Iran's Political & Social Renaissance

Introduction

The “Woman Life Freedom” movement has created a historical platform for reflection on  the social contract, which forms the basis of the relationship between our people and our government. In this critical period of history, we as the people of Iran, need a new definition of this contract that has implications such as  liberty,  justice , legitimacy .National reconciliation and lasting peace. The social contract, which is an agreement between residents of a particular geographic area, delegates the responsibility for protecting the rights of the people of that region to the government and specifies laws, restrictions and responsibilities of the state. Such a government has legitimacy as long as it fulfills its assigned duties and loses its legitimacy in the event of a violation of its assigned duties. It also sets out how to replace a government that has fallen out of legitimacy. This approach emphasizes the importance of the rule of rights and the observance of laws based on the rights and interests of citizens, and provides a platform for a responsive and responsible government to the people, based on republican principles, freedom in the sense of non-domination, civil partnership, and the public interest.

In this way, we must seek to establish a democratic system that prevents a return to tyranny. This movement does not just want to solve the current problems, but also to herald a bright, free and democratic future. In modern Iranian history, although the demand for freedom has always been at the heart of people’s demands, there has been no comprehensive discussion of the role of the state in ensuring freedom. Today, we need a new understanding of the concept We have republics and freedoms to redefine the relationship between the state and the people. This new understanding can provide a promising vision for a better future.  This paper tries to define the principles that a modern social contract of Iran can be discussed, and then proposes a framework for Iran’s future democratic system.

Innovation in Governance – Writing a New Social Contract in Iran

The new social contract for Iran is seen as a symbol of hope and a tool for fundamental change. Driven by the collective will of the people, this agreement is not only a set of ideas, but also paves the way for a just and democratic future. This document is the collective effort of those working to change the structure of power. Written as a symbol of resistance that reflects discontent.The collective outlook for Iran is different. The vision is based on justice, equality and freedom.

The new social contract focuses on ensuring citizens’ fundamental and inviolable rights, including the right to life, freedom of expression, equality before the law, the right to use and express in their mother tongues, and the freedom to believe and practice in different religions and religions. These rights, which include cultural and religious diversity, are essential to the preservation of the dignity and worth of each individual and to build trust and peaceful coexistence between different groups of society. Are. These  rights, derived from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,  guarantee diversity and multiculturalism in a democratic and progressive society. It is important to understand that while in the voting and election process, the group that receives the most votes (the majority) over the group with the least votes (the minority), in the area of civil rights this division into a majority and a minority does not make sense. In this context, all citizens must be recognized equally and without discrimination before the law and have the same rights, regardless of their mother tongue, religion or individual beliefs.

Increasing the participation of the Iranian people in the idea of a social contract makes it a motivator for a  broad popular movement that  could lead to general strikes and fundamental changes in relations between the people and the government, and pave the way for the overthrow of the current regime. The agreement serves two key objectives: first, to clarify the rights of the people that the government should guard and second, to define the legitimacy and mechanisms of preserving the legitimacy of the state. Achieving these goals unites different groups under the banner of freedom, justice and legitimacy, addresses people’s demands and grievances, and directs collective energies toward the nonviolent destruction of existing power structures. Participation in writing this contract is an objective symbol of popular sovereignty and their right to self-determination.

With the realisation of regime change, the role of the social contract becomes an instrument of resistance to a fundamental component of the New Order. At this  stage, the social contract will become a framework for the formulation of a new constitution  and equal representation. It ensures that the principles and values that people emphasize are institutionalized in their future system of government. This agreement is not only a stage for mobilizing people for regime change, but also a test And its real victory will be in shaping Iran after political upheaval. In this regard, one of the key issues that should be addressed in Iran’s new social contract is the definition of legitimacy.

Definition of legitimacy

In an important part of the dialogue of the new social contract in Iran, a broad discussion of “the definition of legitimacy” must be discussed. In the history of Iran’s constitution, the issue of legitimacy has influenced Iranian politics since the Constitutional Revolution in 1906. The Constitutional Revolution was an attempt to limit the absolute power of the Qajar monarchy, but the fundamental question of the ultimate authority remains unresolved. In tensions between groupsConstitutionalists, Republicans, nationalists, and Rouhani can be seen at the roots of today’s competing conceptions of sovereignty in Iran.

On the one hand, the heirs of royal and clerical traditions associate the legitimacy of the state with divine right or religious authority. On the other hand, the followers of democratic nationalism – Mohammad Mossadegh – see legitimacy in the will of the people. But there is also the possibility of expressing a third solution based on republicanism. The main assumption is that the legitimacy of the state should not be based solely on the private decisions of the rulers or the passing will of the people, but should derive its legitimate power from the people’s continuous and collective judgment of its ability to secure equal freedom through impartial legislation and inclusive policymaking.

The main expectation of the government is that in its structure and actions, it publicly demonstrates a commitment to protect all citizens from arbitrary control. Laws must apply this ethic of defending equal liberty so that no agent in society can exercise uncontrolled power over others. There should also be platforms to express civil grievances and channels to hear voices of disadvantaged groups. He provided it. These promising republican standards provide a foundation for assessing and reforming the foundations of political legitimacy in Iran as part of a new social contract in line with the constitutional justice movement. Meanwhile, the interpretation of freedom in Iran’s new social contract is also an important issue that needs to be analyzed.

Understanding Freedom in Iran’s New Social Contract

What definition of freedom should be at the center of Iran’s renewed social contract? There is a lot of confusion and disagreement on this fundamental issue. Some in Iran continue to advocate a traditional and negative view of freedom as “a mere absence of interference in personal affairs.”  But critics argue that this view could easily lead to unequal restrictions on citizens’ rights, although seemingly “non-interventionist” and applied only in the name of freedom.

In contrast, Philippe Pettit‘s republican theory of “freedom as non-domination” demands that we look beyond non-interference to the social relations that make arbitrary control possible. Even if the state does not intervene actively at a particular moment, the remaining capacity to intervene at the discretion of the ruler or majority jeopardizes republican freedom. From this perspective, the history of the last century of Iran from the time of the Constitutional Revolution to the Now it illustrates the various methods that the Pahlavi authoritarian regimes and the present regime have consolidated on citizens. The Pahlavi government expanded its bureaucratic reach through centralization measures that systematically undermined civil society. The Islamic Republic initially changed the Shah’s policies, but after suppressing dissent, it restructured its ideological apparatus. In both cases, despite promises to protect individual rights and freedoms, the Iranian government has effectively retained broad discretion to arbitrarily interfere in most aspects of public and private life. This universal vulnerability to dominance has led the Iranian people to take to the streets again and again to demand their freedom.

The new social contract should be designed to impose decisive and binding restrictions on the state’s ability to arbitrarily intervene. This approach requires a redefinition of the distribution of power and also includes extending legal protections through the new constitution and the creation of independent and powerful regulatory bodies that act in a manner that is modeled on the design of independent democratic institutions.

By emphasizing the lack of domination، we can ensure that citizens are protected from undue domination and pressure. The state should be seen as the trustee of the people and provide space for individual and collective growth. This approach can help promote gender equality، respect for the rights and culture of ethnic minorities، protect the rights of LGBTQ + individuals، strengthen workers’ rights، and improve access to education، health care، housing rights and legal protection.

The “woman life freedom” movement is a symbol of the collective struggle for rights and justice، and the pursuit of impartial justice must also be addressed.

 In search of neutral justice

Justice has always been in line with the struggle of the Iranian people for freedom throughout modern history. From the 1891 tobacco boycott protests to the “Woman of Liberty Life” movement in 2022, ideas of social and economic justice in the face of oppression and inequality have resonated alongside demands for civil and political rights.

However, justice remains unattainable for many. Since the Constitutional Revolution, the rule of Sharia law in Iran has overshadowed civil law. Law is often applied to the interests of elites and in situations of a lack of accountability. Courts under the influence of religious rule ignore the principles of neutrality when dealing with opponents or weak groups. Moreover, access to justice often depends on socioeconomic status or political status. The individual depends that this itself demonstrates the urgent need for independent and impartial civil laws.

The flourishing ‘Woman Life Freedom’  movement in Iran is the latest demonstration of this unfulfilled desire for justice. The heartbreaking death of Mahsa (Gina) Amini by the Iranian morality police, which has been focused on the repressive implementation of hijab laws, has taken people across Iran to the streets demanding greater social freedoms and human rights. However, the government has continued to ruthlessly suppress the protests and the courts are aggressively prosecuting dissidents.Give.

How can these systematic injustices be addressed in the light of today’s protests? A vital starting point is to separate the Iranian justice system from  “factional” policies so that the balance of justice reflects society’s moral center of gravity, not temporary power holders. This will help to make more impartial judgments and align with people’s evolving moral judgments.

The civil republican view must prove impartiality in the courts that investigate serious abuses that lead to the dominance of the Hay group over the other group (women, ethnics, LQBTQ). Judges must act on the assumption that the various possibilities of arbitrary interference represent injustices that require attention. The symbol of this movement in present-day Iran is the long-standing struggle of Iranian women for independence And the right to self-determination over one’s own body is strict against moral laws. Iran’s illegitimate rulers try to dismiss the protests as foreign interference, but the nation’s moral conscience stands firmly on the side of Iranian women fighting for long-term freedoms against violence. A truly neutral judiciary will reflect these realities.

In modern Iran, the foundation of justice must ensure the protection of powerless people from the possible oppression of dominant groups and unaccountable elites. The “Woman Life Freedom “movement requires the legalization of such neutrality to achieve republican justice. Justice as a fundamental political feature must be rooted beyond jurisdiction in the entire structure of government and social interactions. This characteristic must be reflected in political decision-making, how laws are enforced and It is clear in the daily interactions of people with the government and judicial institutions. Only in this way can justice be realized as a dominant principle in modern Iranian society and respond to the goals of the “Woman Life Freedom” movement.

Given the need for independent and impartial civil laws, another key element for a modern Iran is the active role of civil society.

Strengthening civil society

 A new social contract in Iran should allow ordinary citizens to actively participate in the control of government decisions and policies that affect their lives and freedoms. The experience of the Islamic Republic’s failures has shown that elections alone are not sufficient for this active control and can easily be exploited to serve the interests of established rulers and suppress civil society.

Genuine participation requires legal support and political resources from diverse civil society bodies capable of expressing the evolving interests of citizens and protesting government actions. This civil counter-power infrastructure constitutes participatory authorization of the Republican political body. Institutionally, this could include  a national-level “citizens’ forum”  with a comprehensive and representative sample of ordinary Iranians examining important policy issues. The public is on mission. The aim of the Assembly is to express conscious social preferences of Iran, which, based on expert statements and subject discussions, creates pressure on parliament and the presidency to show the will of the people, neither partisan nor factional.

To inform and enable the wider population around government policy issues, it must strengthen public forums such as town halls and neighbourhood councils. This view provides channels to express grievances and influence from below towards national decisions.

When the Iranian government fails to respond to the demands of the people, Iranians should be given the right to support peaceful protests, press freedoms, artistic expression, online organizing, and voluntary associations in civic groups, as well as the right to pursue litigation against the government through easy access to lawyers. These tools serve as vital means of bringing social pressure and preserving republican freedoms. the S Instead of suppressing active civil criticism, government officials must actively engage with their critics and bridge the gaps between governance and evolving moral expectations.

Through these approaches, Iran can foster a dynamic culture of inclusive civic engagement and public debate that will transform into a republic capable of counteracting dominance, corruption or oppression by the ruling minority of the state. Ordinary citizens of Iran deserve not only to vote, but to have a greater role in the direction and function of state power.

Democracy in creating institutions to support popular sovereignty

The mass demonstrations that are taking place across Iran today in various forms reveal the Iranian people’s deep enthusiasm for a democratic system in which citizens are genuinely involved in collective decision-making and unanimously oppose government policies. It is striking that current institutions have failed to ensure accountability for politicians and that government actions are in line with the demands and It’s not the feelings of the general public.

Also, although free elections are important in a democracy, they alone cannot provide enough infrastructure for popular control without other complementary controls and balances. In Iran, elections have not been completely free, but it is important to understand that free elections are only part of the equation. Instead, Iran needs a complex ecosystem of balance that can be the three vital conditions of a dynamic democracy.  

1. Participation of the public in decision-making processes؛
2. equal access to all voices to shape discourse; and
3. Policies that are broadly aligned with social standards.

Rights should be expanded to strengthen the voices of minorities in determining outcomes that affect basic well-being and life opportunities. An inclusive “citizen’s assembly,” consisting of random examples of ordinary Iranian citizens, can engage in political debate and legislation. Also, mandatory public consultations force politicians to pay attention to popular criticism. Local participation centers such as neighbourhood councils, parliamentYouth and thematic conferences provide access to public participation in local concerns. If effectively integrated into urban planning and service delivery chains, such institutions could become citizen schools.

In the context of protests, public protests and opposition speeches serve as a shield against violations of moral expectations by the authorities. Therefore, the right to peaceful protest, press criticism, artistic dissent, and voluntary organization require strict legal protection against repression or government interference. Instead of automatically suppressing protests, authorities should seek dialogue with critics and thereby help reset the moral compass of the state. Hmm.

Over time, these civil exchanges between the state and society educate new generations in the techniques of social autonomy while at the same time holding the state accountable to evolving realities through the constant renewal of the conditions of the social contract.

Guarantee the rights of subgroups.

No republic will survive for long if sections of the people make themselves vulnerable to the domination and neglect of dominant powers and blocs of interests. The inherent tendency of man to factionalism often overcomes wiser commitments to equal liberty, and progress in this regard requires conscious moral self-discipline.

In this regard, fundamental rights serve as vital binding constraints and maintain an autonomous space for subgroups that are prone to chronic disability. While open to selective interpretation and implementation, these rights define legal speeds that limit unjust policies and give society the opportunity to slowly tackle new injustices and reform. They do the defense.

