستاديم و با آنها كتاب و ميزان نازل كرديم تا مردم قيام به عدالت كنند و آهن We sent down in it great power and benefits for the people.” In verse 47 of Surah Yunus, he also points out that justice and non-oppression of servants is a duty that all God’s messengers have followed without exception and emphasized As there is a messenger for every nation and the coming of that messenger is accompanied by justice and negation of oppression, if there is no evidence that spreading justice is the main duty of prophets, at least there are poems that are one of the main duties: “And for every nation there is a messenger, when their messenger comes to them, they will be judged justly between them and they will not be oppressed.”

Also, those verses that command installments and justice, such as verse 90 of Surah Mubaraka Nahl: (إِنَّ اللَََّ يَاْمْرُ بِلْعدلِ وَ الْإِحسنِ), can be a testimony of the social virtue of justice, because there is no reason to consider the audience of these verses to be individuals and to summarize justice in individual lives, but the rulers and the Islamic system are also concerned with establishing justice and fairness. They are agents, and the scope of obeying such divine orders includes the private and public spheres alike, and a believer in whatever situation, position, and position he is in, must make justice and establishing installments and fairness his principle.

After assuming the caliphate and emirate, Amir al-Mu’minin Ali (a.s.)’s emphasis on justice and the realization of lost rights and the compensation of injustices, especially regarding the undue damage to the Muslim household, may be one of the best evidences and proofs of the superiority of the virtue of social justice. come

In order to ensure justice and protect the sanctity of Bait-ul-Mal, he swears to take back the wealth unjustly given by the previous rulers from people: “And if Allah had found the height of marriage to women and the king to the priests, he would be the Lord”; [3] I swear to God! Wherever I find looted property, I will return it to its original owners, even if they have married it or bought a slave girl.

Of course, this point is not used from the total statements of Hazrat Amir (AS) that justice is the highest social virtue; Because in the cases where they refer to the duties of the government and the fruits and goals that follow from it, they make the rights of the weak and the oppressed one of the duties and fruits, without declaring its priority.

After listening to the words of the Khawarij, according to which the rulership belongs to God alone (Lahkim ila Allah), they pointed out the necessity of the existence of the government and its goals such as establishing security and creating peace for the believer and the like:

كَلِمَه حَقٍّ يُرَادُ بِهَا بَاطِلٌ نَعَمْ إِنَّهُ لَا حُكْمَ إِلَّا لِلَّهِ وَ لَكِنَّ هَؤُلَاءِ يَقُولُونَ لَا إِمْرَه إِلَّا لِلَّهِ وَ إِنَّهُ لَا بُدَّ لِلنَّاسِ مِنْ أَمِيرٍ بَرٍّ أَوْ فَاجِرٍ يَعْمَلُ فِي إِمْرَتِهِ الْمُؤْمِنُ وَ يَسْتَمْتِعُ فِيهَا الْكَافِرُ وَ يُبَلِّغُ اللَّهُ فِيهَا الْأَجَلَ وَ يُجْمَعُ بِهِ الْفَيْ‏ءُ وَ يُقَاتَلُ With the enemy and security with it, and taking it for the weak from the strong, so that it rests on the righteous and rests on the wicked; [4] It is a true speech from which the will was invalidated! Yes, it is true, there is no command except the command of God, but they say that governance is only for God, while people need good or bad governance, so that the believers in the shadow of the government can benefit from their work (both busy and unbelievers) and the people in establishing live by the government; it is collected by the government or by the treasury, and with its help, one can fight with the enemies. The roads are safe and secure, and the rights of the weak are taken from the strong. Good people are in prosperity and safe from evil people.

