“Concerns about social upheavals on one hand, and the way in which forces deal with these social upheavals on the other hand, have created the grounds for a change and transformation. According to Dr. Mehdi Motaharnia, this could be a reason for the promotion of the police or law enforcement in Iran from within the forces. Dr. Mehdi Motaharnia, a university professor and political futurist, is the author of books and articles on security and psychological operations.”

The organization of Iran has changed. What was the reason for this change and what are the consequences? Can the record of yesterday and today in the field of social security be defended? These questions and similar ones prompted the monthly magazine “Khat-e-Solh” to approach Mehdi Motaharnia and seek his perspective on these issues. This conversation took place before the news of the death of Mahsa Amini, a 22-year-old girl who lost her life in Tehran after being arrested by the Basij forces, but the command of the perpetrator of Mahsa Amini’s murder is in the hands of the same commander that we asked Mehdi Motaharnia about; meaning the command of the Iranian Islamic Republic’s organization.

The peace agreement also asked Dr. Motaharnia about the delegation of law enforcement powers from the leadership to the Minister of Interior. Mehdi Motaharnia responded that this was a customary practice among governments. However, according to him, the reason for this custom is that “if an event occurs that leads to widespread criticism from the people, it should not be legally attributed to the leadership and the principle of leadership should not be questioned.”

You can read the detailed conversation of the monthly magazine “Khat-e-Solh” with Mehdi Motaharnia below.

“سلام دوست عزیز، امیدوارم حالت خوب باشه”

“Hello dear friend, I hope you are doing well.”

It is likely that the replacement of NAJA with FRAJA is simply seen as a name change. In your opinion, what was the necessity for transforming the police force into a command?

The armed forces of Iran are considered a set affiliated with the General Staff of the Armed Forces. After the revolution, parallel movements were formed in the political and military structure of Iran. The era of the victory of the revolution and the revolutionary situation in Iran ended in the early 1980s. It can be said that Iran was in a revolutionary situation for about two decades since the year 1979 and the occurrence of the revolution, but after that, the people demanded better organization and structuring of political, military, and security structures. In any case, the revolutionary government had to meet the needs of the people after the victory of the revolution. Different parallel activities were also considered costly; as we saw, organizations such as the Ministry of Agriculture and the Jihad of Construction were merged together.

Naja was also a product of cooperation between Zhandamari, Shahrbani, and revolutionary committees. However, social crises and political turmoil on one hand, and the existence of various institutions such as Sepah, Basij, political ideological organizations, information protection organizations, and other institutions at both macro and micro levels, create friction in the functioning of this complex; as a result, it became necessary to ultimately increase the level of concentration in line with the mission of law enforcement forces and their need to respond and be accountable for what happens in the field. In this way, we witness the creation of a space where efforts are made to achieve better coordination in times of crisis with centralized command on one hand, and the execution of tasks on the other hand, so that, as people like Fayol (Henri Fayol, one of the founders of modern management) say in systemic management, the relationship between responsibility and accountability becomes clear. In this way, in mission-related matters, specific actions

Therefore, I explain in this way that the transformation from injustice to justice, power to leadership, with giving more responsibilities and as a result, larger capabilities for more response to what the law presents, creates. Laws in every country are derived from its constitution and should not be in conflict with the principles of the constitution. On the other hand, every institution and organization should be accountable to the people who delegate their authority to government organizations in order to carry out their missions for the benefit of the people and also be accountable to the people.

You mentioned crises. In recent years, we have faced waves of popular protests. Does this change in the structure of relationships have a specific connection with the expansion or prediction of widespread dissatisfaction in the country?

In any case, this situation has caused a change in structure. Concerns about social upheavals on one hand, and how forces deal with and confront these social upheavals on the other hand, have created the grounds for a change and transformation. It cannot be ignored or concealed. In the scene of political and social upheavals, the foundation of proper and law-abiding actions cannot be ignored. Therefore, if there is no clear leadership and accountability, the entire system will experience a kind of oscillation and eventually lead to the alienation of the people from national and governmental institutions. This joint leadership, although responsible for managing and resolving crises and dealing with the unsafe factors, is also committed to the nation in terms of law-abiding actions. If there is a violation of laws, it must be held accountable, just as it is in various countries.

“Faraja Information Organization is likely to be officially on par with Sepah Information and Intelligence Organization and can conduct intelligence operations without any legal obstacles. What is the reason for all this parallel work?”

