Shabtabnews In this dark night, I have lost my way – Arise from a corner, oh you the star of guidance.
Iranwire – The approval of the “Hijab and Chastity” bill in the Islamic Republic’s Parliament has triggered a wave of public anger and condemnation across the Iran.
Citizens, activists, and many social commentators have criticized the law, which enforces strict dress code regulations and imposes severe penalties for non-compliance.
The law, which mandates strict dress codes and introduces severe financial and social penalties for those who do not adhere to prescribed clothing standards, represents a significant escalation of existing restrictions on personal freedoms for women.
The law establishes a complex system of fines and restrictions targeting what it defines as improper dress for both men and women.
Under Article 49, individuals violating dress codes will face escalating financial penalties. Initial offenses will incur fines ranging from 20 million tomans ($285) to 80 million tomans ($1,140), while subsequent violations will attract higher fines, between 80 million tomans and 165 million tomans ($2,350).
Those unable to pay these fines will encounter significant service restrictions, including impediments to passport renewal, vehicle registration, obtaining exit permits, releasing impounded vehicles, and acquiring or renewing driving licenses.
When Will the Chastity and Hijab Law Be Enforced?
Once the Guardian Council approves the bill, the legal process requires the following steps:
According to Article 1 of the Civil Code, the law “is delivered to the President, who must sign it within five days, send it to the relevant authorities, and order its publication. The official newspaper publishes it within 72 hours of notification.”
If the President refuses to sign or send the law within the five-day window, “the Speaker of Parliament can order its publication, and the official newspaper must publish it within 72 hours.”
Whether signed by the President or issued by the Speaker of Parliament, the law will ultimately come into effect by December 18.
However, a source close to the administration told IranWire that President Masoud Pezeshkian plans to meet with the Supreme Leader during his weekly meeting on December 8 to request that the implementation of the law be suspended.
The Silence of an Administration Elected on Hijab Moderation Promises
On November 27, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Speaker of Parliament, announced the submission of the Chastity and Hijab law to the President.
Three days later, its full text was published by the media. However, in the days since, neither the President—who campaigned on promises to “reduce pressure on women”—nor any member of his administration has addressed it publicly.
The last government official to comment on the law was Majid Ansari, the President’s legal advisor, who, on November 25, claimed, “The Chastity and Hijab law, although drafted, remains suspended.” This assertion was quickly proven false.
Some former government officials, however, have voiced opposition to the law. Sakineh Sadat Paad, a legal expert and advisor to the former administration on social rights and freedoms, criticized the law, deeming its implementation contrary to “wisdom and rationality.”
She urged President Masoud Pezeshkian to avoid hastily signing or enforcing it.
In a post on her X account, Paad wrote, “The provisions of the hijab law demand deliberation in a meeting of the heads of the three branches of government to use constitutional mechanisms. Rushing to implement a law that remains contentious among jurists, legal experts, scholars, psychologists, sociologists, and the public defies wisdom and rationality.”
Similarly, Shahindokht Molaverdi, special assistant to Hasan Rouhani’s administration for citizens’ rights, said, “Amid war and unrest, this rush to increase dissatisfaction, erode trust, and raise social costs makes one question who you’re trying to outpace and who you’re being compared to.”
What Does the Public Say?
Among the various provisions of the Chastity and Hijab law, the clause regarding “organizing volunteer groups for the propagation of virtue and the prevention of vice, composed of citizens of the Islamic Republic or migrants or foreigners who hold official residency permits from the Ministry of the Interior, etc.” was the first to draw attention from some people close to Masoud Pezeshkian’s electoral campaign.
Reza Rashidpour, a presenter for state television, wrote, “A foreigner, with their seven generations, has not the right and should not be the one to warn my fellow countryman.”
Given the anti-Afghan rhetoric and discrimination against Afghan migrants and refugees that have been promoted in Iran in recent months, many social media users interpreted this clause as granting “the right of Afghan citizens to intervene in the dress choices of Iranian women” and protested it.