Basically, in the Islamic view, which is indicated by many Quranic verses, welfare and salvation and attaining a virtuous life are the ultimate goals of individual and social life, and this welfare and salvation is in the shadow of things such as the rule of the spirit of monotheism and godliness, the expansion of piety. And servitude, extension of commandments and prohibitions, doing charity and obeying Quranic commands and recommendations and the like. In the meantime, avoiding cruelty, establishing fairness and justice, and strengthening fair relationships in the context of society, is one of the factors that serve prosperity and salvation and provide a good life, not the only social virtue, or the most important social virtue. , in such a way that other virtues are completely worthless and ignored.

۲٫ Structural justice against distributive justice
One of the important disputes in the field of justice extension of the government and the political system is that whether the government is responsible for removing and compensating for the pains and sufferings, inequalities in economic and social relations, injuries and negative consequences and the chaotic economic situation of the failed people in the free market and basically compensating and Is the restoration of the content of the weaknesses and inabilities of the vulnerable sections of the society responsible? Does justice impose such requirements on the government in order to establish social justice, by using government resources and taking special taxes from rich people, to expand and expand social security and reduce the severity of damages and inequalities?

Those who give a positive answer to the said question are actually defenders of distributive justice [5] and by emphasizing the need to establish social justice, they consider the government as the most powerful social institution, responsible for the fair distribution of society’s gifts and facilities, based on a specific model of Social justice based on specific principles and standards (principles of distributive justice) deals with the distribution of society’s resources, facilities and wealth. This obligation requires the government to be sensitive to the unjustified inequalities and adverse outcomes of the economic exchange market and the vulnerable and disabled people of the society, and take preventive and compensatory measures to overcome these damages and negative outcomes and to reduce and eliminate unfair inequalities. .

On the other hand, some political and social thinkers, especially classical liberals and contemporary neoliberals (libertarians) believe that distributive and social justice is unjustified and the government has no duty to establish substantive justice and basically should not be in charge of distributing wealth, facilities and gifts. The so-called negative and unfavorable consequences of the existing economic and social relations do not bring responsibility to the government. Usually, this stance is accompanied by reasons such as the following:

a. Any image of social justice is formed according to a specific idea of social goals and objectives and a special image of good life and social charity. In other words, by presenting the agreed pattern for the fair distribution of facilities, resources, positions and positions, it tries to approach the desired social situation and social good. Therefore, social and distributive justice in all its forms is teleocratic; But the problem is that in the modern world and contemporary civilization, it is impossible to reach a collective agreement regarding social goals and objectives, and the characteristic of modernity is pluralism; Therefore, it is not possible to present a picture of a good society and specific social goals as something common and accepted by the community; Therefore, any format for fair distribution and any set of standards as the principles of social justice, is in the sense of imposing a specific idea of a good life and the purpose and goal of social life on the society and others.

b. The misfortunes and negative consequences of the free market are not an example of injustice and cruelty for those who suffer during free competition and do not achieve wealth and success. Because injustice and justice make sense where a person or a group has done something deliberately and based on a pattern and conscious plan, but in the free market of economic exchanges, such a thing does not happen; Millions of people are engaged in trading and performing economic activities and pursue their personal interests and advancement in the field of free competition, without the distribution of wealth and a specific model of the distribution of gifts and wealth, the purpose and purpose of these purchases and sales and exchanges. be economical So, basically, the distribution of wealth was not their intention, so that it is possible to talk about the fairness or unfairness of this way of distribution and to propose a new model of the way of fair distribution instead of what has happened. The unfortunate results and consequences of these transactions, which include poverty or unemployment and loss of job status or individual business growth and in a word, economic inequalities, which are the result of free competition and failure and victory in this competition. It will not be unfair and its responsibility is not towards any person, group or institution, including the government.[7]

J. Distributive and social justice is based on the principles and standards of justice, and any proposal regarding the principles of justice is based on anthropological foundations and special moral attitudes. For example, those who support “needs-oriented” social justice, compared to those who accept desert-based social justice, have different views and ideas about human nature, moral values, and the goals of life. Due to the fact that it is not possible to reach consensus and moral agreement about these values and perceptions, the choice between need-oriented social justice and merit-oriented is a “moral choice”. It is natural, it is not possible to make a moral choice free and independent of specific philosophical and anthropological insights, tendencies and considerations, and since there is no agreement and sharing of opinion and consensus about the bases of moral choice, then there is no logical and rational way to prefer a view of social justice over There will be no other competitors and insisting on a certain image of social justice is actually imposing a certain moral and anthropological point of view on other points of view.[8]

