..//..
The issue of Vilayate Faqih that you mention is not that VF would be the head of government and would be making day to day decisions and rule the country. The role of the VF in a Islamic country, any Islamic country and especially in a country that has accepted Islam as an ideology, is that of an ideologue rather than that of ruler. Certainly when the people have accepted an ideology for themselves they would certainly also have a role for the ideologue as well. In other words this ideologue would oversee the ideology being implemented correctly or not. Whether this person is capable of administering the law within the principles of this ideology or not and whether he is eligible to steer the country along these principles or not. VF is an ideological leadership. And in essence people choose the VF. This is essentially democracy. Who is it that chooses the Faqih or the Marja to become the VF? Who appoints him if not the people? If this was an appointed office for example if a faqih appointed his own successor then we could say this wold be against democracy and resembles a hereditary dynasty. But a faqih (VF) is elected unlike a Shah by the people. The people themselves elected the Leader (Imam Khomeini). People themselves choose and elect a Marja (VF) as a learned and a scholar .in this field. How is this contrary to the principles of democracy? And why should there be a contradiction between being a Republic and being an Islamic Republic; or that a provisional government to be an Islamic Republic in contrast to a permanent government that would be hereditary. would that not contradict democracy (implication to the Shahs regime which was a hereditary dynasty).

..//..