Shabtabnews In this dark night, I have lost my way – Arise from a corner, oh you the star of guidance.
Al-monitor – Heated debate continues in Iran over the Guardian Council — the arbiter of candidates qualified to run in parliamentary elections — which appears to be seeking the power to determine who can continue serving in the legislature by supervising members throughout their time in office.
AUTHOR
Saeid Jafari
Controversy first erupted in late March after the council disqualified Minoo Khaleghi, a Reformist politician from Isfahan, although she had been deemed qualified to run and had won a seat in the Feb. 26 parliamentary elections. Khaleghi’s Guardian Council approval was reportedly annulled after photos of her without a headscarf appeared on the internet. Her case has since turned into a source of conflict between the Guardian Council and the Interior Ministry, which contends that parliament, not the council, should be making such decisions. Khaleghi is not the first elected official to be disqualified by the council after election. In 2012, Kazem Salimi and Ali Akbar Matin both had their Guardian Council approvals annulled for unknown reasons two days after entering the ninth parliament (2012-16).
Fresh debate erupted over the issue after Guardian Council spokesman Abbasali Kadkhodaei on Oct. 25 commented on the general election guidelines announced by the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, on Oct. 15. Referring to Article 13 of the guidelines — which calls for “working out a mechanism for candidates to perform their duties in the best way possible, observe their oath of allegiance and prevent financial, ethical, and economic abuses” — Kadkhodaei announced that the Guardian Council can continue its supervision of lawmakers during their entire time in office. In response, critics argued that the guidelines make no reference to supervision but are aimed at helping ensure that candidates perform their duties well, abide by what they have sworn to uphold and prevent financial abuse, while at the same time urging “necessary measures” if evidence arises that necessitates disqualification.
Guardian Council members have also pointed to Article 11 of the guidelines, which refers to the “Guardian Council’s supervision over processes, dimensions and stages of presidential, parliamentary and Assembly of Experts elections,” asserting that it means they can monitor candidates at all stages of every election, including after the actual polling. These differing interpretations of Articles 11 and 13 have become a major source of disagreement between the Guardian Council on the one hand and President Hassan Rouhani’s administration and several prominent lawmakers on the other.
In an interview with Iran’s state broadcaster Oct. 22, Kadkhodaei said, “According to the [supreme] leader’s general election guidelines, this council’s powers extend to even after parliamentarians’ credentials have been approved and [thus] during their whole time as lawmakers.” He added, “Based on the Guardian Council’s mandated supervision, this monitoring is seen to span a period of four years. However, what has been practiced until now is to monitor candidates up to the point where their credentials are approved. But now, Article 13 stresses a more comprehensive role [for the Guardian Council] and the need to supervise members of parliament so that they perform their duties well. [These are] points that the [current] election law does not cover. However, Article 13 of the general election guidelines emphasizes this and the need for the continued supervision of [elected] candidates’ qualifications and performance.”
The debate entered a new phase after additional, controversial remarks Oct. 25 by Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati, the chairman of the Guardian Council, speaking at a quarterly meeting of the heads of offices overseeing provincial elections. “Parliament passed a self-supervisory directive, but has it ever taken any measures toward its implementation?” Jannati asked rhetorically. “Supervision of members of parliament must not be ceremonial. If a parliamentarian enters parliament, and it then becomes clear that he lacks qualifications or has lost his qualifications and misused his power and position, should action not be taken to bring his term to an end?”
Jannati’s remarks were met with different reactions from lawmakers. In an interview with the Iranian Students’ News Agency (ISNA) on Oct. 26, outspoken Deputy Speaker Ali Motahari said, “If this supervision is to extend to lawmakers’ remarks, and if any comments that don’t agree with our views are presented as remarks against national security — leading to the disqualification of that candidate — it will not comply with Articles 84 and 86 of the constitution, since according to these two articles a member of parliament has the right to comment on all domestic and foreign matters and cannot be prosecuted or seized for comments expressed in parliament. Clearly, if the [Guardian Council’s] supervision extends to remarks made by members of parliament, it will take away their liberty and independence and we will end up with ingratiating and compliant lawmakers.”
Meanwhile, Reformist member of parliament Mohammad-Reza Tabesh said that Kadkhodaei’s and Jannati’s remarks lack any legal basis. Tabesh told ISNA on Oct. 26, “If there is to be another entity — other than the [current parliamentary] self-supervisory committee — to oversee parliamentarians during their term, and this mechanism is changed, it should go through legal channels and be ratified by parliament. Articles 84 and 86 of the constitution prescribe immunity for members of parliament, giving them the right to comment on all issues and this is officially recognized in the law overseeing parliamentarians’ conduct and is not open to discussion.”
Following Motahari’s comments, Principlist members of parliament also began to criticize the Guardian Council’s argument for an extended supervisory role. Even Mahmoud Bahmani, central bank governor under President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who now serves as a member of parliament, said Oct. 26, “Parliament is a collective of 290 people, and it is certainly unbefitting for a group of five to 10 individuals to supervise this assembly.”
Three days later, on Oct. 29, Motahari further commented on the issue, saying, “If the Guardian Council supervises parliament, it should be supervised by another supervisor itself and this would lead to circularity.” Meanwhile, in a weekly briefing on the same day, Guardian Council spokesman Kadkhodaei responded to parliamentarians’ criticism, stating, “My comments were not clearly presented in the media. … Some friends have added things to my remarks. Two points are evident in Article 13 of the [supreme leader’s] communication. One is supervision of the performance of lawmakers, and the other is monitoring so that they continue to maintain the criteria to remain in parliament. In relation to both of these points, it is up to the legislature to decide on the [supervisory] body. I have made no interpretations and did not say whether the Guardian Council wants to do this.”
Despite Kadkhodaei’s remarks, the dispute continues over the type of role the Guardian Council should play in relation to parliament.
