| چکیده انگلیسی مقاله |
IntroductionOne of the issues considered by political geographers is the concept of citizenship. Citizenshiprefers to the relationship between people and government and shows the mutual commitmentsof both parties. At national level, the constitution of every country can be considered as themain written and theoretical document for defining "citizen rights and responsibilities".Constitution determines the limits of personal freedom against the function of power in onehand, and specifies the scope of the responsibilities of the governing system in relation toindividual rights on the other. The members of society need to observe the rules of constitution.At the same time, citizens of a country are not always similar in terms of ethnicity, language,religion, etc. Hence, the conceptual and functional scope of constitutional laws can play a part incontinuity, stability, and survival of a political society, as well as establishing national unity.The present paper investigates how rules of citizenship rights in the constitutions of Iran andPakistan affect their national unity. To this aim, the citizen rights in the constitutional rules ofthe two countries are compared, and then, their roles in the national unity of each country areaddressed. The reason of selecting Iran and Pakistan for the investigation is similarities of thesecountries with respect to geographical, political, religious, cultural, and ethnic issues.MethodologyThe present study is an applied research using comparative descriptive-analytical methodology.The data are collected using library and computer searching. Results and DiscussionIn this study, the basics of citizen rights in the constitution of Iran and Pakistan are investigatedaccording to Marshal's classification. Comparison of social citizen rights in the two countriesreveals that Iranian constitution tries to create and preserve national unity via "cultural" meansin three ways: 1. Promoting official language and writing system (Farsi); 2. Providing freeeducation; and 3. Raising the level of public awareness in all areas. In this way, various groupsand classes of people are exposed to consistent information, education, values, and norms torealize national unity. However, regarding religious teachings some exceptions are witnesseswhich might be due to the Muslim and Shiite majority of the population of this country. Theserights in Pakistan are almost similar to Iran; for by emphasizing preservation of writing system,language, culture, and obligatory secondary education, this country tries to keep national unitythrough cultural means, especially by putting stress on language. Pakistan, regardless of gender,class, religious, and ethnic differences, emphasizes social citizen rights based on meeting theprimary needs of life. Nonetheless, in social citizen right of Iran, non-Muslim minorities whoare not men of faith are deprived from cultural rights, that is, the variable of "religion" plays asignificant role in providing or not providing cultural rights, while in the constitution ofPakistan this issue has been stated regardless of gender, class, ethnicity, and religion. Theinteresting point is that in social citizen rights of Iran it has been tried to realize national unityby establishing economic justice through mentioning issues like housing right, lack of economicdiscrimination, and equal distribution of national resources and incomes according to Islamicrules. But these rights are presented as the expansion of social justice, eradication of corruption,and promotion of economic and social welfare in Pakistani constitution.Comparison of civil citizen right in two countries indicates that religion plays adeterminative role in these rights in Iran. Like Pakistan, Iran considers Islam as the officialreligion and the laws follow Islamic rules and regulation. Therefore, in such condition, thefreedom of thought and speech is regarded "constitutional". For instance, non-Muslims who arenot men of faith have human rights but not cultural rights. However, the civil citizen rights ofPakistan offering the freedom in performing religious ceremonies provides every citizen withthe right of promoting their religion and having religious ceremonies. Thus, freedom of speechis not "constitutional" in this country. At the same time, it is emphasized in Pakistanconstitutions that all laws must be Islamic. On the other hand, the constitution of this country"disapproves" but not "legally denies" local, state, tribal, ethnic, and sectarian prejudices amongcitizens. It appears that issues like religious and sectarian mass murders are the outcomes ofsuch paradoxes. That is to say, freedom of thought and speech together with freedom ofprejudices has the potential of threatening national unity. Therefore, it can be argued that theconstitution of this country affects exacerbation of religious and sectarian conflicts, and is itselfthe cause of sectarianism and endangering national unity in this country.Finally, comparing political citizen rights in these two countries shows the influence ofIslamic rules and regulations on political citizen rights in Iran. For example, the right ofgatherings, demonstrations, protests, and establishing Islamic societies and parties provided thatthey are not against Islamic rules, and do not deny national freedom and unity as well as Islamic rules and the bases of Islamic republic of Iran; and the membership right of non-Muslims whoare not men of faith in societies and parties provided that they are not allowed to establishreligious association because it might be against Islamic rules and official religion of thecountry. It seems that all these considerations about the role of religion in the constitution ofIran are intended for preserving religious unity of the country and preventing the sectarianismand religious conflicts. But in Pakistan, the political citizen rights disregard Islamic rules andregulations, for the right of establishing societies and parties is declared as "unconditional" and"free". Also, in assigning individuals to governmental systems, no discrimination is made interms of ethnicity, religion, social class, gender, and place of birth.ConclusionConsidering the above-mentioned points, it can be argued that although in the constitution ofboth countries it has been tried to consider issues preserving national unity, there aredisagreements among them. According to the comparisons, the Iranian constitution, more thanthe constitution of Pakistan has been developed based on the realities of the society andfunctions more for preserving national unity. In summary, variables such as geographicalposition, historical experiences, and religion play an important role in developing laws andregulations related to citizen rights in the countries. Efforts are made to prevent any kind of gapin the national unity of the countries. |