These opponents of social justice, who naturally do not believe that the power and influence of the government can be used to restore the content inequalities of individuals and social groups, summarize the commitment of the political system and the government regarding justice in the structural dimension and the legal organization of macro-social institutions. From their point of view, justice means that the government and the political system establish rules in the society that allow people to pursue their own goals and objectives in full freedom. Also, these laws should not have a specific idea about the goals and objectives of life. Therefore, the rules governing the free market should be such that it provides the opportunity for free competition for everyone, respects individual freedoms, and everyone can follow his own plan and idea about the good life and the goals of life. slow. This idea of justice, which defends commutative justice instead of distributional justice, does not establish any connection between the government and the results of the free market, and justice is defined in the legislative dimension and the establishment of structural laws free of specific ends (End-Free). ) and considers the mission of the government to establish these laws and take care of their observance.[9]

As seen, this liberal perception of justice is based on clear lines of relativism and epistemological skepticism, which negates any possibility of rational and objective defense of moral-ethical and anthropological considerations. The defense of moral and epistemological objectivism is not included in this article, but it is clear that based on the Islamic attitude, there is a certain image of the virtues and goals of individual and social life, which Islamic teachings call the individual and the community of believers to their realization. Therefore, the first and third reasons of the mentioned three reasons in the denial of distributive and social justice have no basis. The second reason, which is based on the unintentional effects and negative results of the free market, cannot be the negation of the government’s intervention to improve the conditions of vulnerable people in the society; If we accept, the inequalities, poverty and unemployment that have arisen were not the intention of the economic and market activists.

But what logic allows that no action is taken to resolve these injuries and inequalities, and the pains and pains of the classes of the society continue to remain in their social suffering. In this case, if the occurrence of these sufferings was not deliberate and deliberate, their continuation and perpetuation of the inequalities that we are able to restore and fix will be conscious and deliberate.

In Islamic teachings, there is a special emphasis on caring for the weak and the poor and those who have suffered from economic and social relations, and part of this responsibility is towards the believers who pay Islamic taxes (khums, zakat and obligatory charity) and benevolence and benevolence to They should take action to solve them and some of the duties are directed to the government and the ruler of the Islamic society, for example, I am referring to some of these religious evidences:

Imam Ali (a.s.) writes in his testament to Malik Ashtar:

اللَّهَ اللَّهَ فِي الطَّبَقَه السُّفْلَي مِنَ الَّذِينَ لَا حِيلَه لَهُمْ مِنَ الْمَسَاكِينِ وَ الْمُحْتَاجِينَ وَ أَهْلِ الْبُؤْسَي وَ الزَّمْنَي فَإِنَّ فِي هَذِهِ الطَّبَقَه قَانِعاً وَ مُعْتَرّاً وَ احْفَظِ لِلَّهِ مَا اسْتَحْفَظَكَ مِنْ حَقِّهِ فِيهِمْ وَ اجْعَلْ لَهُمْ قِسْماً مِنْ بَيْتِ مَالِكِ وَ قِسْماً مِنْ غَلَّاتِ صَوَافِي الْإِسْلَامِ فِي كُلِّ بَلَدٍ For some of them are like those of the lowest and the whole height of the truth;[10] Praise God for the low and deprived classes of society, who have no choice [and include] the land grabbers, the needy, the afflicted and the afflicted. In this deprived class, a group is self-sufficient and a group resort to begging, so for God’s sake, be the guardian of the right that God has determined for this class. Allocate a part of the household and a part of the grain of the spoil lands of Islam in every city to the lower classes, because there is an equal share for the most distant Muslims as well as the closest ones, and you are responsible for observing it.

