Parliament Elections: Reception of 'Criminals', Empty Promises, and Unprepared Candidates

As the developments of the 10th parliamentary elections indicate, this election has so far had four main characteristics: 1) For the first time, candidates have entered the parliamentary elections, many of whom have been introduced by election observers as murderers, adulterers, and thieves; 2) Candidates are making new types of empty promises to the people to gather votes; 3) Candidates (and their coalitions) have presented no program for sitting in the parliament for four years other than that they must occupy that seat. Therefore, the disputes and competitions are more about who will win rather than which program will gain more votes; and 4) The number of candidates who are not affiliated with factions has increased. According to a report from Pars News (February 21, 2016), citing sources close to the supervisory bodies of the Guardian Council, among the disqualified candidates, 603 have committed murder and have been convicted in courts (unintentional murder with the consent of the heirs and the opportunity for leave to register); 422 have been recognized as guilty of adultery; 570 have been convicted of theft in courts; 340 of the disqualified candidates have committed all three crimes of murder, adultery, and theft; 415 have been members of dissolved groups including Komala, Mojahedin-e Khalq, Freedom Movement, Participation, Mojahedin, PKK, and monarchists; 250 have not held Iranian citizenship; 176 have been dual nationals; 460 have provided no address in their registration forms; and 330 of the candidates whose qualifications have not been confirmed have not provided a precise address for investigations into their registration files. According to the above report, aside from the 415 who were disqualified for political reasons (this figure does not match the three thousand reformists disqualified according to reformists), two thousand of the registrants have criminal records, 900 have no address, and about 400 have no Iranian citizenship at all. Of course, there are many doubts about the authenticity of this report, as the Guardian Council has a strong incentive to label disqualified candidates as criminals, and the number of registrants with criminal records seems strange. But let’s assume that this council is not lying. In this case, based on the report provided by the supervisory body, the status of the parliament in the Islamic Republic has fallen to such a level that apart from the political individuals listed above, about two thousand criminals with records see the ground suitable for their presence in parliament while the government exerts the utmost rigor in selecting individuals for government positions. Another implication of this claim - if the original accusations are true - is that the government has begun to reconcile with criminals while treating its opponents with rigor. The empty promises include connecting the Caspian Sea to the Persian Gulf, building an airport locally, establishing a BMW factory, creating new administrative divisions, shipbuilding, constructing roads, employing the unemployed, hiring graduates in intelligence agencies, building cable bridges, granting divorce rights to women, marrying singles, providing government positions, completing unfinished projects, creating free zones in electoral districts, building dams, taking three days off a week, traveling to Europe without a passport, increasing oil prices, establishing cement, iron melting, or steelmaking factories, and paving streets and alleys. Given the minimal construction budget for at least the next two years, even the more plausible ideas in these promises (such as building roads or dams) are fanciful. Some candidates may think that after entering parliament they will be able to fulfill these promises, but most know that these are just promises; sometimes costly but empty and currently impossible under economic conditions. Candidates know they cannot promise oversight of state institutions, transparency of public revenues and expenditures, prevention of corruption and rent-seeking, and similar matters to the people because these actions are impossible in Iran under the rule of the jurist. Candidates know that they cannot attract citizens solely with credit promises and must also provide cash goods to individuals. For this reason, the market for distributing free goods and free lunches and dinners by candidates, especially in towns and villages, has heated up. In some towns, candidates have held parties for hundreds of people. These food promises are sometimes presented under religious titles such as vows (and in previous years under the title of iftar). None of the potential and confirmed candidates (after the announcement of qualifications), coalitions, and political parties involved in the 10th parliamentary elections have so far presented even a page of solutions and policies to address the acute problems of Iranian society such as increasing addiction, homelessness, child labor, poverty, environmental destruction, corruption, abuse of power, school dropouts, brain drain, widespread unemployment, violation of individuals' privacy, censorship and filtering, and waste of national resources. They are only focused on who should be candidates and not on how to address people's problems. Candidates believe that by relying on power institutions and the Guardian Council, they can achieve their desired seats, and some of them have a correct perception in this regard. This situation stems from the staged and engineered nature of the elections. Candidates who have been handpicked by the Guardian Council and introduced to the people have no choice but to make empty promises because they have not emerged from the demands of the people and grassroots organizations. Additionally, the candidates are those who have connections with the government faction and want to become members of parliament using these connections. They have neither the need for a program nor the ability to have one. The disqualification of candidates in the 10th election reflects the exhaustion of the ruling establishment from candidates who cause trouble for the 'system'. For this reason, the Secretary of the Guardian Council expressed concern over the registration of about 12,000 individuals. Three categories of candidates could potentially cause trouble for the system: reformists who were disqualified in a three-thousand-strong group, athletes and sports officials, of whom only one was approved (Arash Asmaeili), and women who can challenge the government's discriminations. The rate of disqualification for women after the campaign 'Changing the Male Face of Parliament' has been several times higher than the disqualification rates for all. About 60% of candidates have been disqualified, while this percentage for women in some constituencies like Shiraz has been 96% (48 out of 50). Following the widespread disqualifications, media close to security and military institutions have sought to challenge the reformists' claim of 99% disqualification of their candidates. For this reason, the newspaper Javan claims that about 603 of their exclusive candidates have been approved. This figure is constructed based on the number of independent candidates, and some of the independents are counted as reformists: 'Out of the total approved, 1922 are independent... If 40% of independents are also reformists, 768 should be added to the previous number of 603, totaling 1371 reformist candidates in the election.' (February 26, 2016) These candidates are so distanced from the factions that the newspaper Javan suggests that 40% of them may be reformists. If Javan's claim about the independence of 1922 candidates is correct (about 40% of the approved candidates), we will witness an election in which no faction will have a majority in the next parliament, and the candidates and floating members of parliament will grapple with policies imposed from above and will adapt themselves. It is already clear what kind of parliament the next one will be and what role it will play. The 10th parliament, considering the type of candidates, coalitions, and promises, will only serve the ruling class and military and security forces and will also secure the interests of its members. This parliament will have no role in the country's direction and will implement the decrees and orders of Khamenei and the military and security forces. The members of this parliament owe their seats to the Guardian Council and the resources of security and military forces and the rents and privileges of the government, not to ordinary people whom they feel obliged to serve.