Ma`rifat Siyasi

The problem of the present research is the gap between the ideal theory of governance in the Quranic discourse and the challenges of its objective realization in the modern era. Focusing on the confrontation between the Quranic model of governance and secular narratives, this research seeks to explain the ontological, anthropological, and ethical foundations of this model and to deduce its structural pillars. Furthermore, it aims to analyze the aporias (theoretical-practical deadlocks) of institution-building that hinder the transition from Quranic ideals to efficient institutions within the complex modern sphere. Relying on the method of extractive thematic interpretation (tafsir mawdu'i istiqra'i) and through a systematic analysis of the verses of political-social rulings (ayat al-ahkam) in the Holy Quran, this study attempts to deduce a normative and alternative model titled "Quranic Governance." The central question of the paper focuses on explaining the ontological, anthropological, and ethical foundations of this model and then deducing its structural pillars and indicators in contrast to secular and liberal narratives of good governance. The findings indicate that the ideal Quranic governance model is formulated around the two principles of Justice (as the ultimate end and the ideal of theodicy) and Shura (as the method and process of rationalization), and is deepened and elevated by complementary components such as dual accountability (towards God and the people), monotheistic rights-based approach, and decisive transparency and anti-corruption. By presenting a systematic reading of the political theology of the Quran, this research argues that the indicators of modern good governance are not only in conflict with Quranic propositions but, in the light of the Quran's metaphysical foundations, gain deeper meaning, extra-rational legitimacy, and stronger internal-external enforcement guarantees. However, the realization of this model in the modern era faces numerous aporias of institution-building (rational-practical conflicts), which necessitate dynamic political ijtihad (independent reasoning) for designing appropriate institutions, strengthening independent civil institutions, and culture-building based on the values of critique and accountability