Islamic Republic Is Neither Iran Nor Republic; And Not Even Islamic

The outside world has been deceived for so long to recognise the Islamic Republic Regime in Iran for Iran. The regime has also purportedly presented itself as a republic and an Islamic state as well.

Is it really a Republic?

The Islamic Republic of Iran is not, and has never been, a republic. It would be simplistic to call the Islamic Republic's system of government a republic; just because it has a president as its head of state instead of a monarch. Republic as a system of government has its own conceptual meaning. Oxford dictionary defines the republic as "a state in which the supreme power rests in the body of citizens entitled to vote", emphasize added, whom directly or indirectly elect their leader. This profound right of citizens is then supposed to be protected by law. That is the constitutional law of such state which translates to the contents of the constitution itself. In that sense a quick examination of the Islamic Republic's constitution, however, reveals boundless flaws which render it effectively worthless than the paper it has been written on.  Article 57 of the constitution provides "[T]he powers of government in the Islamic Republic are vested in the legislature, the judiciary, and the executive powers, functioning under the supervision of the absolute wilayat al-'amr"*, emphasize added. The article impliedly brings all the three branches of government under the realm of the leader. An example of the leader exercising this over-arching power was in 1981 when Ayatollah KhomeiniIn, the founder of regime, found his relationship with Dr. Abolhassan Banisadr, the first president of the Islamic Republic, lapsed; he had the president impeached by the Parliament and then removed him from the office. But article 110 of the constitution more explicitly, and without a doubt, removes the people's sovereignty all together and bestows it wholly in the hand of one person, the leader. It astonishingly confers the following powers and authorities to him:
"110 (1) Delineation of the general policies of the Islamic Republic of Iran after consultation with the Nation's Exigency Council.

(2) Supervision over the proper execution of the general policies of the system.

(3) Issuing decrees for national referenda.

(4) Assuming supreme command of the armed forces.

(5) Declaration of war and peace, and the mobilization of the armed forces.

(6) Appointment, dismissal, and acceptance of resignation of:

     (a) the fuqaha' on the Guardian Council.

     (b) the supreme judicial authority of the country.

     (c) the head of the radio and television network of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

     (d) the chief of the joint staff.

     (e) the chief commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps.

     (f) the supreme commanders of the armed forces.
...

(9) Signing the decree formalizing the election of the President of the Republic by the people. The suitability of candidates for the Presidency of the Republic, with respect to the qualifications specified in the Constitution, must be confirmed before elections take place by the Guardian Council, and, in the case of the first term [of the Presidency], by the Leadership; " emphasizes added.

 According to the article 110(6)(a) above, the leader appoints the members of the Guardian Council. The council then in turn, provided by the article 110(9) above, over looks the presidential candidates' qualifications and the suitability. Then after the citizens cast their vote; both the leader and his appointed council reserve their assenting power over the result. Basically the whole process is nothing but a sham. Presumably Ayatollah Rohollah Khomeinei, the founder of the regime, loved to assume such notorious powers--as all dictators do.** In addition the leader, more officially by appointing and the power to remove, holds his domination over the judiciary as well, article 110(6)(b). However, during his ascendancy except that of president Banisadr case, Khomeinei has never, at least in an apparent and obvious way, interfered with the the government's branches. By contrast his successor, Ali Khamenei, the current so-called Supreme Leader, has exercised those powers in many occasions --the recent ones were before, during and in the aftermath of the last year rigged-election. 

A year before the election, when president Ahmadi Nejad was in his final year of his first term in office, in a meeting with him and his cabinet; Khameneei had instructed him to plan and study his government policies the way as he would be president for the next 5 years! What he was signaling then was simply determining the result of future presidential election! The rigged-election therefore was his own play to ensure the Ahmadi Nejad election. And after that, his rejection of the demands for the investigation of election irregularities was obviously predictable. So was his orders to savagely crush the peaceful protesters on streets; extra judicial detentions; barbaric tortures; raping and the killing of innocent people.

The Islamic Republic is not and has never been a republic.

Is it Iran?

Having a president doesn't merely make Iran a republic. According to the country's constitution the people's vote has no effect on the final determination of a presidential election result. Appointing president Ahmadi NejadAhmadi Nejad into the office of president in a direct contempt to the people's will was a clear demonstration of constitutional power of the leader in action. On the other hand ensuing demonstration of power by tens of millions of Iranians on streets wanting their votes back was a clear indication of a clash. That is a constitutional clash between a dictator sitting on the top of the country's constitution and the people. This is a new generation of Iranians, almost 50 millions under 35 years of age, whom are against the constitution which was cemented in by the last generation of Iranians, their parents! In contrast supporters of the constitution, however, have always argued on 98% votes for the constitution. What they don't like to answer though is that who were those 98% people and; where are they now? The answer is simple. They are either dead or perhaps over 55 years of age. Those who are still alive in comparison with the new young generation of Iranians will form less than 30% of the 70 millions Iran's population. That was the leader and his associates dilemma when they tried to put Ahmadi Nejad into the office of president against the people's will. The new generation of Iranians had no role in the creation of the country's constitution. They ardently denounced it last year. When you are in a situation where people of a country are against the establishment in its entirety, the constitution; you cannot possibly relate the system and its government to the country. The Islamic Republic is not Iran.

Nonetheless, so far international community has granted this regime and its appointed governments, through out its history, their international status and recognised them as Iran. But we, the friends of free Iran, believe this attitude towards this people must be changed. They have no mandate from the people of Iranian and until such a time they do; they are not representing Iran and its people. Their representative therefore is only representing a dictator and his close associates.

Is it an Islamic state?

How Islamic is the regime? I am not sure, since I am not a religious scholar. But I only know that, by Islamic rules, rape, especially boys, is punishable by death. And we have been witnessing a systematic rape of political opponents has been adopted as a political tool against Iranian young during and aftermath of the rigged-election by the regime. In addition medieval tortures, in many cases people killed under tortures, and extra-judicial killing have exercised just for the leader to hold into his political power. We learned through the history of the regime that the highest or sometimes, again I am not an expert to know how and under what circumstances, a lower ranking clerics has the authority to issue a Fatwa*** for such crimes to be carried out. A Fatwa such as the one Ayatollah Khomeneei, when he was alive, issued against Mr. Salman Roshdi, the British author, to be killed. However, I haven't heard that such Fatwas can be issued for rape or barbaric tortures under which a victim can be killed too. Many Islamic scholars inside the country saw these actions unIslamic, condemned them and distanced themselves from them.

p.s. The statistics provided on the demographic of Iran's population are the authors' personal view only. However, the percentage of under 35 years of age is in fact registered statistic which compromises over 50 millions people. 

* The so-called Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei.
** Nevertheless, those who had anything to do with the drafting of such constitution are guilty of treason, treason against the Iranian people and their sovereignty. It is a matter for future investigation.
*** Fatwa is a religiously issued order. It can be issued to kill someone in the name of god or religion.