Culture in the Sixth Development Plan: Expansion of the Censorship Organization

The cultural section in the Sixth Development Plan of the Islamic Republic witnesses two major changes: the method of generalizing and delegating cultural censorship has become widespread, and there is no news of cultural ambitions. The Iranian government presented the final text of the Sixth Development Plan bill to the parliament on August 12, 2016. This plan is supposed to determine the main lines of planning in cultural, social, and economic fields in Iran from 2016 to 2020. The plan consists of 35 articles, of which only two articles, namely Articles 23 and 24, specifically relate to the cultural sector. Article 17 of this plan is dedicated to education and research, which is currently separated from the cultural sector in Iran's planning system. A major change in this section refers to the necessity of developing scientific cooperation and exchanging faculty members with universities around the world and allowing the establishment of joint branches with foreign universities in Iran. The first change in the cultural program compared to the Fifth Development Plan (2010-2014) is the reduction of its ambitious goals. The prevailing view in the cultural section of the Fifth Plan was the slogan of cultural engineering. In the Fifth Plan, almost all cultural areas had operational strategies in addition to setting goals. However, in the Sixth Plan, there is no repetition of general goals or the necessity to create changes in various sectors. Therefore, it can be said that the prevailing view in the cultural section of the Sixth Plan is minimalistic and moderated. In this plan, the scope of government obligations in this area is severely limited compared to the obligations seen in the Fifth Plan. The change in the policy of implementing censorship is the main duty of the Ministry of Culture in the Sixth Plan, which is to facilitate the process of issuing cultural permits. Article 23 mandates the Ministry of Culture to 'facilitate the processes of issuing permits and review and reduce restrictive regulations on the production and publication of cultural and artistic works.' This article also states that 'the judiciary and law enforcement are obliged to provide the necessary security for the production and publication of works and the implementation of licensed cultural and artistic programs and to compensate for damages caused by obstruction, provocation, or disruption in the production and publication of these works.' The meaning of such a clause is that the authors of the Sixth Plan have recognized obstruction, provocation, and disruption in the production and publication of cultural works as a conventional process. This process is directly under the responsibility of the judiciary and law enforcement. This clarity in a legal bill means that the government has lost hope of resolving the duality between the Ministry of Culture on one side and the judiciary and other security and law enforcement institutions on the other. This duality has recently escalated over issues such as the cancellation of concerts, the most recent case being the cancellation of Salar Aghili's concert in Sabzevar, and disputes over the cancellation of the Yal-Tharat publication's license. Article 23 states: The Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance, the Broadcasting Organization, and other relevant agencies are obliged to transfer the list of cultural and artistic permits and responsibilities that can be delegated to the private sector, cooperatives, and NGOs, which will be determined by the end of the first year, throughout the Sixth Development Plan years. Delegating executive matters outside the government is not a new issue and does not require a new law. What Article 23 refers to are the sections related to issuing permits for cultural activities and supervising them. These are matters that from the perspective of government officials are considered sovereign matters and the responsibilities of the government. An example of the government's intended policy can be seen in granting publishing permits and pre-publication censorship of books. In a new policy announced by the Ministry of Culture, the pre-publication review work for academic publishers and public sector publishers will be entrusted to scientific committees that are engaged in scientific and cultural oversight of the books being published in these publishing institutions. Mohammad Selgi, the Director General of Books at the Ministry of Culture, stated that the Ministry will inform these scientific groups about what should be censored and how this process will be taught to them. However, this policy will not be applied to private sector publishers in the next six months, that is, until the end of Mr. Rouhani's government. In the list of publishers present at the last Tehran Book Fair, there are 134 active university publishers and public sector publishing institutions. Based on this, it can be said that the changes that will be implemented in the next six months will have no impact on publishing in Iran, apart from facilitating administrative matters for this group of publishers and the Book Administration of the Ministry of Culture. Especially since almost all the books published by these publishers are not among those that are sensitive and important according to censorship rules. However, from another perspective, this policy is significant in that it marks the first time the Ministry of Culture has expanded the censorship organization. This expansion is both quantitative and qualitatively changing. This means that censorship is divided into two organizational stages. Mr. Selgi has stated that this plan will end arbitrary decisions in book censorship. However, the question arises that when the number of individuals and councils reviewing books increases and involves experts with different tastes, how is it possible to reduce the amount of arbitrary decisions? It can also be questioned that given that the Ministry of Culture has stated it will supervise the work of these working groups, will the fear of the Ministry's supervision not lead to increased strictness in the review of books by these working groups? If we accept the book censorship delegation policy as an example of the policy stated in the Sixth Plan, then it can be said that the continuation of this policy in other sectors will lead to the development of the organization and structure of censorship rather than a reduction in the scope of censorship. Even if we are optimistic about the executive aspect and say that the review and permit issuance processes will become more orderly and faster.