close button
Switch to Iranwire Light?
It looks like you’re having trouble loading the content on this page. Switch to Iranwire Light instead.
Features

Rouhani Wants “Special” Constitutional Powers — Why Now?

May 29, 2019
Shima Shahrabi
8 min read
On May 20, President Rouhani asked for “special powers” to deal with the disastrous consequences of American sanctions
On May 20, President Rouhani asked for “special powers” to deal with the disastrous consequences of American sanctions
Sadegh Zibakalam, professor of Social Sciences at Tehran University, says President Rouhani has not acted to fulfill the wishes of his voters
Sadegh Zibakalam, professor of Social Sciences at Tehran University, says President Rouhani has not acted to fulfill the wishes of his voters

In a speech on May 20, amid mounting problems due to US sanctions, Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani asked for “special powers” to run the country, comparing the current situation with the 1980-1988 war with Iraq. “During the war the Supreme Council to Support War was created and this council had full authority. Even the parliament and the judiciary had no say in the council’s decision. And today we are engaged in an economic war.”

Reactions to Rouhani’s speech were numerous and varied. He attracted criticism from many principlist conservatives, who argued that Rouhani had enjoyed more powers that any of his predecessors. Sadegh Zibakalam, a professor of Social Sciences at Tehran University, also opposed the granting of special powers to the president, laying out his objections in an open letter to President Rouhani.

IranWire asked him to argue his case.

 

When Mr. Rouhani talked about special powers, he compared the situation to war with Iraq. During the war, were the president or prime minister given special powers?

During the war neither the prime minister nor the president had any special powers. But during the war solidarity and unity among various institutions was very high and that is why there were no clashes. At this moment, for example, the Friday Prayers leaders, the [state] radio and TV and certain institutions are hostile to Mr. Rouhani, but at that time nobody was openly fighting the president and there was no reason for the president or the prime minister to ask for special powers. What is more, Imam [Khomeini] did not interfere in the details, he only issued general directives such as “continue the war.” The parliament, the Supreme Council to Support War, the president and the prime minister had more freedom of action and of decision-making than today.

The Supreme Council to Support War was created three years before the end of the war but it did not have “special powers.” Its members were appointed by Imam Khomeini, its president was the president of the republic and all institutions were to obey and support its orders, but harmony and solidarity was so high that they did it automatically and there was no need for special powers.

 

Does the constitution provide any special powers for the president?

We have nothing by the name of “special powers” in the constitution. Even if the Supreme Leader wants to give special powers to Mr. Rouhani, it not something that is in the constitution.

 

Does this mean that he must get special powers by a decree from the Supreme Leader?

Yes, but the constitution does not provide for such an executive decree.

 

Many conservatives have opposed the idea of granting special powers to Mr. Rouhani. But why are you, who consider yourself to be a reformist, also against it?

The core of what I wrote to Mr. Rouhani in my open letter is this: “Mr. Rouhani, why do you want special powers? What actions and what steps do you want to take that you were prevented from taking because you lacked the authority? Do you want to do something about political prisoners? Do you want to end the house arrests [of reformist leaders]? Where were you over the last two years when the judiciary shut down the press again and again? Have you wanted to do something about the environmental activists that have been kept in detention for more than a year by the Revolutionary Guards’ Intelligence Organization but were prevented from doing so?”

In another part of the letter, I wrote about the demands of the 24 million people who voted for Mr. Rouhani. A significant share of his voters are against anti-Americanism. They oppose calling the US our enemy and are against shouting out for the destruction of Israel. They are against exporting the revolution and against Iran’s intervention in Syria and Yemen. "If you wanted to satisfy the demands of your voters then you should have moved in the direction that they wanted, but you have taken no steps in this direction," [I wrote]. "Now why do you want special powers?"

 

Supporters of Mr. Rouhani will tell you that Rouhani’s Intelligence Ministry has made it clear that it does not believe the environmentalists are spies and that they were arrested by the Guards’ intelligence unit, which is not controlled by the president. The head of the executive branch can do nothing about the situation. They can say the same thing about ending the house arrests, political prisoners and so on.

