اندیشه‌های حقوق عمومی

Abstract State terrorism, as one of the most important security challenges, is considered a serious threat to society, and its examination within the framework of Imami jurisprudence is of particular importance in the current situation. In this regard, this research examines the principles and foundations of Imami jurisprudence, which rejects violent state actions and emphasizes the necessity of confronting such actions. The present article aims to explain the theoretical and jurisprudential foundations of confronting state terrorism and tries to show that based on rational, narrative foundations, the foundations of Islamic human rights such as the right to life, security and human dignity, and jurisprudential rules, no violent and illegitimate behavior by the government is acceptable. The research method is descriptive-analytical, and the data were collected and analyzed based on library sources including Quranic verses, authentic narrations, rational principles, and jurisprudential rules. The findings show that state terrorism is rejected and prohibited due to the creation of public fear and insecurity, the violation of fundamental rights, relying on the rules of jurisprudence and the principles of Islamic human rights, and it is necessary to confront it. In this study, the focus is on analyzing the jurisprudential and theoretical foundations and only briefly mentions the examples of terrorism in Imami jurisprudence, such as moharebeh, corruption on the earth, and fataq; if these cases occur with the support or guidance of the state, they can be consistent with the modern concept of state terrorism, but a detailed entry into them was not the purpose of the study. The results show that these foundations reveal the necessity of confronting and preventing state terrorism and play an important role in maintaining security, justice, and peace in society.