Analysis of Dual (Jurisprudential and International Legal) Legitimacy of United Nations Peace Diplomacy Mechanisms

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Assistant Professor, Department of Jurisprudence and Foundations of Islamic Law, Faculty of Theology, Farabi Campus (University of Tehran), Qom, Iran

2 Master's student, Jurisprudence and Foundations of Islamic Law, Faculty of Theology, Farabi Campus (University of Tehran), Qom, Iran

3 Master's student, Jurisprudence and Foundations of Islamic Law, Faculty of Theology, Farabi Campus (University of Tehran), Qom, Iran.

10.22081/psq.2026.73794.3086

Abstract

The present research aims to explain the possibility of realizing "dual legitimacy" in
the peace diplomacy mechanisms of the United Nations — meaning the simultaneous legitimacy of peace diplomacy mechanisms from the perspective of both Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh) and international law, which enhances the effectiveness of these mechanisms in Islamic countries. The research analyzes peace diplomacy mechanisms within both the jurisprudential and international legal systems. By redefining the concept of legitimacy and offering a more comprehensive understanding than traditional legitimacy — through applying the principles and frameworks of the jurisprudential system and comparing them with the international legal system — it leads to the presentation of a
new legitimacy model titled the "Theory of Dual Legitimacy." This research adopts a "comparative-inferential content analysis" method to examine the relationship between the jurisprudential rules of peace and the principles and mechanisms of peace diplomacy
from the perspective of international law. First, using content analysis, foundational jurisprudential texts (including the Qur'an, Sunnah, consensus, and reason) and key international legal documents (such as the UN Charter, major treaties, and international judicial practice) are carefully examined to extract and explain the rules and principles related to the concept of peace separately. Subsequently, applying an inferential approach, the foundations, objectives, conditions, and obstacles of these rules in both legal systems are deeply inferred and analyzed. Finally, through comparative analysis, these rules and principles are compared within the framework of the "Theory of Dual Legitimacy," and their points of convergence and divergence are identified.
In seeking answers to its research questions, this study, through examining the theory of dual legitimacy in UN peace diplomacy, has reached the following important results:
- The theoretical framework of the concept of "dual legitimacy" emphasizes the acceptance and validity of peace diplomacy mechanisms in two completely distinct domains — jurisprudential and international legal — and consists of two essential components: first, international legal legitimacy based on the UN Charter, international treaties, and fundamental principles of human rights; and second, jurisprudential legitimacy based on religious principles, fatwas of jurists, and the objectives of Sharia (Maqāṣid al-Sharīʿa). It also requires adherence to conditions such as conceptual clarity, content compatibility, and the acceptance process.
- The points of intersection and convergence between the general principles and rules of Islamic jurisprudence and international law in the field of peace — which strengthen the theory of dual legitimacy — include: both systems emphasize the protection of life and human dignity, justice and fairness, and respect for religious beliefs and rights as core principles.
The principles and rules governing peace diplomacy mechanisms from the perspective of the jurisprudential system were explained, and the corresponding principles for each from the perspective of international law were subsequently explained and compared. While achieving the following results, which are briefly presented, the "Theory of Dual Legitimacy" was proven:

a) The objectives of Sharia in the three areas of "necessities" (ḍarūriyyāt), "needs" (ḥujjiyya), and "embellishments" (taḥsīniyyāt) are fully consistent with the objectives
of the main peace diplomacy mechanisms, namely "ending violence," "justice and accountability," and "protection of human rights."
b) The Qur'anic verses indicating peace provide a basis for the legitimacy of diplomatic relations, peace treaties, and international cooperation with non-belligerent non-Muslim states, which corresponds with the "principle of non-aggression" in Article 2(4) of the UN Charter.
c) The principle "al-ṣulḥ khayr" (peace is good), derived from the Qur'anic phrase "wa-l-ṣulḥu khayr" (and peace is better), through its conceptual generality and from a principles-of-jurisprudence (uṣūlī) perspective in interpreting "khayr" (good) as applying to "ṣulḥ" (peace), indicates its intrinsic desirability and demonstrates the preference of peace over conflict and hostility in any context that secures the interests of both parties. This also serves as a basis for inferring the preference of peace in political and international interactions. It has a very high degree of content compatibility with preventive diplomacy — which involves using diplomatic tools to prevent the formation of a dispute or its transformation into armed conflict — rooted in Chapter VI, Article 33 of the UN Charter.
d) The jurisprudential rules of "la ḍarar" (no harm) and "iḍṭirār" (necessity) align with coercive diplomacy under Articles 41 and 42 of the UN Charter and the acceptance of certain unusual conditions to avert corruption/mischief (mafsada).
e) The principle of "maṣlaḥa" (public interest), which in practice allows for the replacement of one Sharia ruling with another based on social circumstances and the protection of Islamic interests, has a high degree of compatibility with the principle of consent and will, derived from Article 4 of the UN Charter.
f) The principle of "luzūm" (obligatoriness/ necessity of fulfilling contracts) in jurisprudence corresponds with the principle of equality and sovereignty of states in Article 2(1) of the UN Charter.

