By board of editors
Extreme views with respect to the leader's responsibilities
Since the beginning of the revolution, there have been varied opinions with respect to the definition of the responsibilities and functions of the leadership. Some attribute very little functionality to the role of the leader by believing in a ceremonial and demonstrative leadership wherein the leader would occasionally appear before the people—like Ceremonial, powerless leaders of the world—and deliver a speech to them, take some photos and return to their palaces afterward, leaving the job of the Caesars to the Caesars and that of God to God [separating religion from governing]. In this view, the leader of the society does not have many responsibilities, except for offering advice. Evidently, such a view results in the appearance of secularism, and separation of the institution of religion from politics and government. This is exactly the opposite of the goal for which the Islamic Revolution was founded—then embraced by the people.
On the other hand, there are people on the other extreme who attribute to the leader anything that happens in different sectors of the government, considering them reliant on the vote and action of the leader; seeking the leader’s interference in all major and minor matters of the government. These people hold that if the government or the parliament or the judiciary does not perform their duties appropriately or completely, the leadership must interfere directly and take serious action them. This view, might at times be derived from worries about the future of the revolution, or a revolutionary spirit; nevertheless, it will unintentionally lead to an autocracy. This is again against the original goals of the revolution, based on which the revolution was formed.
Imam Khomeini and Ayatollah Khamenei’s opinions about the responsibilities of the leader
In contrast with these two extreme currents, there is Imam Khomeini's and Ayatollah Khamenei’s logical viewpoints based on their religious knowledge: firm belief in protecting the structure of the Islamic Republic, or better said, the religious people-oriented [democratic] system. In the viewpoint of Imam Khomeini and the Leader of the Islamic Revolution—Ayatollah Khamenei— religious democracy is not just another political theory among man-made political systems. Rather, it has strong religious foundations based in Fiqh [jurisprudence], and that is why Ayatollah Khamenei expressly announced last January that:" I have, genuinely, cherished religious democracy. We truly believe in religious democracy. We consider everyone who has been elected by the people as the chief and as the official in charge. We consider helping them as essential, and we consider it our responsibility. Jan 9, 2018" With this perspective, mistaken definitions of Wilayat al-Faqih [the rule of the jurisprudent] has no place in the democratic system of Iran." The kind of Vilayat-e Faqih which was introduced, defined and implemented by our magnanimous Imam is a kind of dynamic, flourishing and progressive management. Imam Khomeini (r.a.) was a perfect manifestation of this Vilayat-e Faqih and over time his outstanding characteristics became clearer to whoever knew him well. Imam Khomeini (r.a.) promoted the idea of absolute Vilayat-e Faqih. Some people resorted to fallacious reasoning and tried to distort the issue in one way or another. They tried to impose a wrong meaning and interpretation on the concept. They said that absolute Vilayat-e Faqih means that in the Islamic Republic the Leader is above all the laws. They said that absolute Vilayat-e Faqih would give leaders of the Islamic Republic unlimited power to do whatever they wanted. This is not the case. Our magnanimous Imam was more committed than everybody else to observing the laws, the principles and the details of divine commands and this is the duty of the Leader. Oct 16, 2011"
What are the leader's responsibilities and how does he rule?
We should now address the question that asks: What are the leader's responsibilities and how does he govern?
In response, it should be said that firstly, "the most important task performed by the leadership as assigned by the constitution is a delineation of general policies." And secondly" The responsibility of the Leadership begins when he feels that a movement is being launched that diverts the path of the system. Here, the responsibility of the Leadership is to enter the arena and to prevent this movement in whatever ways possible although such cases might be related to peripheral matters. Jul 2, 2016." Conducting these two duties, on the one hand, will practically lead to general guidance and overall outlining of the road to achieve the goals of the establishment. On the other hand, it will result in monitoring the matters of the country, and prudent engagement with necessary affairs in a manner that will neither disturb the mechanisms nor make the country reach a dead-end.
Now, to answer the question as "what is the leadership’s mechanism to perform duties?” it should be said that it is through the allocated legal structures and mechanisms."
I have said many times ago, the Leadership cannot constantly enter into every decision made by various executive organizations. He cannot constantly say that this should be done and that should not be done. This is not possible. Neither the law nor reason gives me this permission. Organizations have certain responsibilities. If an official makes a mistake on such and such an issue and if they do something wrong, this is the responsibility of the Majlis. It is the Majlis that should impeach them.
Or it should be investigated by the administration if the task that has been carried out is a wrong one. The president should intervene and prevent them from carrying out such tasks. It is not the case that the Leadership takes a look at the various decisions that every executive organization makes to see which is correct and which is wrong and to discuss it with such organizations. This is not possible. This is illegal, impossible and unreasonable. Jul 2, 2016."
“Even a topic like that of Government Decree—which some mistakenly assume as an affair above or against the law—actually does comply with the Constitution and its principles. There are cases wherein if the officials and organizers seek to enforce a valid law with every detail of it, they may face problems. The Constitution has foreseen a way out of such situations wherein officials reach a gridlock implementing a law—for or instance a tax law, or a law in foreign policy, commerce, industry, or academia—and cannot move ahead or do anything about it and the mechanism of the Parliament also does not allow an issue be brought up and urgently decide on: so, the leadership is referred to. It was the same during the time of Imam Khomeini. I was the President at the time and when we faced such problems, we would write to Imam Khomeini and he would grant permissions. December 17, 2003”
Two examples to prove this claim
This rationale has been the constant and continuous view of the Leader of the Islamic Revolution during his leadership; there are many examples to it.
For instance, if during the 2009 sedition, the Leader of the Revolution—Ayatollah Khamenei— fully supported the outcome of the public election and the people’s votes without giving in, it was because the rioters tried to adopt unlawful and unconventional ways rather than taking the legal procedure to file a complaint. Four days after the 2009 presidential election, the Leader of the Islamic Revolution explicitly declares in meeting with the representatives of the electoral headquarters of presidential candidates that if Mr. Mousavi adopts the legal procedure, Ayatollah Khamenei would back him: "there are legal ways to settle such problems. These complaints must definitely be investigated. You mentioned some of your complaints. I ask the officials at the Ministry of Interior and the Guardian Council to thoroughly investigate these complaints. It is alright if some of the complaints necessitate recounting a number of the ballot boxes[...]But this is the proper method. The right way is the legal way. I also mentioned it to Mr. Moussavi. He accepted that the appropriate way was the legal method. He should proceed with the legal method and I will strongly support him. Jun 16, 2009."
In addition, it is based on this logic that the leader of the revolution, during his recent meeting with the Assembly of Experts, explicitly rejected the formation of a parallel government: "Kicking up a row is not the cure, nor is establishing parallel organizations with the administration. Mr. Jannati pointed out that we should do jihadi work. This is a completely correct statement. Jihadi work should be done, but by whom? By officials themselves! This should be done through the legal procedures. Of course, there may be cases in which the law does not work for a government official. He may need to work outside the present legal procedures. He may need to ask for our permission. In such cases, I will definitely cooperate and help. There is nothing wrong with this, like what the honorable head of the judiciary branch did [Supreme Leader’s response to the letter written by the head of the judiciary branch on August 11, 2018 regarding confronting economic crimes]. However, this should be done by the officials in charge. Doing parallel work alongside the administration will not be a successful act. This is the definite experience of this humble person throughout all these years. Sep 6, 2018."
Using this logic, one can correctly understand other events that are unfolding these days and the way the leader of the revolution reacts to them. One can also assess different people and currents, and their claims, as well as appraise their adherence to democracy and the country's legal procedures.
Comment