When Hazrat Ali (a.s.) saw a poor old man, he inquired about his condition and after learning that the old man was a Christian and disabled, while criticizing the people’s indifference towards him, he ordered a pension from Baitul Mal to meet his needs. determine[11]

It has been stated in several narrations that if a person from the Islamic community is not able to pay his debts and this matter is verified by the ruler of the Islamic community, the payment of that debt will be the responsibility of the Imam of the community and the Muslim almshouse. Following the example of Imam Sadiq (a.s.), he says: “The imam judges about the believers, our debts are empty of the mahor al-Nasa”.[12]

Basically, in Islamic logic, the poor have the right to the wealth of the rich and are their partners. Almighty God says in the Qur’an: (and in their possessions the right of the poor and the deprived) (Dhariyat: 19) And in their property there was a right for the beggar and the deprived.

Imam Sadiq (a.s.) also says: “May Allah bless and exalted be the sharing of wealth between the rich and the poor. It is not for them to waste it on other than their partners.”[13]

In another hadith, he quotes Imam Ali (a.s.): This is the need for the poor to enjoy the property of the rich in the Islamic society, to the extent that it satisfies their needs: “Allah imposes on the rich people in their wealth the same amount as the poor.”[14]

Although the financial and legal obligations, which were placed on the shoulders of the rich for the benefit of the poor, place a duty on the rich Muslims individually, but this does not mean that the Islamic government and the rulers of the society do not have responsibility in this matter; The overall management of receiving and distributing obligatory alms (such as zakat) is the responsibility of the ruler of the Islamic community.

۳٫ The realm of distributive justice
Social and distributive justice does not only consider the realization of justice in the field of structural legislation, but considers the objective and real results of social interactions and tries to correct unjustified and unfair inequalities and to compensate and restore the undesirable and unfair consequences and results at various levels of collective life. slow. Now, the important thing is: What is the realm of social justice and what areas of social relations and interactions are subject to this attention and content modification?

In the first place, it is possible to imagine that social and distributive justice mainly has an economic dimension and is aimed at the fair distribution of wealth, gifts and social resources, and the theory of social justice aims to put an end to unjustified inequalities in the field of wealth and income of the society. provide an acceptable model based on the principles of justice for the fair distribution of these material facilities and resources of wealth.

The reality is that social relations are not limited and exclusive to economic relations, nor does the virtue of justice as an individual and social value have a narrow and limited field of adaptation; Just as the moral and natural conscience of people recognizes instances of injustice, oppression and discrimination in the realm of economic interactions and makes moral judgments about justice and injustice, there is room for such judgments in other areas of collective life as well; For example, in the way political power is distributed and the way power relations are formed in a society, in terms of the origin and source of obtaining political power, the influence of the ruler on the possibility of people to reach political positions and the quality of the exercise of political power and the way rulers interact with the people, there is a wide field for There is judgment about justice and injustice; As a result, along with economic justice, we can mention political justice as well. In the same way, we can talk about areas such as educational justice, judicial justice and the like; In other words, in every society, there are various areas of social relations and interactions, if there is something called goodness and desirability in each area, and in the general understanding of the members of that society, having them includes a kind of privilege, superiority and benefit. So, the logical background of the idea of distributive and social justice is provided.

Due to the fact that the container of community and human interactions is not only a container of benefit and enjoyment, but also associated with accepting the burden of hard work and responsibility and performing duties, and in forming a community, people actually benefit from the results of other people’s actions and some gifts and facilities, and In turn, they are responsible for some duties and hardships, the category of distributive justice, in addition to paying attention to the fair distribution of resources, gifts and positions, should also be responsible for the fair distribution of labors and duties. Therefore, the domain of distributive justice is not limited to the fair distribution of power and wealth, and it also includes the fair distribution of rights and duties; For this reason, the Islamic government in the broad sense of the word “government”, which includes legislative and judicial institutions, must be sensitive to the establishment of justice in the system of rights and social duties, and monitor the social duties, responsibilities and labors that are directed to the holders of positions and It is a social situation, it should be properly implemented and it should not be the case that there is inequality in enjoying political and social positions and the superiority of some people and the inferiority of others, which in itself is not considered injustice and is necessary for the credit system of human societies, with negligence in performing duties. And not accompanying the acceptance of these positions and blessings, with the acceptance of hardships and duties corresponding to them, will turn into injustice and unjustified inequality.

