What is the Difference Between Candidate Approval in Iranian Elections and a Western Democracy?

The process of registering and then vetting candidates for the 14th presidential election in Iran is taking place amid ongoing criticisms of such processes in previous elections. These criticisms encompass a wide range of issues: from the fact that until three years ago, anyone, even without managerial and executive experience, could register to run, to the prohibition of women's candidacy and, ultimately, widespread disqualifications, even of prominent figures within the Islamic Republic. Overall, the process of approving a candidate for the presidential election in Iran is so ambiguous due to the actions of the Guardian Council that the list of candidates may change until just days before the election. But how does the candidate approval process in presidential elections in countries with a relatively long history of democracy differ? What differences exist in this regard between Iran and these democracies? What are the differences between parliamentary and presidential systems? The executive branch in democracies is based on two models: parliamentary or presidential. In a presidential model, like France or the United States, the president is elected by direct vote from the people and holds the main executive power. However, in a parliamentary model, people first elect members of parliament, and then these representatives choose the prime minister to head the executive affairs. In this model, the president, who is usually not elected by direct vote, or a king, has a ceremonial role, and the main power lies with the prime minister. The prime minister derives legitimacy from the party to which they belong and holds an absolute or relative majority in parliament. In the Islamic Republic, the president has always been elected by direct vote, but until the constitutional revision in 1989, the position of prime minister also existed, and especially with the presence of the leadership position, the presidency was considered a relatively powerless position. In the 1980s, Ali Khamenei, the then president, and Mir Hossein Mousavi, the last prime minister of Iran, had disagreements in some areas. After the elimination of the prime ministership in the Islamic Republic, the president gained more power. However, due to the interventions and unlimited, unaccountable power of the 'Supreme Leader' in such a system, the presidency in the Islamic Republic has been reduced to a 'logistics manager,' according to Mohammad Khatami, one of its former presidents. A few years ago, Ali Khamenei, the leader of the Islamic Republic, raised the possibility of establishing a parliamentary system instead of the presidential system in Iran. Some observers and political activists believed that proposing such a suggestion was aimed at increasing the leader's control over the process of electing the head of the executive branch, eliminating direct public voting in this regard, and reducing potential margins and protests similar to those of 2009. After this suggestion was raised, Mostafa Tajzadeh, a member of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps who is currently imprisoned, proposed that the leadership and presidency positions be merged. How is candidate approval in the presidential system of France? In democracies with a presidential system, the approval of each candidate's candidacy for the presidency differs. Here, to compare the process of approving presidential election candidates in a long-established democracy with Iran, France has been chosen. In the fifth republic of France, established after World War II, despite the position of prime minister, the main executive power was given to the president. Therefore, the French prime minister has less power compared to prime ministers in other democracies, both Western and non-Western. The election of the French president was indirect until 1962, but since that year, on average, about 10 candidates have been approved in each presidential election. An image of Charles de Gaulle is installed at the speech venue of Nicolas Sarkozy, the former president of France. De Gaulle was the first president of France to be elected by direct vote from the people. Due to the existence of parties, most candidates are from their party leaders, or they are initially selected by their political party based on methods that have evolved in recent years, such as holding internal party elections. Francois Mitterrand, Jacques Chirac, Nicolas Sarkozy, and Francois Hollande were party leaders before reaching the Elysee Palace. However, in recent years, due to the weakening of traditional left and right parties, some political figures (like Emmanuel Macron and Jean-Luc Mélenchon) have personally founded their political organizations to enter the electoral arena and nominated themselves from those organizations for the presidential election. Nevertheless, every candidate must obtain the support of 500 elected officials across France to submit their candidacy file to the Constitutional Council of France. Mayors, members of regional councils, members of parliament, senators, and European parliament representatives are among these elected officials, and each official can only support one candidate, and their support is irrevocable. The necessity of these supports, which acts as a filter for candidacy in elections, is to prevent unknown individuals or a multitude of mid-level political candidates