Budget for 'Special Institutions' Approved by Parliament

The newspaper Shargh has reported on its front page titled 'Accountability for Special Institutions' that the budget for individuals and 'special' cultural and social institutions, known as 'Table No. 17', was approved by the Islamic Consultative Assembly on Wednesday. Amene Shirafkan, the reporter for Shargh, noted that 'Table No. 17 has been retained again, with a list of special institutions. Institutions that often have the name of a well-known individual behind them and a budget-friendly name on their sign. The special table will remain in the budget with a credit of 230 billion tomans and numerous controversies.' She added, 'The hustle and bustle of the last days in Baharestan did not allow representatives to at least spend an hour on the details of this special table. As a result, without any discussion, and amidst the end-of-year chaos, this table was approved alongside other tables as easily as drinking water.' The newspaper also reported changes in the 'previous process and procedure' regarding this matter, stating, 'The outcome of the busy last days of the parliament and the review of the 96 budget has resulted in a special working group overseeing Table 17, and a resolution in the sixth development plan can also monitor this table.' Ali Motahari, the Deputy Speaker of Parliament, alongside Ahmad Mazani, a member of the Cultural Commission, and Mohammad Ali Vakili from the board of directors, managed to finally obtain a decree to form a supervisory working group for Table 17 of the 96 budget. This action may have its impact visible in the future with increased oversight over this table. The newspaper reminded that among the names of 50 institutions receiving budgets from the government in Table No. 17, there are interesting names; from the 'Headquarters for the Revival of the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice' to the 'Center for the Study of Jurisprudential Rules' and the 'Cultural Foundation of Mahdi Muntazar', to the 'Spir' hospital managed by Siamak Marzban, a member of the 10th parliament, the 'Iran and Eurasia Studies Institute (IRAS)' managed by Mahdi Sanaei, the current Iranian ambassador to Russia, the Mofid University (presided over by the late Ayatollah Mousavi Ardebili), and the Center for Islamic Revolution Documents headed by Rouhollah Hosseinian. The 'Parto Thaqalayn' institute belonging to Ayatollah Mohammad Reza Modarresi Yazdi, one of the jurists of the Guardian Council, the Mahdiyeh Qom housing complex for providing housing units to students, and the cultural institute 'Tarjomane Vahi' managed by Hojjatoleslam Mohammad Naqdi, with Nasrollah Chamran, the brother of Mehdi Chamran, the head of Tehran City Council, as its chairman, and the vice-chairman being 'Mohsen Parviz, the deputy minister of culture in the ninth government' also have a share in the budget of Table 17. Shargh also noted that since last year, institutions such as the Imam Khomeini Institute for the Compilation and Publication of Works (affiliated with Ayatollah Khomeini), the Imam Khomeini Educational and Research Institute (managed by Mohammad Taghi Mesbah Yazdi), and the Saadi Foundation (managed by Gholamali Haddad Adel) have been removed from Table 17 and added to fixed annual budget lines. The newspaper Etemad published a report on Thursday about Ali Tayebnia's account of 'the culprits behind the seizure of Central Bank funds in Luxembourg' and quoted the Minister of Economy of Hassan Rouhani's government as saying, 'They were negligent, the dollars did not return,' while 'from autumn 2007 to June 2008, there was an opportunity to transfer these assets in the previous government, but no one did anything.' This newspaper pointed out that on April 20 of this year, the U.S. Supreme Court approved the payment of about $2 billion to the families of the victims of the 1983 bombing at the U.S. Navy base in Beirut, which resulted in the deaths of 241 American soldiers, from 'the seized assets of Iran.' It recalled that previously, 'the U.S. Federal Court in 2007 also ordered the payment of $2.65 billion to the families of the victims of the 1983 Beirut explosion and several other explosions.' Etemad wrote that eleven months after that incident, a recent American newspaper reported on a court action in Luxembourg to seize $1.6 billion of the Central Bank of Iran's assets, and this ruling was also issued following a request from the victims of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks by a judge in Luxembourg, indicating the seizure of the Central Bank of Iran's assets. According to this newspaper, Ali Tayebnia, the Minister of Economy, emphasized on Wednesday, in the margins of the cabinet meeting, that 'since 2006, with the approval of laws in America, problems have arisen, and our dollar funds abroad have been put at risk. In autumn 2007, the Luxembourg company that held our dollar bonds warned Iran that it would be better to transfer these resources, and until June 2008, there was an opportunity to transfer these bonds, but only $220 million of these bonds were transferred. The inference was that since these resources belong to the Central Bank, not the government, there is no possibility of seizing them.' Etemad also quoted Ardeshir Firoozani, the legal director of the Central Bank, stating, 'Some American claimants, following the issuance of default judgments as anti-terrorism judgments by the courts of that country against the Islamic Republic of Iran, are seeking to recognize and enforce these judgments in various countries. For this reason, they request courts in different countries to recognize and enforce these judgments, and one of the countries where these claimants are requesting the seizure of the assets of the Central Bank of the Islamic Republic of Iran is Luxembourg, where the assets of this bank have been kept with financial institutions in that country for a long time. This request is currently being reviewed in a case in the Luxembourg court, and the issue of seizure does not mean withdrawal from the mentioned accounts and assets, but the Luxembourg court is currently examining the