The political structure of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the absence of adjustments in some of its policy shortcomings have resulted in occasional crisis because of cyclical state interventions, and, conflicting and hidden responsibilities. The events of two decades since the last amendment of the constitution have undeniably demonstrated that the ineffectiveness and conflicts of parts of the state structure result in the inefficiency of the whole system. Interestingly, this systemic failure occurred again even to the government that was announced to be closest to the supreme leader Mr. Khamenei than any other administration, which brought about a crisis in the executive branch.
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who had received unprecedented support from the supreme leader of the Islamic state in the last two decades, has now been paralyzed for a while in his attempts to advance the goals and measures of his government. His efforts have been checked by the judiciary and state agencies affiliated with the supreme leader, in addition to the Majlis and its committees. One should not be surprised if any day now one heard Ahmadinejad express the very same frustration that was made public by the country’s previous president who said “the president is nothing other than a logistics person.”
In a televised debate not too long ago, Ahmadinejad attacked his presidential rival (Mir-Hossein Mousavi) by asserting that the latter involved the founder of the Islamic republic (ayatollah Khomeini) to completely reduce the limited authority of the president (who at the time was none other than Khamenei). A close look at Ahmadinejad’s record indicates that he has not done any better himself. In his first presidential term, Ahmadinejad repeatedly approached the supreme leader to get the latter’s support to advance his programs. At the time, many government expenditures took place without proper Majlis authorization. At the same time, there were many supra-legal and unconstitutional interventions by the administration to reduce the powers of the different branches of government, including the Majlis. Such interventions include messages and directives from the office of the supreme leader which at times called for discontinuing impeachment efforts, imposing “confidence” on a cabinet minister or ending an investigation.
The judiciary too has not been untouched by such inerference and an example is the lawsuit against Mohammad-Reza Rahimi (the president’s first deputy) and those of his accomplices and even some Ahmadinejad associates which was stopped on Khamenei’s orders.
Most of the programs and plans of Ahmadinejad’s administration (which were rejected by specialists and experts) were imposed on other branches of the state through the use of Mr. Khamenei’s influence and directives. The supreme leader of course at one time believed in the uniqueness of the president and hardly ever refrained from throwing in his support for the chief executive. At the first public Friday congregational prayer after the 2009 presidential fiasco, Mr. Khamenei once again announced that his views were closer to those of Ahmadinejad than to his 50-year friend (Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani) even though at one time he had affirmed, “nobody can be Mr. Hashemi for me”.
But differences between the leader and the president escalated during Ahmadinejad’s second term. They began over his first deputy Esfandiar Rahim Mashai, and then over the group removal of cabinet ministers culminating in Ahmadinejad’s decision to remove the minister of intelligence, resulting in the president’s 10-day work boycott.
Seeing the deep shadow of the supreme leader over his office, Ahmadinejad was now in a tight corner. While at one time he smirked at his rival in support of the views of the supreme leader, conditions had changed as he himself was ostracized by the same leader. But this was the natural result of using extra-legal authorities to advance his causes.
Towards the end of the Persian calendar year (February and March of 2012), Ahmadinejad came to the conclusion that he needed to defend his presidential authority. Believing that the president was the second highest authority of the state after the supreme leader, he revived the committee to monitor the implementation of the constitution and tried to “recover” the presidential powers he believed rested in the constitution and announced the “necessity” of the committee which he had once called “useless.”
The very same person who in his first press conference in 2005 declared his “disgust” with democracy and human rights suddenly remembered to write a prescription on democracy, freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. He talked of the “rights of the nation in the constitution” and stressed that “nobody could be arrested without a judicial order” and that “torture” was illegal and that everybody was innocent until proven guilty.
And as he was making these statements, he seems to have forgotten that just a few years earlier the opponents of his government were never allowed to hold a peaceful march. He forgot that his own administration was the plaintiff in many suits against newspapers, journalists and student activists.
Just a few days ago Majlis representative Ali Motahari revealed that, “four lawsuits had been filed against him by the first vice president and another three by the president himself.”
Ahmadinejad somehow forgot that his own ministry of Islamic Guidance had used every available tool to shut newspapers, eliminating the need for the prosecutor to do his job. Interestingly just last week after Sharq newspaper was shut Ahmadinejad made a reference to it at a press conference and declared that it was not right to shut newspapers.
Motahari who sits on the press oversight committee described the Sharq newspaper situation in these words. “My position at the committee on Sharq was that the paper be issued a warning and its case be referred to a court of law where it would the charges would be reviewed in the presence of a jury and after hearing the defense of the manager of the newspaper. But the majority of those on the committee, and particularly the cabinet minister present, asked that the newspaper be shut.”
During the last seven years, the ministries of Guidance and Commerce have used their powers of control over paper and foreign exchange to intimidate publications and publishers. Just take a look at the book situation which is the direct result of the policies of the ministry of guidance. Or look at the cinema industry and the Khane Cinema (House of Cinema was the association where professionals in the cinema world organized themselves). Who shut Khane Cinema? Who shut the journalists’ association? What about parties and the role of the ministry of the interior?
Two news reports have dominated the news world last week. One is the request to free the leaders of the Green Movement by Ahmadinejad, something that was mentioned by Motahari and the second is the announcement that Ahmadinejad would be visiting Evin prison published by government media. The first one was not denied while the second brought forth responses from prison officials.
Both events are positive but I have this question. Why is it that now that Ahmadinejad’s allies are in danger is he crying out loud about freedoms and people’s rights?