from running and also to ensure a certain level of public acceptance of the candidate. Initially, the support of 100 elected officials was sufficient, but in 1976, to make candidacy more difficult, the required number of supporters was increased to 500. To ensure the public acceptance of the candidate, candidates are required to gather support from elected officials in at least 30 different regions of the country, and no more than 50 elected officials from one region can support one candidate. According to laws passed in recent years, this support is public and published on the Constitutional Council's website. Posters from the last presidential election in France; in France, most presidential candidates are themselves party leaders. Therefore, each elected official supporting a candidate usually explains to the public why they supported them. In recent years, it has happened that an elected official from one party supported a candidate from another party, citing the necessity of 'pluralism' in elections and creating 'opportunities for competition for all.' However, this filtering has its critics, and some say that alternative ways to approve candidacies for the presidency should be established. Edouard Balladur, a former prime minister of France, proposed in 2007 that the 500 support system be abolished and replaced by a council consisting of 100,000 elected officials to approve candidates through secret voting. Lionel Jospin, another former prime minister of France, also proposed gathering support from citizens in 2012, suggesting that each candidate for official nomination should collect at least 150,000 signatures of support from ordinary citizens. How is candidate approval for elections in Iran? In the Islamic Republic, the approval of presidential election candidates occurs in two stages and by two bodies: the Ministry of Interior and the Guardian Council. Until three years ago, the laws were such that many individuals could register to run for elections by appearing at the Ministry of Interior. For example, in the ninth presidential election, 1,010 individuals registered as candidates. At that time, the willingness of many unknown individuals to register for the elections became a subject of humor. The registration laws later became stricter, and now only those who have at least four years of experience in government and executive positions can register. One of those who appeared at the Ministry of Interior to register for the presidential election in recent years also mentioned that since parties do not operate freely in Iran and party activities are not like those in the democracies of the world, political figures usually enter electoral campaigns individually and later gain the support of some organizations. Individual decisions regarding registration for elections have sometimes led to two or more candidates from a governmental or tolerated political current appearing in elections. However, the main stage of the candidate approval process occurs during the reviews by the Guardian Council, which is referred to as the 'supervisory oversight' of this council. This stage has always provoked significant criticism, even from high-ranking officials of the Islamic Republic. In 2007, Jalaleddin Taheri Isfahani, a former member of the Assembly of Experts and former Friday Prayer leader of Isfahan, strongly protested the Guardian Council's supervisory oversight over elections, stating: 'Continuing supervisory oversight means the death of the revolution and the death of the constitution.' The Guardian Council, which consists of 12 members including six 'theologians' and six jurists, is heavily controlled by the leader of the Islamic Republic. According to the constitution of the Islamic Republic, six 'theologians' are directly appointed by the leader, and six jurists are appointed by the head of the judiciary, who is himself appointed by the leader, and introduced to the parliament. The parliament usually approves the jurists selected by the head of the judiciary without any objection. Ahmad Jannati, who is now 97 years old, has been the secretary of the Guardian Council for over three decades and is a key figure in approving or disqualifying candidates. In previous elections, the disqualifications by the Guardian Council have been so severe that even high-ranking government officials, including former presidents and ministers, former heads and representatives of parliament, and even the grandson of the former leader of the Islamic Republic have been disqualified by the Guardian Council. In response to the protests of disqualified candidates, the Guardian Council does not consider itself obliged to provide public explanations. In May, Hassan Rouhani, the former president whose candidacy was disqualified in the recent Assembly of Experts elections, did not publish the Guardian Council's response to his complaint but referred to it as 'an indictment against the presidency' and stated that 'future presidents will have no political freedom with this indictment.' For example, Khamenei, in the same year 2007 when Taheri Isfahani protested against the Guardian Council, stated: 'The enemies of the Islamic system in their propaganda continuously bombard one of the points, which is the Guardian Council.' The leader of the Islamic Republic has called criticisms of the Guardian Council 'unfair' and stated: 'Today, as we move forward, we realize more the importance of the Guardian Council's presence.'