This research argues that Muslim scholars developed two theories of
government over time. Even tough Islamic scholars—Shia and Sunni—agree on
mandating the highest level of legal knowledge in any member of the Islamic
government, they disagree on the legal nature of these members, whether they
are judges, or jurists. Shia Islamic scholars adopted the theory of the
guardianship of the jurist (Wilayat al-Faqih in Arabic, or Vilayat e-Faqih in
Farsi). Unlike Sunni scholars, the Shia has developed a practical approach to
apply their theory of government in practice. A prominent example of this theory
is the Iranian practice of the Guardianship of the Jurist Theory. Sunni Islamic
scholars adopt the theory of government by judiciary (Wilayat Al-Qadi). The
assumption of this theory is that member of the government are judges. This is
based on the assumption that Prophet Mohamed was a judge with enumerated
executive authorities, namely the collection of Sadaqat (state financial revenue),
military power, and foreign affairs’ representation. This theory has never been
in practice since the assassination of the first four successors of the Prophet.
This research is divided into three major sections. The first deals with the theory
of Sunni-Muslim scholars, which is government by judiciary. The second section
presents the theory of Shia-Muslim scholars, which is guardianship of the jurist.
The last section deals with the major five distinctions between the two theories.

Volume 33 Issue 4