Some civil society activists, journalists, and lawyers argued that focusing on the law’s discriminatory nature as a racial issue and fueling hatred against migrants was wrong.
Hamed Siasi Rad, a writer and journalist, said, “They probably said: The plan is to go on with the existing divisions in society for a while, escalate hatred of Afghans, and then give foreign nationals the right to tell Iranian women what to wear. The public will focus on this clause and ignore the rest of the dirt we’ve called a law.”
Sina Yousefi, a lawyer and human rights activist, said, “Reducing the fundamental attack on women’s rights and gender apartheid in Iran to a racial issue is a trap that should not be fallen into.”
The heavy financial pressure on women with optional clothing through substantial fines also became a focal point of concern.
Mehdi Mahmoudian, a human rights activist and former political prisoner, responded to this pressure, suggesting, “Civil institutions and social activists should prioritize creating civil funds and civil pledges to support those who protest gender apartheid and engage in civil resistance.”
Another civil activist wrote, “The only way to fight this new hijab law is not to keep money in our bank accounts. If everyone queues up at the banks to withdraw their money, the government will be forced to back down within a week.”
Lawyers and legal experts have raised more profound objections to the law.
Hussein Taj, Shima Kosha, Hassan Asadi Zaidabadi, Reza Shafakhah, and others emphasized that the implementation of the law would not only escalate public anger toward the government but could also promote violence or even civil war at various levels of society.
Mohsen Borhani, a legal scholar, wrote on X that the law “is neither in line with Islamic principles nor with legal standards.” Borhani said that he is willing to have a debate with the law’s designers.
Ali Mojtahedzadeh, another lawyer, said, “As a legal expert, reading the Chastity and Hijab law, I can only express shame and embarrassment for my oppressed and dignified fellow citizens.”
Mohammad Fazeli, a sociologist and former assistant professor at Shahid Beheshti University, believes that the law’s designers and supporters aim to “create widespread dissatisfaction, make the Pezeshkian administration appear ineffective in fulfilling its promises, turn society into a police state, and intentionally humiliate the majority of Iranians.”
Nasrin Sotoudeh, a lawyer and human rights activist, and Sediqeh Vasmaghi, an Islamic scholar and opponent of compulsory hijab, issued a joint statement calling the law “medieval” and “a ridiculous show,” demanding its immediate repeal.
One of the most contentious provisions of the law is Clause 1 of Article 64: “CCTV footage from the Ministry of Intelligence, the Atomic Energy Organization, the Ministry of Defense, the Armed Forces, and security forces will be provided to the police with due security considerations.”
Hussein Salahvarzi, a journalist, said, “What is your understanding of this clause in the Chastity and Hijab law? My impression is that for the legislator, identifying and tracking people who don’t observe hijab is one of the most security-sensitive issues.”
Clause 2 of Article 54, which forces taxi drivers to spy and report on passengers who refuse to wear the compulsory hijab, has also drawn significant attention.
According to this clause, if drivers report a passenger’s non-compliance with hijab rules, they will be exempt from fines.
The Supporters
Following the publication of the Speaker of Parliament’s remarks regarding implementing the Chastity and Hijab law, several channels on the domestic messaging app Eitaa began promoting the law.
The administrator of the Daughters of the Revolution channel warned that if they don’t follow “the path of Ruhollah,” referring to the Islamic Republic’s founder Ayatollah Khomeini, “we will be slapped.”
Supporters of the Islamic Republic voiced their support for the hijab and chastity law. Most of these supporters used fake names and photos to express support for the Islamic Republic’s policies on women’s dress.
Additionally, fake accounts on X used the hashtag “Enforce it” and called for the swift implementation of the law.
One user wrote, “It’s time for the hijab to become a law, so that no one can use it to gather votes anymore. This bill has been approved by the parliament and the Guardian Council, and the people support it.”
The law’s approval, aside from its high financial costs, could force citizens to spy on each other to avoid fines, imprisonment, and loss of civil rights, creating a new crisis.
