Aside from how much of the elections in Iran is real and the question of what gives you the right to impose Islam as a starting point (although I wouldn't be much surprised if that can be spun back based on Islam itself), we see this:
Guardian Council of the Constitution ------> (by restricting candidates) Assembly of Experts
Guardian Council of the Constitution------> (by restricting candidates) Parliament
Parliament ----> (by appointments) half of Guardian Council of the Constitution
I wonder if this was the inspiration of Putin-Medvedev's combination?
There is a circular dependency here and present situation may have no way to escape being predetermined by past results. Is this more of a way to give power to people or to hijack power and make it continuously dependent on people's trust and faith or hope placed at the starting point (Like that which could have been there at the beginning after the revolution) ? Shouldn't any reasonable constitution give the power for fresh start to the people at some recurring point?
For example although the President and Senate here appoint federal judges, still if everybody misbehave without exception, people would still have the power of fresh start to change and remove them all directly or indirectly (through the replacements they elect) without exception.
No comments:
Post a Comment