The least Mr. Rouhani could have done was to act according to the constitution. The most important duty of the president according to Article 113 of the constitution is implementing the constitution. For instance, when Mr. Rouhani’s Intelligence Ministry says that the detained environmentalists are not spies and the Environmental Protection Agency says that the agency had approved their activities then their detention is no longer constitutional. The president must publicly oppose it.

True, Mr. Rouhani could not go and release them from the Guards’ prison — but he could protest and he could explain the situation in his speeches and interviews. He could bring up the subject with the Supreme Leader who controls the Guards and its intelligence organization. And he could have protested in other cases as well. But not only has Mr. Rouhani paid no attention to the wishes of his voters, he has even acted in contradiction to them.

He knows his voters oppose anti-Americanism, but in one speech he said that we must set up an international court and put America on trial for crimes against humanity. This is the same thing that the hardliners have been saying for 40 years.

 

To justify this, his supporters can say that Rouhani’s government negotiated and signed the nuclear deal but it was the US that withdrew from it first.

Mr. Rouhani must explain why, before the US reneged on its commitments and even before the signature on the nuclear agreement was dry, they [the Revolutionary Guards] launched two missiles with the words “Israel must be destroyed” in Hebrew painted on them. I believe that those two missiles were not launched against Israel but against the nuclear agreement. Their message was “O world! Don’t be deceived by the Iranian president and Mr. Zarif’s smiles. Nothing has changed and nobody is moving toward reducing tensions.”

When the Guards launched these missiles, Mr. Rouhani made no protests. Granted, he could not prevent the missile tests nor the arrest of the environmentalists or the “Death to Israel” slogans and so on. But he could have said [the prevention of these incidents] is what the 24 million who voted for him wanted. He could have said: “I believe in anti-Americanism but my voters are against it and it is my duty to act according to their wishes.”

I am not implying that Mr. Rouhani should have resigned and said: “I resign because I could not realize these wishes.” What I am saying is that he could have brought up these demands not as his own but as what his voters want. But he never seriously pursued these demands to say that he could not do anything because he did not have the power. Now he says that he does not have the powers he needs — but he should have said this during popular protests in [early] 2018. It was then that he should have said: “I am committed to realizing the wishes of my 24 million voters but cannot do it because I lack the power.”

 

During the three decades of Ayatollah Khamenei’s leadership, the only president who dared to publicly oppose the Supreme Leader’s stances on issues was Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. But he was not a reformist and did not seek to make reforms. Why have other presidents lacked the courage to protest?

I grant you that. During the leadership of Ayatollah Khamenei, Mr. Ahmadinejad has been the only president who protested — definitely much more than Mr. Khatami and the late Hashemi Rafsanjani — and showed his opposition to the Leader’s positions directly and indirectly. But let us not forget that, during his presidency, Mr. Ahmadinejad was a powerful president who enjoyed the support of the Guards, the Basij, the Supreme Leader and all the pillars of the regime. His protests started after 2011 and following his 11-day absence [when Ayatollah Khamenei vetoed his firing of the intelligence minister]. He had no problems before that.

 

But he did protest when he faced this problem...

I agree with you. I have said elsewhere that if Mr. Khatami, the late Mr. Hashemi Rafsanjani and Mr. Rouhani had even one hundredth of Mr. Ahmadinejad’s daring and audacity, reforms would not have ended so badly and the country would be in much better shape now.

 

Related Coverage:

Does Rouhani Plan to Declare a State of Emergency?, May 23, 2019

Decoding Iran’s Politics: Iranians’ Concerns Over War, May 21, 2019

Decoding Iran’s Politics: The JCPOA Ultimatum, May 16, 2019

Iran's Partial Withdrawal from the Nuclear Agreement: What are the Consequences?, May 8, 2019

Khamenei Calls for Immediate Action on Nuclear Enrichment, June 6, 2018

Professor Sentenced for Propaganda Against the Regime, March 14, 2018

Sadegh Zibakalam: I Will Not Trample on the American Flag, November 2016

comments

Features

How the Corruption Mafia Took $30 Billion out of Iran in One Year

May 28, 2019
Ali Ranjipour
8 min read
How the Corruption Mafia Took $30 Billion out of Iran in One Year