For example, in Islamic teachings, the ruler of the Islamic society, who is in charge of the overall management and administration of affairs, has many duties that are appropriate for this position; As it is emphasized in the Islamic narrations, in the Islamic society, the holder of any position must have the ability and the necessary conditions to fulfill that responsibility; Otherwise, he has betrayed God and Muslims. There are many such narrations; Some of them are mentioned below:

The Holy Prophet (PBUH) said: “I present myself to my people, the Muslims, that they know that I am the best of them. They are the Khan of Allah, His Messenger, and the Muslims.”[15]

It is also narrated from the Holy Prophet (PBUH): A person who does not have the necessary qualifications to hold a position of responsibility and cannot perform the necessary duties in that position in an optimal manner, if he exposes himself to the position of leadership, God will not look at him and he must repent to God: “The rulership is not correct except for Allah and for the people, and I put his soul in a position other than the one that Allah has placed in it, and I prayed to him, and he said, “I am your ruler.” And if he is not like that, Allah did not look at him until he returned to what he said and repented to Allah for what he claimed.”[16]

۴٫ From oppression to spreading justice
When talking about the role and mission of the government in social justice, two opposite ideas and views come to mind, one is called “weak theory of justice” and the other is called “strong theory of justice”. The weak theory considers justice to be the removal of oppression from the society, tangible and visible injustices and inequalities are removed, and discriminations and injustices in various areas of society are prevented. In this way, the desire to remove oppression and deficiency from unjustified inequalities and fight against discriminations and gross and obvious lawlessness is interpreted as extending justice and establishing social justice.

The strong theory of spreading justice defines social justice as the reconstruction of the macro structures of society in various fields based on the principles of justice; In this way, the correction of the wrong and unfair relations of the society and the all-round establishment of justice is to change fundamentally and based on the principles of justice, the network of political, economic, cultural, judicial, educational and other examples of the macro structure of the society, and find a new form. slow. From this point of view, measures such as combating unjust discrimination, eliminating oppression and redistributing income among the weak and poor, although they are measured measures and reduce the sufferings of the society, but they are far from justice in the strict sense of the word.

In terms of comparison, it should be known that a strong theory, unlike a weak theory, needs many theoretical prerequisites. A serious transformation in the macro structures and relationships of a society and laying a new plan in the network of social relations requires deep theoretical discussions about fair relations and the principles of justice in each part of the macro social sectors. This does not mean that weak theory is basically unnecessary for theoretical debates in the field of social justice; It is clear that distinguishing discrimination from justified inequality and distinguishing examples of injustice from justice requires a clear and theoretical understanding of the criteria of equality from justified and legitimate rights from illegitimate, but the point is that the theory is weak, focused on clear examples and between injustice and oppression. And it is discrimination, and it calls for the removal of the image of the society from these clear and obvious examples that their identification is not subject to debates and theoretical fields.

It seems that in the short term and as an urgent need, the weak theory can guide the action of the Islamic state, but the deep and root treatment of the problems of the Islamic society depends on the effort to establish and objectify the strong theory of spreading justice.

Conclusion
According to what we said, we can conclude:

۱٫ The duties of the religious government can be discussed by referring to the arguments and approaches of all Sungar and based on philosophical analysis, and the present article tried to explain the problem from the perspective of the people.

۲٫ Spreading justice is considered one of the main goals of religious governance, which has always been a serious religious demand from those in authority in Islamic society.

