Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei today ordered the Majlis,
the Iranian parliament, to cancel its scheduled session to question President
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad over country’s deteriorating economy. (IRNA, 21 November)
Earlier this month, lawmakers voted to summon Ahmadinejad. Khamenei's order, portrayed as an attempt to maintain unity among the
country’s senior leadership, manifests supreme
leader's absolutist powers over all branches of the government.
always interesting when the king tells the common rabble to to be quiet.
ReplyDeletethis is the same "Don't complain or the enemy wins" attitude you saw in the US in the early 2000s.
ReplyDeletein the US nobody tells the Congress to shut up and expects them to comply.
ReplyDeleteI wouldn't necessarily qualify this in absolute terms, but rather in terms of arbitrator. Many times you'll see the Leader branch of government acting as a decider or arbitrator. It's useful during emergency situations, particularly during the current economic war being directed against the country.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately Khamenei is not acting as the arbitrator here, but as his official position as the supreme leader, with powers to order the parliament to stop questioning the president on the economic situation of the country. Of course his powers over other institutions like the presidency, the parliament, the judiciary, the armed forces and the security apparatus are justified as convenient during emergency. The problem is he’s always had and used these powers. As soon as such ‘emergency’ period spans the entire life of the Islamic Republic, the system becomes authoritarian, not a democracy headed by an honest arbitrator.
ReplyDeleteI must congratulate the Majlis.
ReplyDeleteI've just turned on the telly and seen an aljazeera report that contained members of the legislature looking into the cameras and disagreeing with the order not to question Ahmedinejad and the government about the woeful state of the economy.
Khamenei may have the power to tell to shut up and sit down, but at least some Iranian representatives still have enough spine to grumble before sitting.
ANON 4:03PM
ReplyDeleteIn the US, the Congress voted for a war on Iraq against the will of its constituency, (expressed by public cpinion's poll at that time), and knowing that there was false pretext.
That Congress voted down, during seven consecutive years, to increase the national minimum wage, but at the same time it voted 5 times to increase their salaries.
A-F
8:13----
ReplyDeleteyou're not correct. the US public was originally against the war with Iraq when the Bush admin started campaigning for it, but by the time the Congress declared it ~58% supported war.
-----
Poll: Most back war, but want U.N. support
By Richard Benedetto, USA TODAY
With a war against Iraq perhaps days away, Americans are backing President Bush but remain split over launching an attack without United Nations support, a USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll shows.
By a 2-to-1 ratio, Americans favor invading Iraq with U.S. ground troops to remove Saddam Hussein from power. Not since November 2001 have they approved so overwhelmingly. Nearly six in 10 say they're ready for such an invasion "in the next week or two."
But that support drops off if the U.N. backing being sought by the United States, Britain and Spain Monday is not obtained. If the U.N. Security Council rejects a resolution paving the way for military action, only 54% of Americans favor a U.S. invasion"
------http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-03-16-poll-iraq_x.htm
may the Almighty shower blessings to this humble PERSIAN SAGE OF OUR TIME!!
ReplyDeletethank you, BMA but I'm not always as humble as I might be.
ReplyDelete