From Calls to Change Ahmadinejad's Administration to Demanding Civil Rights
عبور از خواست تغییر دولت به مطالبه حقوق مدنی
19 January 2010
Roozbeh Mirebrahimi
Font size:
Mir Hussein Musavi’s 17th Statement is a very important document due to its timing and content. This announcement was released in the aftermath of the bloody events of Ashura and people’s fury in response to them; its content’s high value is also driven from these factors.
Mir Hussein Musavi’s Statement, should have on one hand promoted the persistence of the Green Movement, and on the other, demurred the radicalized environment of the movement; the latter, has been and still is an important characteristic which depends on the continuation of the movement.
Although the Green Movement was born during the election days and initially aimed at changing Ahmadinejad’s government, it later faced a military coup (by the Basij, the Revolutionary Guard, and other military organs), and dealt with widespread repression of the masses. Today, the movement has turned into one “demanding civil rights” for the Iranian nation.
As Musavi declared in his first Statement after the election, “Today, it is our historical duty (prophetic mission) to protest and demand the nation’s rights.” Thus, the Green Movement which was supposed to, with its victory in the election, bring about the “Government of Hope,” today is in demand of civil rights from the regime. They demand rights such a freedom of speech, the right to assembly, the right to peaceful protest, and right to free elections; we should analyze Musavi’s latest Statement within in the context of civil rights.
Musavi in his 17th Statement, which began with strong introduction addressing the Islamic regime, suggested five methods* to overcome the current crisis ailing the government. This announcement may be one of the rare ones in which Musavi has actually addressed the Islamic regime, and as one of the central figures of the Green Movement he has introduced his own package of proposals for engaging the government.
Any resistance if it is for the sake of reaching a goal—and not only for the sake of fighting— must keep the paths to negotiations open, and it must express its demands explicitly and clearly.
Four out of five of Musavi’s proposals to the regime are based on demanding civil rights for the Iranian nation. Meaning that in his announcement Musavi has explicitly demanded: freedom of speech and press, change in the electoral laws to ensure free elections, freedom for parties’ activities, the right to peaceful protests, and freeing of all political prisoners.
Musavi based these demands on the Islamic Republic’s constitution and asked the regime to abide by the text which serves as its foundation. We must note that the strength of Musavi’s announcement lies in the fact that he refers to the constitution in order to demand civil rights.
The regime has two options in responding to these demands: 1) it must either ignore them and like previous years keep on the path towards dictatorship, which does not match the regime’s claim to be “of” the people and elected by the people, or 2) it must accept such demands— acceptance of any of which will have an incredible impact on changing the current system. On the other hand, ignoring these demands that were purposefully based on the Islamic Republic’s constitution will mean that the regime admits to dictatorship.
The Islamic Republic is in a grave position, where for the first time the question of the regime’s soundness has reached the regime’s top leaders. The violent and treacherous behavior of the regime during the elections and its aftermath caused many of the regime’s and the Supreme Leader’s followers to question their views. Many have even surpassed these doubts and have joined the opposition.
Some may argue that referring to the constitution is a mistake and that the constitution itself is the source of many problems. This is a very serious and important point; however, in the current civil resistance stating the end goal at the beginning of the movement is not effective, and it will not create homogeneity and gather mass support. Imagine that from day one the key leaders and thinkers of the Green Movement stated that they are looking for a new constitution and a new regime. In that case, it would have been impossible to challenge the elements that claim to be of the people, and would not have been able to have such a vast movement.
Nevertheless, amongst the oppositionists to the status quo, we know of those who are still attached to the founding values of the Islamic regime, its founders, and the concept of a supreme leader. This is not a weakness in the Green Movement, on the other hand, it is indicative of its strength, and it will only be strengthened if the Green Movement keeps moving towards attaining civil rights in the future.
In acknowledging and accepting believers of civil rights, one should not draw boundaries between “us” and “them.” Any individual, with whatever background and goals, who believes in these universal values, while respecting differences should be welcomed into the Green circle.
In Musavi’s statement the terms “nation” and “followers of the Green Movement” are defined in ways that they are more broad and inclusive. This approach is exactly in opposition to the regime’s methodology during the last three decades; a method which began the day after the victory of the revolution and it daily decreased the number of “us” (referring to government supporters) and the followers of the regime. Today, these followers have reached low levels.
However, the first article of Musavi’s proposal—where he asked for “governmental accountability towards the nation, parliament, and the judicial branch” —has led to different interpretations. Some interpreted this article as a retreat from considering the current regime “invalid.” A portion of conservatives and oppositionists have similar impression from Musavi’s announcement.
