Nipped in the Bud
Council of Guardians responded to Rezaee’s election mechanism reform plan with a big no
The proposal put forward by Mohsen Rezaee, Ahmadinejad’s principlist rival in the presidential elections, for changing the election mechanism and forming a committee independent from the government was categorically rejected and called unnecessary by the only institution controlling elections, i.e. the Council of Guardians. Instead, it were the voters and candidates who were advised to change their behavior by the council spokesman.
Rezaee’s plan was not fully developed of course. But what drove this principlist political activist to talk of the necessity for transformation of election structures and mechanisms, were the crises heavily affecting the Iran society and politics in the past four months; ones that created deep rifts between social and political institutions.
In the early days after the controversial election, like Mehdi Karrubi and Mir Hosein Musavi, Rezaee objected the vote-counting and Council of Guardian’s supervision., though he did not take the reformists’ track in protesting. After a period of silence while he seemd to be monitoring the course of developments, Rezaee decided to return to the political scene by putting forward this proposal and establishing a newspaper.
In countries with incipient democracy, or under the threat of domestic or foreign anti-democratic forces, the independent election committee shores up democracy and tries to dispel distrust of the political system.
When an election becomes subject to intentional or unintentional rigging and provokes protest towards commissioners of the election, forming an independent institution or allowing observers from different political groups to monitor the election process can reinforce the bond between citizens and state. Of course this functions only if the political system believes in democratic structures and regards democracy as a guarantee to the continuation of its rule.
Depth of the gap (or as the victorious bloc prefers to call , the ’sedition’), is undeniable. The victorious camp is trying to paper over the crack by blaming the protestors and their leaders and recognizing them as the only culprits of the post-election turbulence. Unlike the executive-military-security camp now controlling the affairs, other political groups and activist demand a closer look at what has happened. They believe that the current trend, e.g. trying the protestors, will not only solve the problems but turn it into a dormant volcano ready to erupt with the first opportunity.
Promoting national solidarity, reconstructing popular trust, admitting to political diversity, avoiding unilateralism and authoritarianism are the main suggestions made by those who still believe in the Islamic Republic.
Iran’s recent election brought to light the structural defects of the election mechanism and lack of a democratic viewpoint in circulation of power. Otherwise, we didn’t have all these disputes and protests which traversed all the political social layers.
Though having a long way to become a comprehensive plan, and needed to be adapted to political realities and the level of democracy in Iran, Mohsen Rezaee’s suggestion was interestingly nipped in the bud by the Council of Guardians. We may even wait for one of those statements that warn the newspapers not to continue discussions on the issue anymore.
According the council’s spokesman, forming a national election committee will have harmful effects. He has not even explained who will be harmed after reforming the institutions however. Mr. Kadkhodayi seemed not to be getting ’improvement’ from the word ’reform’, saying that: "I don’t think reforming and changing the institutions would lead to a favorable result". Instead, he said that he believes in changing the election culture: "those who enter into the election should admit defeat, not call for major changes. If the election culture changes and we become convinced by the result, problems will be solved".
Such an understanding throws the ball into the voters and candidates’ court. It is in fact the path the winning bloc is actually taking these days, that is, ignoring the roots and accusing protestors for causing the problem.
It was predictable that the Council of Guardians and the pro-government forces would neither accept formation of an independent election committee nor would favor a national unity plan. They will never want to co-exist with other political parties. While chances for bargaining at the higher political levels are low, further pressures at the grassroots and new civil movements are possible. They may pass the red lines of the Islamic Republic and seek for new means to achieve their demands.
Rezaee’s plan was not fully developed of course. But what drove this principlist political activist to talk of the necessity for transformation of election structures and mechanisms, were the crises heavily affecting the Iran society and politics in the past four months; ones that created deep rifts between social and political institutions.
In the early days after the controversial election, like Mehdi Karrubi and Mir Hosein Musavi, Rezaee objected the vote-counting and Council of Guardian’s supervision., though he did not take the reformists’ track in protesting. After a period of silence while he seemd to be monitoring the course of developments, Rezaee decided to return to the political scene by putting forward this proposal and establishing a newspaper.
In countries with incipient democracy, or under the threat of domestic or foreign anti-democratic forces, the independent election committee shores up democracy and tries to dispel distrust of the political system.
When an election becomes subject to intentional or unintentional rigging and provokes protest towards commissioners of the election, forming an independent institution or allowing observers from different political groups to monitor the election process can reinforce the bond between citizens and state. Of course this functions only if the political system believes in democratic structures and regards democracy as a guarantee to the continuation of its rule.
Depth of the gap (or as the victorious bloc prefers to call , the ’sedition’), is undeniable. The victorious camp is trying to paper over the crack by blaming the protestors and their leaders and recognizing them as the only culprits of the post-election turbulence. Unlike the executive-military-security camp now controlling the affairs, other political groups and activist demand a closer look at what has happened. They believe that the current trend, e.g. trying the protestors, will not only solve the problems but turn it into a dormant volcano ready to erupt with the first opportunity.
Promoting national solidarity, reconstructing popular trust, admitting to political diversity, avoiding unilateralism and authoritarianism are the main suggestions made by those who still believe in the Islamic Republic.
Iran’s recent election brought to light the structural defects of the election mechanism and lack of a democratic viewpoint in circulation of power. Otherwise, we didn’t have all these disputes and protests which traversed all the political social layers.
Though having a long way to become a comprehensive plan, and needed to be adapted to political realities and the level of democracy in Iran, Mohsen Rezaee’s suggestion was interestingly nipped in the bud by the Council of Guardians. We may even wait for one of those statements that warn the newspapers not to continue discussions on the issue anymore.
According the council’s spokesman, forming a national election committee will have harmful effects. He has not even explained who will be harmed after reforming the institutions however. Mr. Kadkhodayi seemed not to be getting ’improvement’ from the word ’reform’, saying that: "I don’t think reforming and changing the institutions would lead to a favorable result". Instead, he said that he believes in changing the election culture: "those who enter into the election should admit defeat, not call for major changes. If the election culture changes and we become convinced by the result, problems will be solved".
Such an understanding throws the ball into the voters and candidates’ court. It is in fact the path the winning bloc is actually taking these days, that is, ignoring the roots and accusing protestors for causing the problem.
It was predictable that the Council of Guardians and the pro-government forces would neither accept formation of an independent election committee nor would favor a national unity plan. They will never want to co-exist with other political parties. While chances for bargaining at the higher political levels are low, further pressures at the grassroots and new civil movements are possible. They may pass the red lines of the Islamic Republic and seek for new means to achieve their demands.