What is observed in the subject of hijab and its surrounding controversies has a great absence. A look at the course of events surrounding the subject over the past year shows that part of the ruling establishment, located in specific institutions such as the national media and other organizations, despite their initial logical approach, is now moving towards radicalizing the space and, of course, breaking occasional resistances. The submission of the bill under Article 85 of the Constitution also shows the caution of the bill’s proposers, who are concerned about the feedback and public reactions on the eve of the elections. However, it seems that ultimately this bill will become more ambiguous with the recent explicit statement of the head of the judiciary; because both the Guardian Council and the Assembly are present in the path of approval after the public hearing, and it is unlikely that its experimental implementation will satisfy the extremist supporters and the religious people who add fuel to the fire every week from official tribunes.

However, the absence of a very important and determining expert in this clause, without a doubt, is the social and legal theorists – especially those influential in the field of social and legal issues – both in the section of multilateral debates in official media outlets and in the main areas of research. It seems that there is a deliberate attempt to remove the body of expertise from this draft, and the occasional voices heard and excluded from the relevant commission regarding the principles, clauses, and provisions of this draft do not have any positive message. With this description and explanation, the fate of this “draft” or most likely “law” is already clear and evident.

During the years after the revolution, it has been proven time and time again, in various specific matters, that negative and aggressive approaches have not yielded the desired results in relevant laws. In the end, the law has been trampled upon to the extent that its existence or non-existence makes no difference, and the only remaining burden is the social, psychological, and even international costs that the country has to bear. In the case of the hijab, despite the current uproar, a similar fate is predicted. The Iranian society has also shown in previous circumstances that it can identify and impose the right solution with the help of customs and public opinion. Interferences from minimalistic perspectives, even with the use of force, have not only been unhelpful, but have also become another problem, resulting in heavy costs. An example of this can be seen in the past year, and repeating it, under any name, symbol, or other law, will only impose even worse and unpredictable conditions on

In any case, it seems that some people, without paying attention to scientific and real necessities and various warnings, have no intention of retreating and, with a sense of confidence gained from being in a position of power, are determined to continue on their path. I hope that before it is too late, a rational and national interest-based approach is taken towards the issue and the supervisory institutions established in the constitution take necessary measures against this wrong path.