Rene — Iran's Silent Coup
Topic(s): Iran | Comments Off on Rene — Iran's Silent CoupWorld Press Review
Jan 14 2004
Iran’s Silent Coup
Unsigned editorial, Yas-e No (reformist), Tehran, Iran, Jan. 12, 2004
Iranian reformist legislator Elaheh Koulaiee listens to the wife of
fellow deputy Mohsen Mirdamadi, as the sister of the political
prisoner Hashem Aghagary (L), listens, Jan. 13, 2004. Iranian
reformist deputies have refused to leave the Majlis assembly for
three days to protest the ban on most reformist candidates’ seeking
reelection (Photo: Henghameh Fahimi/AFP-Getty Images).
On Jan. 13, senior members of Iran’s reformist government, which was
elected in 2001 with 77 percent of the vote, threatened to resign if
the Guardian Council, a 12-member panel of clerics charged with
maintaining the Islamic character of the Iranian state, did not
overturn a ban preventing half of the candidates in the Feb. 20
parliamentary elections from running on the grounds that they were
not sufficiently loyal to Iran’s theocratic government. Reformist
deputies in the 290-member Majlis legislative assembly, 83 of whom
have been prevented from standing for reelection, have staged a
sit-in protest at the Majlis since Jan. 10, when the Guardian Council
announced the ban. In this unsigned editorial, Tehran’s reformist
Yas-e No turns the charge against the Guardian Council, arguing that
their ban undermines the republican aspects of the Islamic Republic
of Iran’s constitution.
For the past few years, the conservatives have called the reformists’
peaceful and legal efforts to modernize Iran’s legal and political
structure a “silent overthrow,” a “legal and parliamentary coup,”
“the crawling metamorphosis,” and so on. Meanwhile the reformers,
emphasizing the importance of abiding by the law and defending the
integrity of the system, have been working only to revive a neglected
and wronged aspect of the political system. They have been striving
to restore the “republic” in the Islamic Republic of Iran, rather
than thinking only of the “Islamic.”
Conversely, there are individuals and parties who, because of the
enmity they have for the reformists and in order to keep their rivals
from entering the beehive of power, seek to change the structure and
nature of the political system and poke holes in some of its main
pillars and institutions.
Taking away the power and authority of the elected executive and
legislative branches of government—two pillars of the Islamic
Republic—represents nothing less than a direct attempt to destroy the
republic. This usurpation will indirectly lead to the collapse
Iran of the Islamic Republic.
When the Guardian Council took the questionable and unprecedented
action of disqualifying a large number of the present Majlis
[Parliamentary] deputies and other political activists from running
in the next election, it in effect staged a bloodless coup.
Disregarding the will of the majority who voted these deputies into
office, they sought illegally to change the makeup of the government.
Even if this action achieves what the conservatives want, it will not
bring a shred of legitimacy to those who end up holding power
illegally.
We should not forget the arguments [Ayatollah Ruhollah] Khomeini used
to challenge the legitimacy of the [shah’s] undemocratic Majlis and
its laws before the victory of the Islamic Revolution [in 1979]. Did
he not say that government officials who were victorious in
competitions without any rivals, people who got their mandate from
rigged elections, did not have the right to legislate as
representatives of the people?
We do not need to go too far back, because Khomeini dealt with the
behavior of the Guardian Council in the third Majlis elections [in
1988] and all of his repeated statements are still in front of us.
[After the war with Iraq ended in 1988, Khomeini called for stricter
adherence to republican ideals.] But evidently some people want to
use his name as cover to distort his priceless heritage, the Islamic
Republic.
Can we still call the political system a republic if the Guardian
Council, rather than the people, elects the Majlis deputies?
We have repeatedly insisted on the golden phrase, “The people’s votes
are the mandate.” That phrase is the true, rare nature of the
Republic. What is interesting is that, in this statement, the imam
[Khomeini] did not present the words, demands, opinion, or will of
the people as something that could be interpreted or analyzed.
Instead, he explicitly introduced the votes of the people as the
mandate for and the basis of government. He certainly meant those
votes that are placed in ballot boxes. So it can be said that the
future of the people and the country should be determined through
free elections and the votes of the people. Those votes are the only
basis for a government’s legitimacy. Any effort to limit the people’s
right to vote changes the structure of legitimate power in Iran and
spurns Khomeini’s political heritage.
http://www.worldpress.org/Mideast/1764.cfm