Face off Discourses in the Islamic Republic of Iran Constitution Council (Discourse of Jurist Islam versus the Liberal Islam)

The present study aimed to examine theposition of "Jurist Islam" discourses and "Liberal Islam"in the "Final Review of the Islamic Republic of Iran Constitution" in1979. And consider the conflict between the above-mentioned constitutionaldiscourses to gain a better understanding of these discourses and the constitution.To this aim, should find the point of the debate on the draft was in the finalconstitutional review session of the IRI. And for finding the result, detailsthe "final constitutional review" negotiations, and the memoirs andinterviews of council members, as well as those involved in the constitutiondraft, were examined using Laclau and Mouffe's theory of discourse. "The Council forFinal Review of the Islamic Republic of Iran Constitution," consisted of the Jurist Islam proponents and theLiberal Islam. Based on the views of the representatives of the two sides, thediscourse of liberal Islam, which vied for such concepts as freedom, nationalsovereignty and the governance of law stood against the jurist Islam discourse;which held for "the rule of the jurist" over the society, the Islamic society andestablishment of the divine laws and limits. Ultimately, the jurist Islam,backed by an absolute majority in the Council for Final Review of the IslamicRepublic of Iran Constitution, building on the revolutionary atmosphereprevailing in the society, succeeded in compiling and ratify the Constitutionaccording to its discourse.