case and the question of whether the ruling issued by the American court can be recognized and enforced in Luxembourg.' The newspaper Kayhan, however, in its front page titled 'From Fact Sheet to Luxembourg Case: Government Concealment, Western Media Reporting,' accused Hassan Rouhani's government of 'concealment' and wrote, 'While details of another case of the seizure of the nation's assets are being discussed in political and media circles of the country, once again, in the shadow of the government's secrecy, foreign media are the source of it and have revealed it.' This newspaper emphasized that 'the $1.6 billion Luxembourg case was initially denied by government officials and then blamed on the previous government, but after the matter escalated and new dimensions were revealed by Western media, Valiollah Seif, the head of the Central Bank, hastily expressed hope that the American claims would not be accepted by the Luxembourg court.' Kayhan pointed out that 'the government, in the case of the fact sheet of nuclear negotiations, despite the explicit emphasis of senior officials of the system, the collective demand of parliament members, and public pressure, did not publish it,' writing, 'After the strange insistence of the government on not announcing the details of such cases on the one hand and the revelations of foreign media about the government's secrets, a question that arises is how many more such cases exist that the government is unwilling to inform about, and whether foreign media should continue to be the source of the government's disclosures.' Abbasali Kadkhodaei, the spokesman for the Guardian Council, during an interview with the Nowruz special issue of Iran, parts of which were published in Thursday's issue of this newspaper, implicitly identified Heydar Moslehi, the Minister of Intelligence in Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's second government, as the reason for the disqualification of Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani in the 1392 presidential election. The spokesman for the Guardian Council, in response to the question, 'If you were to hold another session to review Ayatollah Hashemi's qualifications and hypothetically, the Ahmadinejad government was in power and Moslehi was the Minister of Intelligence, would you still invite Moslehi to the session?' said, 'If we were there now, it might have been better not to invite him so that these ambiguities would not arise.' Abbasali Kadkhodaei also stated, 'Sometimes a responsible person comes and reports about an individual; for example, that expert who comes from the Ministry of Intelligence says, yes, we know the issues have been this way, and what is in the file has these matters as well. Well, he provides more explanation, and the gentlemen (members of the Guardian Council) gain more information about the individual's status and then make a decision, but my main point is that the members of the Guardian Council consider the opinions of our internal experts, the opinions of external experts, whether from the Ministry of Intelligence, the police, etc., as a 'means' for better discovering the subject, but it is not the only basis for decision-making; sometimes decisions may even contradict the reports received.' In this interview, it was also mentioned that Hassan Rouhani's efforts to find a way to confirm Hashemi's qualifications were in vain; what happened to Rouhani's insistence on negotiations will be read in the Nowruz special issue of the Iran newspaper, which will be published on Saturday, March 21. The spokesman for the Guardian Council confirmed the presence of Heydar Moslehi in the Guardian Council meeting to review Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani's qualifications in the Guardian Council, saying, 'It might have been better if Mr. Moslehi had not been invited.' The newspaper Qanoon in its front page titled 'Embassy is not a Post Office' wrote, 'The letter from the president of the ninth and tenth governments addressed to the president of the United States was delivered to the guard of the Swiss embassy in Tehran as the custodian of U.S. interests in Iran,' but a few days later, 'the Swiss embassy announced to the Iranian Foreign Ministry that this embassy and its country do not act as a courier.' This newspaper, while stating that 'this news has been kept silent by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his supporting media,' described Ahmadinejad's correspondence as 'letters against the dignity of the Iranian nation' and emphasized that it is time to remind Ahmadinejad and his close associates that what they did with this country for eight years still has a heavy cost, and there is no reason to continue incurring such costs for this land.' The newspaper Iran reported on the poisoning of a bride and groom and 83 guests due to gas leakage in a wedding hall in Urmia, stating, 'A few hours after the gradual release of carbon monoxide gas in the hall, when rescuers entered the hall to save the poisoned individuals, they encountered a strange and shocking scene and saw that many attendees had fallen into a coma on the floor of the hall or had their heads on the tables and had lost consciousness. Some were also trying to reach outside the wedding hall.' The head of the emergency center of West Azerbaijan told this newspaper, 'The 83 poisoned individuals, including the bride and groom, were transferred to hospitals with 10 ambulances and one bus ambulance before any disaster occurred, and their general condition, except for three individuals, is satisfactory, and they are all under treatment.' The newspaper Aftab Yazd has a report about 'Student Haji Firuz at intersections' and wrote that some students have turned to the role of Haji Firuz to earn income due to financial difficulties these days. This newspaper published parts of an interview with 'Hamid, a student from one of the public universities in Tehran,' who said, 'He and his friend are both wearing red clothes, a skirt that has many folds. He has blackened his face and is thin,' and has been 'wandering at intersections for two years and has become the Haji Firuz of Tehranis.'