Home

Iran's Election: Ban, participate or a third way?

3 June 2005

Iran's upcoming presidential election has divided the reformists into two sides: one group believes they should ban the election, another believes in voting to Moeen, the candidate for Progressive Reformists.

There are very high ranking characters in both groups. For example, Abdollah Noori, one of the best ministers of Khatami in his first period, believes that in this system, under the rule of Khamenei, nothing can be done, and the result of even the victory of Moeen can not change much, so why bother to participate?

Other reformists, including Mostafa Tajzadeh, one of the main figures among reformists, believe that they should not let hardliners make an absolutely totalitarian system, and should use this small window of opportunity.

I think that these two view can be converged in one: Limiting the power of Supreme Leader: Ali Khamenei. If Moeen can guarantee that he is capable of doing so, and people believe that, they definitely vote for him. But how, in this complicated system, can the power of the Supreme Leader be reduced?

In my view, the next year election of October 2006 for electing "Experts" who are capable to "control, force to resign, and replace" the Supreme Leader, is very important. Unfortunately, reformists have not yet been discussing it in this election. If reformists could win presidential elections as well as the October 2006 election, then they have control over Khamenei, and can even force him to resign and replace him (Article 108, 110, 111 of Iran's Constitution).

If Moeen's team can show a practical method and their commitment about their maximum effort on October 2006 election for controlling Khamenei, then people who believe in banning the upcoming election, will be voting for Moeen.

From: "Green Mind"

Read more in the blog Green Years...

Sign the petition: save our Freedom of Information

The UK government is running a secretive unit inside Michael Gove’s Cabinet Office that’s accused of ‘blacklisting’ journalists and hiding ‘sensitive’ information from the public. Experts say they’re breaking the law – and it’s an assault on our right to know what our government is doing.

We’re not going to let it stand. We’re launching a legal battle – but we also need a huge public outcry, showing that thousands back our call for transparency. Will you add your name?

Had enough of ‘alternative facts’? openDemocracy is different Join the conversation: get our weekly email

Comments

We encourage anyone to comment, please consult the oD commenting guidelines if you have any questions.
Audio available Bookmark Check Language Close Comments Download Facebook Link Email Newsletter Newsletter Play Print Share Twitter Youtube Search Instagram WhatsApp yourData