IRAN SECULAR DEMOCRACY

Like everything in life, quality takes time. 

By its very nature, drafting a constitution is not a solitary task; it requires a great deal of legal and political knowledge, coordination and a lot of stamina. The more people are involved, the more opinions and ideas come together. Furthermore, the political developments and desires of the Iranian population must be observed and taken into account. 

The early drafting of the constitution is intended to ensure that a thorough and clean draft can be presented to the people, ultimately to prevent a hasty vote, as occurred without sufficient transparency and without alternative after the Islamic Revolution. Furthermore, a political power struggle among groups or individuals should be avoided, especially since the proposed constitution allows everyone to actively as well as passively participate and contribute and consequently does not favor or exclude any group, view, or individual in any way (more on this below). All can and should participate within the framework of this constitution in the future Iran within the scope of their abilities in the reconstruction of a progressive and independent Iran.  

Therefore, it is considered useful, even necessary, to deal with the future constitution as early as possible.  

The previous constitution of the Islamic Republic was detailed, yet it contained no separation of religion and state, crucial loopholes, and a concentration of power that could not sufficiently safeguard the interests of the Iranian people, which is what everyone is currently striving for. The constitution presented here is intended to be comprehensive and to incorporate important principles of both the constitution currently in force and other draft constitutions for Iran.  

Moreover, the early drafting of a constitution is intended to achieve broad acceptance by allowing everyone to come to grips with a new system or constitution at an early stage and already be open to adjustments. 

Moreover, this draft constitution can increase political pressure on the regime in Iran by providing an alternative. History has shown that only just systems have proven themselves historically and have been maintained over the long term.  

Furthermore, this project is intended to motivate the freedom-seeking people of Iran and to show them concretely what they are taking to the streets for: Namely, for the conquest of their basic freedoms and rights within the framework of the «Woman Life Freedom» movement and for the creation of a progressive secular democratic Iran.

“Secularism” is the principle of separation of religion and state. Accordingly, state institutions should not be influenced by religions and should be completely neutral in religious matters. 

Secularism can be established independently of the form of state and government. 

In view of the experiences in the history of Iran as well as in other states, especially in Europe, religion has been misused for power purposes. This has not only harmed those affected but in the long–term has also led to people distancing themselves from religion and thus to the means being detrimental to the end. In addition, the potential for conflict with interests directed in different directions is enormous. 

Direct (secular) democracy is a system, which is not only democratic and gives all people the right to participate but also strengthens the participation rights by various means and extends their range: for example, by enabling the participation or intervention of the people in a direct way in the political decision-making process.

For example, by providing the following mechanisms:

• Popular initiative (The popular initiative allows citizens for example to propose an amendment or addition to the constitution or to the laws in a more proactive manner. However, and this may be unique, such right to an initiative could be extended to other acts and decisions as well. Considering today’s technological means, its implementation may be more feasible under certain conditions)
• Optional referendum (As it can be defined, certain state acts shall be subject to an optional referendum (e.g. retrospectively) once the defined conditions are met, e.g. if a certain number of signatures are collected within a specified and limited time.)
• Mandatory referendum (As it can be defined, certain state acts shall be subject to a mandatory referendum (e.g. in advance or retrospectively) once the defined conditions are met, e.g. if certain state activities are planned, decisions of major significance are to be made or when constitutional amendments are approved by Parliament – all shall be submitted to a popular vote)

The terminology for direct democracy is not standardized. Various terms are used in different counties to describe similar institutions (mechanisms) and processes. Therefore, the mechanism and processes are to be defined.

A direct democracy has of course not only benefits. The downsides need also to be considered and the risks mitigated accordingly. Among such downsides or risks are high costs, lack of information and competence, voter fatigue, risk of authoritarian and populist abuse, time-consuming processes, and challenges with respect to logistics. However, in consideration of a comprehensive view, by defining proper mechanisms both practically and formally (e.g. in the laws and ordinances) and by setting up a proper operational management, and sufficient cultural education, the advantages of a direct democracy would clearly prevail in the long-run.

A direct democracy shall be one of the additional features of the here-planned constitution.

Democracy as a form of government is based on the republic (as a form of state). Iran is a multi-ethnic state. Consideration of the local culture of the individual provinces and customs is unavoidable. This must be taken into account with an appropriate degree of federalism.  

A representative democracy is perhaps somewhat faster in decision-making processes, depending on its design, but the interests of the people are represented only indirectly and only partially.  

According to the view expressed here, a direct democracy with its extensive opportunities for participation and involvement, for example, in which socially weaker people can also participate directly, both actively and passively, brings about greater acceptance of government actions on the part of the population. This broad participation not least promotes political discourse and represents the necessary diversity in connection with voting in Iran. In addition, with the considerable opportunity to influence new laws, the interests of the people can be adequately considered and taken into account in the face of adjustments that are subject to change. Consequently, the interests of the people are dynamically reflected in the laws.  

A direct democracy can further reduce inequality in the context of the ruling elite, especially since, at least formally, everyone has the same starting point for holding political office than, for example, in other forms of state or government.  

A direct democracy would therefore contribute significantly to the preservation of political peace, long-term stability, and consequently Iran’s progress socially, technologically, and economically. This would be entirely in the general interest. However, culturally this presupposes an appropriate tolerance to often adapt to, for example, majority decisions. 

Iran Secular Democracy believes that other forms of state or government may not only bring no added value for the population but also certain risks, depending on the form they take. These include a lack of transparency or continuity in domestic politics when a monarch changes, further, limited rights of participation and co-determination for the population, additional costs to the detriment of the general public, and unequal treatment enshrined in law are the outcomes as the question remains why one person shall be privileged in the long-run. 

A discussion of other forms of government, such as constitutional or parliamentary monarchy, is deliberately omitted here.  

In view of the reasons mentioned above, a direct-democratic constitution is currently being worked on here. 

Historically, the Persian Empire with its 1st Human Rights Charta as well as the advanced civilization took on a pioneering role worldwide. It would be desirable to see Iran resume a more active and exemplary leadership role worldwide by creating a direct democracy that may even go further than existing models. Considering today’s technological means, an implementation of a more advanced democracy should even be feasible. 

A secular democracy allows the entire population to participate directly and restricts arbitrary government. Furthermore, a wide variety of interests can be represented in the state. This diversity pays off over time when the diversity represented leads to stability and this in turn can have various positive effects on the people (for example, promoting welfare and development).  

Members of diverse religions can practice their faith and participate directly in political matters that relate to their interests. (For more information, see under “Constitution”). The voices of minorities or socially weaker persons can be directly harmonized. Accordingly, not only formally, but factually, the requirement of equal opportunity would be taken into account in a better way.  

Above all, the proposed constitution would guarantee the participation rights of the Iranian population by making the right to an initiative or referendum available to the people in a broad form.