عنوان مقاله [English]
The right to self-determination is a crucial political right that is acknowledged in numerous international legal documents and the constitutions of many countries. In recent decades, it has also become a topic of discussion among Shia jurists in Islamic jurisprudence. Within Imami Shia jurisprudence, the Quran, Tradition (hadiths), and certain rational arguments are referenced to support the existence of this right. This research takes an analytical and critical approach, employing the principles of jurisprudential inference to evaluate the rational (or speculative) arguments within Islamic jurisprudence regarding the right to self-determination. The main focus of this research is to examine how independent reason or intellect can indicate the political right of self-determination, and to identify any deficiencies or problems that may arise when relying on rational or reason-based arguments. The findings of this study reveal that several rational arguments have been put forth to support human self-determination, including the principle of human autonomy or self-guardianship, the necessity of adhering to social contracts, the argument from hisbah (community morals or maintenance of public order), and the principle of shared ownership of citizens over their country. However, it will be argued that, apart from the self-evident principle of human autonomy or self-guardianship, these arguments have certain shortcomings. The principle of human guardianship over one's own fate (self-determination) is considered valid unless there is an explicit religious text that contradicts it.