Fragmented and Tense Society and the Lack of Rule of Law

The legal advisor to the President of the Executive Branch states: "Currently, there are 10 million cases in the judiciary, 5.3 million cases in the Arbitration Council, and 5.5 million cases in the courts, which indicates that if each family has 4 members, about 40 million people are involved with legal and judicial issues." (December 29, 2014) It seems that the difference between the cases in the judiciary and those in the courts relates to criminal and civil cases or those at the investigation and trial stages, which the speaker has not clarified. These cases do not pertain to everyday violations of law (such as traffic regulations) but are related to disputes between individuals or violations of criminal laws. The total number of cases mentioned by the legal advisor is 19 million, and if an average of two people are involved in each case, about 38 million people are dealing with the courts, which means one open case for every two people or two cases for every family. What does this amount of cases signify socially and culturally? If in a society millions or tens of millions of people violate existing laws (such as 2 million draft dodgers or tens of millions using satellite reception equipment or millions consuming alcohol and drugs), and about 50% of them deal with the judiciary and conflict resolution processes, and prisons have an annual intake of 600,000 people (according to the head of the Prison Organization, October 5, 2014), there is a fundamental issue: either the society is in a state of chaos and disorder, or the laws are not being followed and lack authority, or the laws are not laws in the conventional sense. It appears that we are facing a combination of these conditions in today’s Iran. The lack of rule of law in Iran can be attributed to four reasons: 1. Laws are not written in a way that only a small minority violates them. This means that laws are unrelated to the prevailing customs and behaviors of the majority; 2. The most powerful individuals are the first and most prominent violators of their own laws; 3. Many laws are written to protect the interests and concerns of the powerful and are not intended to solve problems for powerless and non-wealthy citizens; and 4. Many laws aim to impose the lifestyle of the ruling class on other segments of society. For this reason, the majority of society does not see compliance with the law as beneficial, and even in some cases, citizens without specific benefits or harms violate the laws (such as littering in the street or violating traffic regulations). Law violations in Iran are not only committed by those who have issues with social customs and are law-averse but also by ordinary and law-abiding citizens who sometimes feel compelled to violate the law. The boundaries between ethics, tradition, Sharia, and law in the Islamic Republic of Iran have become severely blurred. Many unethical matters (from the perspective of Aristotelian ethics), Sharia rulings (from the perspective of Sharia-compliant Islamists), and traditional practices in certain regions and classes of Iran have turned into national laws and regulations, increasing the volume of matters considered violations and crimes. This has added to the number of cases that do not have private plaintiffs and are merely claimed by government and state agencies. In the case of hijab alone, millions receive warnings annually, and for tens of thousands, cases are formed after arrests and referred to court. When the government intervenes in all aspects of people's lives like a "big brother" and legitimizes this intervention (with laws such as the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice), one should expect an inflation of crimes and an increase in disputes among classes. The existence of disagreement and conflict in society is a natural phenomenon. Individuals can easily disagree over resources and the types of interactions, behaviors, and contracts they have with each other, and this can even lead to disputes. Additionally, crime occurrence in any society is natural because the enactment and enforcement of laws brings with it groups that violate those laws. However, societies differ in the extent of law violations and in their methods of conflict resolution. Over the past three decades, Iranian society has experienced a situation regarding cases and the number of prisoners that is different from the society before the establishment of the Islamic Republic and even different from neighboring countries. Today, Iran ranks among the top ten countries with the highest number of prisoners (Mohammad Baqer Zolqadr, ISNA, December 28, 2014). With the population of the country increasing 2.3 times compared to 1979, the number of prisoners has increased 22 times (from ten thousand in 1979 to 220 thousand in 2014). The only instance where judicial officials have spoken about crime prevention has been in defense of the house arrest of leaders of the Green Movement without trial. The excessive and reckless promotion of violence and the government’s easy resort to violence, alongside the prohibition of love and its promotion in public and media, have made citizens more inclined to resort to violence, and many citizens seek violence instead of seeking to resolve disputes. Furthermore, the Islamic Republic, due to fear of the emergence of centers and sources of social authority, has completely eliminated or prevented the establishment of a dispute resolution system by elders and trusted individuals in guilds and associations. The courts of the Islamic Republic do not recognize dispute resolution by a trusted individual of both parties (who has not been approved by the government). Iranian society is a multi-normative and multi-valued society, and this multi-normative and fragmented nature, without mechanisms to create and strengthen social bonds, is one of the barriers to reconciliation. This multi-normative and multi-valued nature is even evident within families. Unfortunately, civil institutions are not strong enough to promote peaceful coexistence, mutual understanding, and acceptance of multiculturalism and tolerance so that small and large social institutions and the entire society can naturally find common ground. The government, in this regard, completely moves against the path of social and cultural tolerance and exacerbates tensions with its one-sidedness. The prevalent subcultures in Iran, namely three cultures of Islamism (Sunni and Shia), Westernism (liberal and socialist), and nationalism, along with their combinations and regional and ethnic subcultures, have created a fragmented society that the central authoritarian government can only superficially unify through force and its security and military apparatus. A law based on totalitarianism, even in all details of private and public life, cannot resolve disputes in society. Therefore, a fundamental step to prevent crime and conflict, as well as to resolve disputes, is to recognize this fragmented society and to strive to find common points and the cements that bind individuals and groups together. Less government intervention will certainly help heal familial and social wounds. The points of connection among individuals in Iran have become so weak that even family members sometimes easily deceive each other and steal each other's property, let alone individuals who have no familial relation. Millions of checks that bounce annually are not all exchanged among strangers. A significant portion of the existing cases in the judiciary and courts are complaints by individuals against each other who have familial and kinship ties.