Keywords

References

The Holy Quran.
Nahj al-Balagha.
A group of authors. (2004). Farhang-i Fiqh (Encyclopedia of Jurisprudence) (Vol. 8, S. M. Hashemi Shahroudi, Ed.). Qom: Institute of the Encyclopedia of Islamic Jurisprudence. [In Persian]
Abtahi, H. (2005). The Islamic Republic of Iran and the ICC. Journal of International Criminal Justice, 3(3), pp. 635–648.
Akhavan Kazemi, B. (2014). Principles and functions of public diplomacy in the Prophet's conduct (PBUH). Islamic Politics, 2(5), p. 11-34. [In Persian]
Amininia, A. (2010). The status of the right to peace in the UN Charter with a view to
the Security Council's performance. Private and Criminal Law Research, no. 13,
p. 131-159. [In Persian]
Anṣārī, M. (1990). Al-Makāsib al-Muḥarrama (Vol. 2). Qom: Dār al-Fikr – Conference of Shaykh al-Anṣārī. [In Arabic]
Anṣārī, M. (1994). Al-Qaḍāʾ wa al-Shahādāt. Qom: Dār al-Fikr - Congress of Shaykh al-Anṣārī. [In Arabic]
Athari, S. A., Mousavi, M. R., & Bakhshi Telyabi, R. (2012). Recent threats to peace and peacebuilding tools to counter threats. Political Studies, 5(17), p. 117-141. [In Persian]
Berridge, G. R. (2010). Diplomacy: Theory and Practice. (5th ed; p. 1-25). Palgrave.
Cater, C. & Malone, D. M. (2016). The origins and evolution of responsibility to protect at the UN. International Relations, 30(3), pp. 278–297.
Duursma, A. & et al. (2023). UN peacekeeping at 75: Achievements, challenges, and prospects. International Peacekeeping, 30(8), pp. 1–25.
Ebrahim Gol, A. R. (2008). Developments in UN peacekeeping: Peacekeeping, peacemaking, peacebuilding. Legal Research, no. 47, p. 225-257. [In Persian]
Eftekhari, A., & Mohammadi Sirat, H. (2013). Peace and reconciliation in the Holy Quran. Quran and Hadith Studies, no. 12, p. 53-78. [In Persian]
Firouzi, M. (2021). A jurisprudential study of the right to peace with an emphasis on the verses of the Holy Quran. Jurisprudence, 28(4), p. 69-97. [In Persian]
Ghazālī, A. (1996). Al-Mustasfā min ʿIlm al-Uṣūl. Beirut: Muḥammad ʿAbd al-Salām ʿAbd al-Shāṭī; Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyyah. [In Arabic]
Hamzeh, H. (2023). Assessing the cooperation of an Islamic state with a hostile non-Muslim state (In theories of the primacy of war and the primacy of peace). Studies in Political Jurisprudence, no. 5, p. 79-95. [In Persian]
Hazinia, N. (2013). Peaceful diplomacy of the Prophet of Islam (PBUH). Islamic Government, no. 2, p. 145-164. [In Persian]
Hosseini Maraghi, S. M. F. (1996). Al-ʿAnāwīn al-Fiqhiyya (Vols. 1-2). Qom: Islamic Publications Office of the Society of Seminary Teachers. [In Arabic]
Ḥurr al-ʿĀmilī, M. (1988). Wasāʾil al-Shīʿa (Vols. 15, 23). Qom: Āl al-Bayt Institute.
[In Arabic]
Ibn al-Athīr, A. (1965). Al-Kāmil fī al-Tārīkh. Beirut: Dār Ṣādir - Dār Bayrūt. [In Arabic]
Ibn Hishām, M. (n.d.). Al-Sīrah al-Nabawiyyah. Beirut: Dār Iḥyāʾ al-Turāth al-ʿArabī. [In Arabic]
Ibn Idrīs al-Ḥillī, M. (1989). Al-Sarāʾir al-Ḥāwī li Taḥrīr al-Fatāwī (Vol. 2). Qom: Islamic Publications Office of the Society of Seminary Teachers. [In Arabic]
Ibn Manẓūr, M. (1987). Lisān al-ʿArab (Vols. 7, 4). Beirut: Dār Iḥyāʾ al-Turāth al-ʿArabī. [In Arabic]
Javadi Amoli, A. (2000). Wilāyat-i Faqīh (2nd ed.). Qom: Isrā. [In Persian]
Jenča, M. (2013). The concept of preventive diplomacy and its application by the United Nations in Central Asia. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 8(2), pp. 211–222.
Kamalizadeh, M. (2016). Islamic diplomacy teachings for a world free of violence. Political Thought in Islam, no. 9, p. 87-113. [In Persian]
Kāshif al-Ghiṭāʾ, M. H. (1940). Taḥrīr al-Majalla (Vol. 1). Najaf: Al-Maktabah
al-Murtaḍawiyyah. [In Arabic]
