رویکردها به «قانون‌نویسیِ تاسیسی» در عصرِ ناصری و نسبتِ آن با شریعت

یکی از مباحث کمترشناخته‌شده در «تجربه تجددِ سیاسی در ایران»، کوشش‌هایی است که در زمینه «قانون‌نویسی» در عصرِ قاجار، تا پیش از تشکیل مجلس شورای ملی انجام شد. این کوشش‌ها، از یک‌سو بر اندیشه درحال‌گسترش قانون‌خواهی قرار داشت و از سوی دیگر به بسطِ آن کمکِ بسیاری می‌نمود. پژوهشِ حاضر، با در نظر گرفتنِ تحلیل گفتمان انتقادی، و تاکید بر «بافت» گفتمانیِ قانون‌خواهی، ضمنِ توجه به گونه «کانستیتوشنالِ» آن، به‌دنبالِ شناخت رویکردهایِ این گونه از قانون‌نویسی در نسبت با شریعت است. یافته‌های پژوهش نشان می‌دهد از آن‌جا که این رویکرد اهمیتِ بسیاری برایِ «آینده» نظامِ سیاسی داشت و «انتظار» متجددانِ ایرانی ایجادی یک نظامی سیاسیِ مبتنی بر «کونستیتوسیون» بود، از همان ابتدا به نسبتِ آن با شرع انور توجه ویژه‌ای شد و در این میان دو رویکردِ مهم موردِ نظر بود. یکی رویکردِ «ایجابی» که بیش از همه در یک کلمه مستشارالدوله بحث شد و دیگری رویکردِ «سلبی» بود که آخوندزاده در واکنش به نگارشِ این رساله دنبال می‌کرد و با نگرشِ او نیز هم‌خوانیِ کامل داشت. در رویکردِ «ایجابی»، شریعت به‌مثابه ضابطه‌ای مهم برایِ درکِ بهتر از قانون‌نویسی ارائه می‌شود که در آن هیچ قانونی نوشته نخواهد شد، مگر در وجود نسبتی مشخص با شرع و البته در آن قانون مدرن که اساسِ آن از «کونستیتوسیون»های اروپایی برآمده اصل بود و شریعت مقوله‌ای بود که مویدِ آن تلقی می‌شد. درعین‌حال، رویکردِ سلبی، اساساً قانون‌نویسی را بر این مبنا نادرست و غیرمفید برای جامعه و دولت می‌دانست و به‌کلی آن را رد می‌کرد.

approaches to constitutional law-codifying in the nasser era and its relationship with sharia

law codification during the naseri era is one of the most important issues relating to the “experience of political modenity” in the qajar period; a “form” of legalism, whose foundation was not oblivious to traditional concerns, though it was based on a desire formodernity. law codification during the naseri era is a unique type of law codification thatcan be referred to as “law codification in the absence of a parliament,” where the king’swill or certain individuals’ desires hold great importance in writing down and formulatingcertain laws in the absence of a legislative body. there were two types of law codificationin the naseri era: one of them was regulatory and the other constitutional. the firstone was, above all, based on regulations and received special attention from partiesinside and outside the ruling system. the other one was constitutional, whichconsidered the legal foundations of the law. one of the main considerations in this typeof law codification was its relationship with the islamic canonical law (shari'a). becausethe shari'a laws were the only codified laws with a partial guarantee of implementation,by which modern western laws were challenged, and this challenge was taken intoaccount from the very beginning. since the approach to law codification during thisperiod was based on formulating the law rather than adhering to procedures existing in thetwo systems; i.e. the shari'a courts and the customary courts, the “relationship” betweenthis law codification and shari'a was necessary, and attention was paid to it from the verybeginning of developing approaches based on formulating and writing down the law iniran. therefore, in this study, the main point is to show the approaches to this issue, whichplayed a very important role in the orientation of legislation in iran. methodologydiscourse approaches can be divided into two groups according to the nature of theirsocial orientation towards discourse: noncritical and critical. of course, such divisionis not absolute. critical approaches not only differ from noncritical approaches indescribing discourse actions and the constructive effects that discourse has on socialidentities, social relations, and knowledge and belief systems, none of which are usually evident in discourse, but also show how discourse is shaped by power relations andideologies. critical discourse analysis is a type of discourse analysis research, whichstudies to discover how ideology, identity, and inequality are represented throughtexts produced in social and political domains, and in which, language is consideredimportant in building and perpetuating ideologies, which are important in creating andmaintaining identities and social inequalities. in the meantime, context is of greatimportant in the cognition of discourse. this terminology can be used in a broad andnarrow sense. in its narrow sense, it refers to cognition factors outside the studied text.and in its broad sense, it refers to awareness of these factors and cognition of theother parts of the studied text, which are sometimes referred to as context.use of discourse analysis in this study is of importance from several aspects. theattention paid to the context of legalism in this study, and the attention paid to itsimportance in discourse analysis, allows for