There are two ways to organize social space. The first method follows a predetermined goal. This approach is authoritarian, rational, and reductionist. It is carried out by those who are responsible for understanding and producing organization. The second method of creating social space is a living process that only benefits the main centers of activity in a clear spatial configuration. It has such intensity of form and meaning that it benefits the things we know fundamentally, the relationships and biological activities that arise from diversity, unexpected initiatives, and above all, the human characteristic that leads to the creation of society.

After years of struggle and open and hidden conflicts among the owners of power, facing plans to destroy a large part of the historical fabric of the city of Shiraz, it seems that Ibrahim Raisi, the current president, with a historic determination, ignoring all legal boundaries and disregarding the people’s rights to their city, has given the vote to form three-member committees with extra-legal authority to remove everything that exists between the two shrines of Shah Cheragh and Aladdin, from the scene of life and create an ideological landscape through force and coercion; to turn the area between the two shrines into a wide and decorated passage, devoid of any trace of the lives, efforts, actions, and art of its inhabitants (with an estimated area of fifty-seven hectares), in order to make it a symbol of religious fortune and prosperity, and of course, to have a serious look at the economic benefits of turning it into a profitable business, as some have called it “selling graves”. A

Although most media outlets have simultaneously spoken about the municipality’s ownership of houses through the use of power and force, and the initiation of the implementation of the plan and the destruction of the historical fabric, some serious defenders of the plan consider all of these rumors.

In any case, what has practically happened is a blatant rebellion by the Cultural Heritage Organization, the President, and those in power and influence to disregard the provisions of the Venice Charter for the protection of historical sites (adopted in 1964) and national laws, including the Constitution of the Cultural Heritage Organization which states that all decisions regarding historical structures are the responsibility and duty of the organization.

In the tenth and eleventh articles of this law, the preparation and implementation of plans related to supervision, protection, repair, restoration, and revitalization of cultural-historical works, buildings, and complexes, and expressing opinions on all comprehensive and detailed development plans related to cultural and historical areas, is recognized as the inherent duty of the Cultural Heritage Organization. In addition, the three-member extra-legal institution, in addition to the President, has special privileges to bypass criminal regulations – which the Penal Code has established – and has the power to block any legal objections to the plan.

The operation of authoritarian and directive production in Shiraz is being carried out in order to create new territories for the implementation of dominant processes; and this is happening at a time when the state religion and coercion have called upon the people to fight, and the people have taken to the streets to preserve their free thinking and actions.

Political and ideological discourses always construct their own spaces on the ruins of the physical and symbolic spaces of the past in order to initiate new social subjects. Foucault discusses this in his book…

History of Madness

The relationship between the emergence of new discourses and the reproduction of social spaces is well demonstrated. According to him, these spaces not only impose a specific spatial order on social relations, but also affect human life. (2).

The production of sacred spaces also occurs by breaking the chain of relationships and connections that have been established and formed in the space, with the aim of rejecting the current situation and changing spatial perceptions and intervening in ways of thinking, living, and perceiving the space. However, the ideological system that seeks to produce a sacred space at the cost of destroying a part of the social life of a historic city is unaware of the fact that the sacredness is achieved through its rituals and ceremonies in a long historical context. The interference of the government in sacred matters causes people to perceive religion as a tool of the ruling system and react to it, endangering their new identity, beliefs, and lived experiences, and demanding their right to plunder the city. This action is manifested in the form of new social movements.

In Shiraz, the right of the people to the city and the identity they have acquired through a long historical coexistence is at risk. This right, which today humanity has included in the category of third generation human rights and has formulated within the framework of international regulations, is more than a legal demand. It has a moral dimension and its purpose is a set of interconnected rights that turn the city into a place for the realization of justice, equality, and collective well-being. It emphasizes the inevitable necessity of residents’ participation in creating cities.

Henri Lefebvre, who first understood the political thought in the way of producing space and human rights, considers space as a political entity that ruling classes use as a hegemonic tool. According to him, space cannot be seen as a container for life and social relations, and it is not free from ideological content. “Rather, every social space is present and visible in all levels and social relations of humans. Space is both a physical environment that can be perceived, and an abstract signifier that influences the way people and planners use space, and serves as a medium for the interaction of bodies with other bodies.” (3).

Lufour believes that this space, which should be a place for the realization of human rights, has been turned by rulers into a commodity for profit and the subjugation of people. This has hindered their free communication and has led to the division of humans into different groups, perpetuating violence against each other.

The concept of human rights in a city is based on two fundamental principles: the right to ownership and the right to participation. The right to ownership refers to the residents’ right to use the city’s spaces in their daily lives, such as the right to live, choose housing, work, play, etc. The right to participation is the ability for all citizens to have a serious say in all decisions that affect the fate of the city, and for citizens to directly or indirectly take part in these decisions.

With inspiration from these thoughts, the right to the city has been recognized as one of the rights of the third generation of human rights and has been included in international documents.

The most important global document in the field of the right to the city is the World Charter on the Right to the City, which was drafted in 2005. UNESCO also recognizes the human right to the city in a document known as “Towards the City, Solidarity and Citizenship”. Civil society organizations have also successfully adopted the Montreal Charter as agreements between citizens and municipalities, and the Mexico City Charter on the Right to the City.

In addition, the United Nations conference on housing and sustainable urban development, known as the United Nations Habitat III program, in 2016 addresses the issue of the right to the city.

According to these international documents, governments are obligated to ensure the participation rights of citizens and civil society and to adopt urban policies based on the opinions of the people.

In Shiraz, a part of the city’s body, a part of its history and a part of the social life of its people – which is a valuable heritage of the past and speaks in every moment – has been sacrificed to the selfish scalpel of surgery. But the destruction only removes the “physical form” of this part of the city; the “lived experience and perception of the people” remains. Sometimes when a human hand is cut off, the nonexistent hand suffers in a crazy way. Among the people of Shiraz, this broken part will remain like an incurable wound and will become the source of social resentment. Just as in Mashhad, the systematic destruction of the historical fabric around the shrine and its surrender to the tourism industry has taken away a historical stronghold from the people, emptied their view of the charming historical architecture, large houses and narrow alleys, and erected ugly towers and bars, and set up the machinery of ideological commerce by emptying the pockets of pilgrims

Notes:

1- Loofor, Henry, Space, Difference, Daily Life, Translated by: Mohammad Fazeli and Afshin Khakbaz, Tehran: Tisa Publishing, 1393, p. 262.

2- Foucault, Michel, History of Madness, translated by Fatemeh Valiani, Tehran: Hermes, 1399 (20th edition).

3- Torkmeh, Aydin, An Introduction to the Production of Henry Lefort Space, Tehran: Nashr-e Tisa, 1395 (2nd edition), p. 101.