Speaking today, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei suggested that the current presidential system in Iran might not last forever, adding that “there would be no problem” in scrapping the office entirely in favor of a parliamentary system.
Considering the on-again, off-again feud between Khamenei and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the comments are seen as a warning that the controversial president might find not only his job in danger, but the office entirely.
The two engaged in a rare public battle earlier this year, with Ahmadinejad refusing to show up at cabinet meetings in the second half of April to protest being overruled by Khamenei on a cabinet firing. A number of key clerics and top political figures have been openly demanding Ahmadinejad’s ouster since then.
The position of president in Iran doesn’t carry nearly the power it does in other presidential systems, and in practice it is little more than an Interior Ministry with a fancier title. The title, and Ahmadinejad’s tendency to make controversial comments in the international press have been a major headache for Iran’s foreign policy since he was elected.
It might well be that, given Iran’s rather unique political system, a prime minister would be less of a hassle. Such a position would likely be filled with aging MPs with considerable political savvy instead of fiery speakers like Ahmadinejad.
Ayatollah Khamenei said that moving towards a parliamentary system would require amending or changing the constitution. He also pointed out that this will be only possible in the future, which is a distant one, as changing articles of the constitutions is no easy undertaking by any measure. This will require laws, proposals by the parliament and a possible referendum. Even then the post of the president will not be scrapped. It is Islamic Republic of Iran, and a republic must have a president. At any rate, according to the constitution, the Ahmadinejad's term must run its course before the executive branch of the government can take a new form. So, Jason Ditz's interpretation is quite misplaced, as it has nothing to do with Ahmadinejad's presidency.
Unfortunately, Jason Ditz's reporting lacks to the point of misleading the readers of this article, and only servers to service the viewpoint that his reporting on Syria is only a glaring example of.
In Iran after the revolution there was a position of prime minister in addition to the presidency. During that period Ayatollah Khamenei held the position of presidency and Mir Hossein Moussavi the prime minister. However the prime minister was not elected, and only appointed by the parliament, through an ordinary vote. It was not like parliamentary regimes of Europe, where the leader of the majority party automatically assumes the post of the prime minister. That state of affairs was scrapped by the late Ayatollah Khomeini and a new system was put in place through the legislation, where the elected president will take over the executive branch of the government, instead of a prime minister chosen by the legislative branch. Ayatollah Khamenei has just called the bluff of the discredited supporters of the compulsive liar that Mr. Moussavi was and is. Ayatollah Khamenei said, You want a prime minister? Fine. But you have to do it right. He will not be elected by a simple roll call. He will have to be the leader of the party that holds the majority of the seats of the parliament. Ayatollah Khamenei particularly emphasized the role that political parties have to play in this process, the most important part of which is contesting in an election and facing the direct vote of the people. As it is, there is no one in the almost dissolved reformist camp which finds that route profitable to any degree. So again, not only the presidency of Mr. Ahmadinejad is not in any danger, but also the change of the articles of the constitution and moving to a parliamentary system of government has a zero chance of actually happening.
As a side note, compare the flexibility of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the United States of America. In America, as far as I know, the constitution is held sacred to the point that only amendments are allowed. The blacks are not slaves, only by amendment and not by article of the law. Even then no president, or lawmaker loses any chance to piss on the very sacred articles when it fits his agenda and profits. Yellow Jesus, Yellow Constitution.
“Ahmadinejad… a major headache for Iran’s foreign policy since he was elected.”
Quite the reverse, for he is by far the most honored statesman in all the Arab world.
…I agree, despite the goofy picture above