Katouzian, N. (2007). Ethics and law. Ethics in Science and Technology, no. 2, p. 85-88. [In Persian]
Khomeini, R. A. (1994). Anwār al-Hidāya (Vol. 2). Qom: Institute for Compilation and Publication of Imam Khomeini's Works. [In Arabic]
Kulaynī, M. (1986). Al-Kāfī (Vols. 2, 5; 4th ed.). Tehran: Dār al-Kutub al-Islāmiyyah. [In Arabic]
Majlisī, M. B. (1989). Biḥār al-Anwār (Vol. 81). Beirut: Al-Ṭibāʿ wa al-Nashr Institute. [In Arabic]
Mangapul, J. H. (2019). Reforming the United Nations: Realities, expectations and the way forward. Philippine Journal of International Law, 3(1), pp. 45–68.
McDonagh, P., Manocha, K., Neary, J. & Vázquez Mendoza, L. (2020). On the significance of religion for global diplomacy. Routledge.
Mesbah Yazdi, M. T. (2009). Ethics in the Quran. Qom: Imam Khomeini Educational and Research Institute. [In Persian]
Mesbah Yazdi, M. T. (2012). Questions and Answers (Vol. 1). Qom: Imam Khomeini Educational and Research Institute. [In Persian]
Mohaghegh Damad, S. M. (1985). Qawāʿid-i Fiqh (Jurisprudential Rules) (Vol. 4, 12th ed.). Tehran: Center for the Publication of Islamic Sciences. [In Persian]
Morgenthau, H. J. (1995). Politics among nations: The struggle for power and peace (H. Moshirzadeh, Trans.). Tehran: Publication Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. [In Persian]
Mousavi Bojnurdi, S. H. (1998). Al-Qawāʿid al-Fiqhiyya (Vol. 1). Qom: Al-Hādī. [In Arabic]
Mousavi Khalkhali, S. M. (2001). Sovereignty in Islam or the Guardianship of the Jurist. Qom: Islamic Publications Office. [In Persian]
Mousavi, F. A., & Aminzadeh, A. (1996). The basic foundations of the United Nations Charter regarding the establishment and maintenance of peace. Judicial Law Perspectives, no. 4, p. 205-221. [In Persian]
Mughniyya, M. J. (2000). Fiqh al-Imām al-Ṣādiq (AS) (Vol. 4, 2nd ed.). Qom: Anṣāriyān. [In Arabic]
Najafī, M. H. (1994). Jawāhir al-Kalām (Vol. 23). Mashhad: Ṣāḥib al-Zamān (AS) Institute. [In Arabic]
Norouzi, M., Jazayeri, S. H., & Rajabi, H. (2021). A study of the primary principle of peace
or jihad in Imāmiyya and Sunni thought. Journal of Islamic Sects Research, 8(15),
p. 29-56. [In Persian]
Qummī, A. (1999). Qawānīn al-Uṣūl (Vol. 2, A. Qazvīnī, Ed. & Annot.). Tehran: Eslāmiyyah. [In Arabic]
Rāghib Iṣfahānī, H. (n.d.). Mufradāt al-Qurʾān. Qom: Al-Murtazawiyyah Library. [In Arabic]
Rāwandī, Q. (1984). Fiqh al-Qurʾān (Vol. 1). Qom: Ayatollah Marʿashī Najafī Library. [In Arabic]
Ruhani, M. S. (2013). Fiqh al-Ṣādiq (Vol. 30). Qom: Āyīn Dānish. [In Arabic]
Ṣāḥib ibn ʿAbbād, A. (1993). Al-Muḥīṭ fī al-Lughah (Vol. 7). Beirut: ʿĀlam al-Kutub. [In Arabic]
Shahīd al-Awwal, M. (1980). Al-Qawāʿid wa al-Fawāʾid (Vol. 1, A. Ḥakīm, Ed.). Najaf: Muntadā al-Nashr. [In Arabic]
Shāṭibī, A. (1994). Al-Muwāfaqāt fī Uṣūl al-Sharīʿah (Vol. 2, A. Ramaḍān, Ed.). Beirut: Dār
al-Maʿrifah. [In Arabic]
Sobhani, J. (1994). Al-Rasāʾil al-Arbaʿ (Vol. 3). Qom: Imam Ṣādiq (AS) Institute. [In Arabic]
Soleimani, M., & Karshenas, A. (2019). The model of peace in religious thought. Islamic Politics Research, 7(16), p. 294-329. [In Persian]
Ṭabāṭabāʾī, M. H. (1995). Tafsīr al-Mīzān (Vol. 5, M. B. Mūsavī Hamadānī, Trans.). Qom: Islamic Publications Office of the Society of Seminary Teachers. [In Persian]
Ṭūsī, M. (1986). Al-Khilāf (Vol. 3). Qom: Islamic Publications Office of the Society of Seminary Teachers. [In Arabic]
Varai, S. J. (2010). The primacy of peace in international relations. Islamic Government, 3(57), p. 63-78. [In Persian]
Wählisch, M. (2016). Normative limits of peace negotiations: Questions, guidance and prospects. Global Policy, 7(2), pp. 247-256.
 
Political Science
Volume 28, Issue 3
October 2025
Pages 145-172

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics