MADRID - Millions of Iranians went to the polls on March 1 to elect 290 lawmakers and 88 members of the Assembly of Experts, the body responsible, according to the Iranian constitution itself, for “electing and overseeing” the Leader of the Islamic Revolution. 

The Assembly of Experts is a body elected through direct popular vote every eight years. To run for office, candidates must be experts in Islamic jurisprudence, pass multiple written and oral exams, and obtain approval from the Guardian Council. The Guardian Council, in turn, consists of 12 members appointed by the Supreme Leader and the parliament. It is noteworthy that five of the 12 members of the Guardian Council are also part of the Assembly of Experts.

The Assembly represents one of the fundamental pillars of Iran's institutional structure. Its mere existence guarantees active participation of the population in the country's political life. In this regard, the founder of the Islamic Republic, Imam Khomeini, emphasized that if the people elect the Council to appoint a just mujtahid, that is, an interpreter of Islamic law, to lead the government, then the experts would nominate a person to assume that leadership. In this situation, authority is validated by the people, and the Wali Faqih (supreme leader) is democratically elected, providing his government with a solid legal basis.

Therefore, according to the structure of the institutional architecture of the Islamic Republic itself, one can speak of a circularity of power where the highest figure, the Wali Faqih, is indirectly elected through the Assembly of Experts, which in turn is directly elected by the population, as mentioned earlier. In this sense, it is important to remember that the current Leader of the Islamic Republic, Seyed Ali Khamenei, was appointed by the Assembly of Experts in 1989.

The position of the Supreme Leader is one of the most enigmatic within Iranian politics and has often been distortedly interpreted, being considered autocratic. However, the Iranian constitution, in Article 56, makes it clear that “absolute sovereignty over the world and human belongs to God. And it is He who has granted sovereignty over their social destiny to humans. No one can usurp this divine right from humans or apply it for the benefit of a specific person or group.” This article reflects the idea expressed in Surah al-Ikhlas of the Quran, where any attempt to usurp divine sovereignty is rejected.

The provisions in the mentioned article dismiss any individual or autocratic authority, as sovereignty belongs to the Ummah, and no individual or singular group can appropriate, divide, or confiscate any part of it.

In this regard, one can mention, for example, Article 107 of the constitution, which stipulates that the Supreme Leader is equal to others before the law and is subject to the law. Similarly, the authority of the Wali Faqih is subject to four constitutional safeguards:

- Article 4, which refers to Islamic principles and commandments, establishes a fundamental basis for the exercise of power by the Wali Faqih.

- Article 107, which pertains to legislative laws, provides a legal framework within which the power of the Wali Faqih must operate, thus ensuring its subjection to established laws.

- Article 156, which refers to the sovereignty of the people and the social destiny conferred by God, underscores the importance of popular legitimacy and divine will in the exercise of power, reaffirming the Wali Faqih's responsibility towards the community.

- The republican requirements for a government backed by the people.

Taking into account the above, it is a mistake to confuse the sovereignty of the Wali (wilayat) with absolute sovereignty, as is the case with tyrannical and totalitarian theories. In other words, wilayat does not equate to sovereignty. The presence of "safety valves," represented by the constitution, ensures that the Wali does not exceed his functions.

In his work "Government in Islam," Imam Khamenei posed the rhetorical question of how a divine government could also be popular. He questioned whether the term "Islamic Republic," which combines Islamic governance with popular governance, is a correct term or merely apologetic.

According to him, most governments established in the name of a divine system were despotic, as the population and public opinion barely had any role to play. He added that the Islamic system not only concerns itself with establishing public freedoms but its main goal is to foster justice and equity. Unlike Western systems of governance, where despotism is interpreted as the opposite of freedom, in Islamic systems, the opposite of despotism is justice.

It can be said that modern Islamic politics in Iran is based on two pillars: the doctrine of the leadership of the jurisprudent (Wilayat-e Faqih) and the popular consultation of the community (shura of the Ummah). Together, these two pillars act as a safety valve that prevents Islamic governance from degenerating into a despotic regime. 

Furthermore, as previously noted, many articles of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic were designed to act as safeguards and practical guarantees to prevent tyranny and dictatorship, as well as to ensure justice. For example, the preamble of the constitution states that it guarantees the elimination of all forms of intellectual and social dictatorship, as well as economic monopoly, and strives to rid itself of tyrannical government and ensure the people's right to self-determination. And and as Imam Khomeini, the founder and main architect of the current constitutional framework of the Islamic Republic, stated in a discourse, "it is the figure of the Faqih who prevents dictatorship in any of its manifestations."

As long as the Faqih is in office, the Assembly of Experts closely and continuously monitors him to ensure that he adheres to the following stipulations: merit, competence, and effective management. Failure to meet any of these requirements would result in his dismissal from office. Conversely, if the Faqih proves to be well-qualified for the position, there is no specified time limit for his tenure.

In other words, the Assembly of Experts closely monitors the Faqih's jurisprudential qualifications, his exercise of authority, and his aptitude for independent reasoning (ijtihad).

Therefore, the importance of the Assembly of Experts lies in its role, as granted by the constitution, to have the prerogative of identifying any potential deviation in the conduct of the Faqih that steers away from the pursuit of justice, which should be its primary political trait.