۳٫ In explaining the position of justice among the virtues of political society, it was pointed out that in Islamic thought, the position of justice requires a wide discussion. But by referring to Islamic sources, we can understand that, if we do not say that justice is the most important social virtue, there should be no doubt that it is among the most important social virtues that the Islamic system is responsible for.

۴٫ Political schools in the field of distributive justice should point out that in Islam, there is a special emphasis on caring for the weak. Of course, justice has wide dimensions and its effectiveness is the treatment of many ailments of different views and it will be the Islamic society.

Sources
– Nahj al-Balagha, translated and explained by Haj Seyyed Ali Naghi Faizul Islam.

– Baghalani, Abi Bakr Muhammad Bin Tayyib, Tahmed al-Awael and Talkhais al-Dalael, research of Imad al-Din Ahmad Haider, Beirut, Institute of Books, third quarter, 1414 A.H.

– Har Amili, Hasan bin, Wasal al-Shi’a, Beirut, Dar Ehiya al-Trath al-Arabi, Beta.

– Shabeh Harrani, Abu Muhammad ibn, Tohf al-Aqool, research, correction and commentary of Ali Akbar Ghafari, Qom, Al-Nashar al-Islami Institute, second quarter, 1404 AH.

– Maghrib, Qazi Numan, Da’aim al-Islam, research by Asif bin Ali Asghar Fayzi, Cairo, Darul Ma’arif, 1383 A.H.

– Vaezi, Ahmed, “Transcendent wisdom and compilation of Islamic political philosophy”, Political Science, Vol. 43, Fall, 2017, pp. 22-9.

FA Von Hayek, Law, legislation and liberty, Vol 2, Routledge, 1976.

John Gray, Hayek on Liberty, Blackwell, Oxford, 1984.

Raymond Plant, Modern Political Thought, Blackwell, 1992.

John Rawls, A Theory of Justice, Oxford University Press, 1999.

He wrote:

[۰]. Normative

[۱]. In the following article, explanations are provided about the main dimensions of political philosophy and the general division of its topics (Ahmad Vaezi, “The Transcendent Wisdom and Compilation of Islamic Political Philosophy”, Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 43, pp. 22-9).

[۲]. John Rawls, A Theory of Justice, Oxford University Press, P.3.

[۳]. Nahj al-Balagha, translated and explained by Haj Seyyed Ali Naghi Faiz al-Islam, 15th century.

[۴]. Ibid., No. 40, p. 125.

[۵]. distributive justice

[۶]. From the Greek word “telos” which means purpose and goal.

[۷]. FA Von Hayek, Law, legislation and liberty, P.65.

[۸]. John Gray, Hayek on Liberty, p.73.

[۹]. Plant Raymond, Modern Political Thought, P. 80-81.

[۱۰]. So fear God; Fear God about the poor, destitute, needy and helpless subordinates who are stuck in hardship and suffering and incapacity… and a part of the wealth that you have in your hands and a part of the grains and profits that have been obtained from the spoil lands of Islam, in every city for He has a decree; Because the farthest of them has the same share and benefit as the closest of them, and you have been asked to respect the rights of each of them (Nahj al-Balagha, Letter 53, pp. 1019, 1020).

[۱۱]. Hasan bin Harr Amili, Wasal al-Shia, Vol. 11, Chapter 19, H. 1, p. 49.

[۱۲]. The same, vol. 15, chapter 11, h 5, p. 22.

[۱۳]. Ibid., Vol. 6, Chapter 4, H. 4, p. 150.

[۱۴]. Qazi Noman Maghrib, Duaim al-Islam, vol. 1, p. 245.

[۱۵]. Abi Bakr Muhammad bin Tayyib al-Baqalani, Tahmed al-Awael and Talkhais al-Dalael, p. 474.

[۱۶]. Ibn Shuba Harrani, Tohf al-Aqool, p. 44.

Source: Marafet Political Quarterly of the first year, number one