In the context of Iran, these areas can include

• Linguistic rights: the right to use native or native speakers in different environments such as education, legal processes, and government services.
• Religious freedoms: the right to practice one’s religion without harassment or discrimination, and freedom to practice religious practices and rituals.
• Legal process: The principle of rights that ensures that individuals are treated fairly and fairly in the judicial system.
• Privacy: An individual’s right to protect his or her personal information and private life and to protect against undue or illegal interference by the government.
• Cultural expression:  the right to express one’s cultural heritage, beliefs, and customs. This includes freedom in traditional celebrations, the lining of cultural clothing and participation in the cultural arts.
• Inclusive access:  the right to equal access to services and opportunities for all, regardless of individual background. This includes equal opportunities in the fields of education, employment and access to government services.
• Positive Support: Measures taken to improve the status of historically disadvantaged individuals or groups. This can include policies or programs aimed at enhancing the status of economically or socially disadvantaged communities.

In a progressive democracy, it is vital to set legal boundaries for the rights and autonomy of subgroups. These boundaries, which are advocated in trans-ethnic and cross-party coalitions, must remain resistant and inviolable to political change. Such an approach allows democracies to work more effectively with subgroups and involve them in decision-making processes.

Fostering Public Integrity

Corruption in government institutions reduces civil partnerships and violates minority rights and strengthens itself as soon as enough is impoverished. Preventing this democratic degeneration requires fostering high standards of integrity across public sector domains including tax administration, program and budget, tendering government contracts, infrastructure development, service delivery, regulatory  actions and enforcement of judicial decrees.

The guiding principles of neutrality, transparency, accountability and participation should be manifested through the overt fight against corruption, including that of the offices of inspectors, auditors, statisticians and prosecutors with operational independence, as well as increased oversight powers of parliamentary committees, the media and civil society organizations that regularly publish findings and promote reform.

Public sector codes of conduct that numerically assess performance based on criteria such as bribery rates, data leakage percentages, response times and tracking criteria.The aim is to guide them toward acceptance and internalization of anti-corruption standards and norms by using concrete metrics and encouraging mutual learning, as well as creating a healthy competitive environment among government institutions.

These mutually reinforcing institutions of oversight greatly increase the risks and costs of public mistreatment, directing incentives from officials toward more loyal, negotiated democratic policies. In fact, maintaining democracy in Iran requires the establishment of connections between powerful citizens and independent technocrats within a transparent system that punishes self-interest and encourages the maintenance of public trust. By combining inputParticipatory practices, bureaucratic autonomy and mechanisms of integration with constitutional rights protections emerge a republican social contract that promotes non-domination by responsive government actions that are visibly connected to society’s evolving center of gravity.

Towards a Sustainable Democratic Partnership

In this paper, the main lines of a renewed social contract between the government and Iranian society are examined. It emphasizes freedom without domination, justice and legitimacy, and includes components such as accountable state institutions, powerful citizens, segregation of balanced forces, and minority rights. The purpose of this agreement is to promote freedom in the form of non-domination.

This framework, aligned with the democratic aspirations of the Iranian people and the civil republican tradition, not only provides a roadmap for building solidarity and a strong expression of will towards fundamental change, but also serves as a motivator for a large popular movement overthrowing the ruling regime that will lead to mass strikes and political change. This agreement emphasized the unity of various groups under the banner of freedom, justice, and Legitimacy and directing people’s energies towards constructive change symbolizes the sovereignty of the people and their right to self-determination.

With the realization of political changes, the social contract becomes an essential component of the new order, leading to a framework for the formulation of a new constitution and the creation of equal representation. Rewriting the constitution under this agreement creates restrictions on state interference, provides participatory avenues for civil voices, and allows for continuous civil dissent, all of which will enact state actions with the judgments of the general public. They relate to common welfare. This agreement ensures that the principles and values of the people are included in their future system of governance and, ultimately, can help shape Iran after political upheaval.

By supporting independent regulatory bodies and protected civil liberties, active parliamentary policies can help strengthen citizenship for all Iranians through legal protections, access to public policy documents, local advisory associations, and guarantees rights to organize, dissent, and access to justice.

In the long run, these enabling infrastructure foster a robust and mutually respectful democratic culture, where politicians rule through constant interaction with citizens and citizens participate through informed critique. Public officials seek positive influence by showing sensitivity to people’s concerns, while community groups pursue change through the creation of coalitions. Public law provides environments In spite of their differences, Iranians help each other flourish as equals.

Although the path remains full of obstacles, the courageous people of Iran have repeatedly proven their perseverance and commitment to democratic ideals since the Constitutional Revolution. By institutionalizing citizens as permanent partners in state power and protectors of republican liberties, the Iranian nation can finally fulfill its longstanding promises as the torchbearer of participatory in West Asia – based on rights, integrity, and social justice that it doesn’t eliminate any voice.