However, in the view of many writers the meaning behind this section is deeper than it is conveyed at the surface. In this article, Mir Hussein Musavi for the first time considered the regime and the supreme leader as one entity, and asked for the government to be accountable to the nation, parliament, and the judicial branch. This perspective is opposite of the one established view within the regime which makes the government accountable to the supreme leader.
Musavi’s combining of the current government and the current supreme into one category was not without a basis since Ayatollah Khamenei, before and after the elections, did not hesitate to explicitly or implicitly defend Ahmadinejad, and almost everyone considers them to be on the same side. This topic gets a deeper meaning when we witness that the slogans used during protests have been directed at the head of the regime—the supreme leader.
On the other hand, this article demanded an end to irregular defenses against criticisms of the current government’s weaknesses and inefficiencies. The true subject of this sentence is the backing of Ahmadinejad’s government by Khamenei, the police, and security forces’ (in the in the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps and Basij), which Musavi asked to be ended.
However, from a writer’s perspective, the most important message of this article was the “proposal of the regime’s removal” as an option for ending the current crisis.
In the context of the Islamic Regime’s laws the parliament is allowed to take a vote of confidence in order to determine the president’s inabilities; this has been witnessed in the Iranian history when Iran’s first President, Abulhasan Banisadr, was voted out of office.
Mir Hossein Musavi showed the governing regime that “this path”--- the one discharging Ahamadinejad—is an option, however, he emphasized that people’s demands are now beyond the elections and the stolen votes.
One can confidently say that after the election people’s initial demand was—“Where is My Vote?” However, today, it has expanded and generalized to demand civil rights for the nation. Today, the demand is no longer “Where is my Vote?” in reference to the results of the 10th presidential election; rather now the Green Movement asks these questions in more general terms, in regards to the nation’s efficacy and control over its own destiny.
The Green Movement asks, “Where is the space for me to present my ideas and vote?” (Referring to the freedom of speech and media). The Green Movement asks, “Where is my right to assembly in order to express my vote, and ideas” (freedom of assembly). The Green Movement asks “Where is my right to protest, and announce my vote and ideas?” (The freedom to protest and gather). The Green Movement asks, “Where is my right to free elections and the right to choose from those of similar opinion and ideals?” (Free elections).
Today, the Green Movement by focusing on such ends is speaking for historical demands that the Iranian nation has fought and paid a price for, for over 150 years.
What the world has seen from the Green Movement in the recent months is only a beginning of a Green chapter for Iran’s Green generations. History has always been a merciless judge, but it is also a valuable witness to atrocities.
1. [1]The Government must accept direct accountability towards the nation, parliament and the judicial branch in a way that the government does not defend its failures and inefficiencies, and it must directly respond to the problems it has created for the country; this is considering that if the government is just and effective it can be accountable to the people and the parliament, and if not the parliament and the judicial branch must deal with it within the boundaries of the constitution.
2. Compilation of clear laws in order increase people’s trust for fair and free elections without any deceit and interference. The law must guarantee participation of all individuals regardless of their political leaning and believes, and must prevent intrusion of governmental supporters based on political ideology and preferences at all levels. The early parliaments (Majlis) after the 1979 Revolution can be referred to as role models.
3. Freeing of all political prisoners and reestablishing their honor and reputation in the society. I believe that this decision will not be viewed as regime’s weakness, rather as its strength; and also we are aware that the declining political powers disagree with this approach.
4. Freedom of press and media and the permission to re-publish newspapers that have been banned are essential to the remedial of the current situation. The fear of freedom of press must be relieved and world’s experiences with such phenomenon must be relied upon. [There must be an] [e]xpansion of satellite station as valuable sources whose effectiveness indicates the inefficiencies and failures of prior approaches and the Islamic Republic’s Broadcasting services. Internet filtering and limitations may only be effective in the short term. The only solution is to have diversity of free media outlets in the country. Isn’t it time to trust our domestic thinkers and creative minds and to bring back people’s attention from looking overseas to our own domestic political, social, and civil creativities?
5. To officially recognize people’s right to assembly, formation of parties, and abiding by the 27th amendment of the constitution. A step in this direction can be taken with the help of all nationalists, and within a few months a friendly national environment can replace the one filled with confrontations between the security apparatus and the masses or clashes amongst the people themselves.
Email to a friend
Print version
Plain text
Permalink
About author
Attacks on Academic Freedom in Iran
20898 times read
Theatre, A Response to a Need
10807 times read
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
5816 times read
Torture, Neglect, and Death
5 Comments
Post your comment