There are numerous security and intelligence institutions in various countries, but there must be unity in command. The American intelligence community now consists of over ten centers, each with specific borders in their actions and ultimately managed by a unified command. Today, in our organizations and authorities, there are various intelligence and security institutions that seem to be in fierce competition on the operational scene. This leads to wasted energy and increased national expenses. Although we accept that there may be over twenty intelligence communities in Iran, each one must have clear borders and defined responsibilities in our system of movement and not interfere with each other’s affairs. If this is the case, this number is acceptable, but if it leads to interference and conflict between functions in the practical field, it goes against the logic and literature of security science. Therefore, it must be said that if parallel operations do not comply with laws, they are not acceptable. This will result in concern about the current situation and the control of one by another and all by all.

Sometimes images of the harsh confrontation of law enforcement with suspects known as hooligans and thugs on the streets are published. What is your opinion about these confrontations? Do you consider these actions and confrontations justifiable?

Any action that is outside of the laws and regulations set in a country, even if it is accepted by various opinions, will not be acceptable from a political and security perspective. A governing system in different countries with different forms of government creates laws to establish order and security. If an action is taken by an individual, organization, or specific group that is outside of the laws, even if it is acceptable to my and others’ opinions, it is not legitimate and goes against the law, even if the perpetrators are considered law enforcement forces. The enforcer of the law must consider themselves more obligated to follow the laws than any other individual or entity, rather than trying to achieve their own goals by disregarding or ignoring the laws. This is what they mean when they say the end justifies the means.

Will we witness a greater sense of security from the people with this upgrade?

By changing names and transforming forces into command, if it does not result in a suitable and proportional output in terms of security for the people, we can say that nothing will change. In a way that a name and title are given and a little hope is revived, but then when it does not lead to improvement in the current situation in terms of security and social indicators, it increases the state of divergence towards these institutions and organizations; this is a very natural matter.

What is the relationship between this security that you mentioned and citizenship rights?

Security must serve citizenship rights. Citizens are a blessing. According to the revolutionary tradition that this government is based on, Ayatollah Khomeini says that the people are a blessing. This means that sovereignty and government must be based on the people’s desires and established on the foundation of laws. If laws and their enforcement do not guarantee citizenship rights, then why do laws, their enforcers, and governments even exist? The function of all governments is to serve the people within the framework of laws and support that the people provide. National resources cannot be spent solely on the government, taxes cannot be collected from the people and they cannot be ruled outside of the laws.

The issue that exists is that people in Iran are often afraid of encountering the police; while in many countries, interacting with the police is generally considered a normal part of daily life and citizens do not fear or hesitate to see them on the streets; as a result, it could be argued that they have more trust in the police and are more willing to approach them if necessary. What is the reason for this?

In every part of the world, there are good and bad, healthy and unhealthy police. When the concentration of bad outweighs the good in a society, the community’s attitude towards the police tends to shift from positive to negative. If statistical data confirms what you say about Iran, it shows that the police have not performed well. Therefore, these statistics and their validity and reaching a statistic that can show the truth of the matter are very important. Intuitively, it can be said that yes, the attitude of people towards institutions such as security and police in recent years and decades has been a kind of roller coaster and fluctuation; therefore, this is a perception based on intuition. Special research should be conducted in this regard.

What is the necessity of discussing the use of weapons, which the law on how to use them is also currently under review in parliament for amendment? Can’t we eliminate the need for using lethal weapons by providing better and more targeted training for law enforcement forces?

Given the social, political, and cultural turmoil in our society today and the national and regional context of Iran, the introduction of weapons into the public sphere of Iranian life will not create a sense of security, but rather a greater sense of insecurity. On the other hand, our society is not familiar with weapons and the actions of the people indicate a tendency towards violence. In this society, weapons are in the hands of members of legal and legitimate institutions who are also exposed to these psychological, social, and political upheavals. Therefore, while it is necessary to acknowledge that the possibility of increased conflicts and confrontations is a valid concern, making hasty decisions without proper analysis and discussion can have unintended consequences that go against our stated goals in the short and long term.

It has always been customary for the leader of the system to delegate the authority of command in law enforcement affairs to the Minister of Interior. Now, with the change of police from a force to a command, will we still see such an occurrence or will there be a direct connection with leadership and direct command similar to the Revolutionary Guards and other military institutions?

From the beginning, it has been customary for the powers of the law enforcement forces to be delegated to the Ministry of Interior by the government. The commander of the law enforcement forces is directly appointed by the leadership and their delegation to the ministers of the country is a ceremonial process. We all know that when the leadership appoints someone and gives them a command, no minister of the country can reject it due to their legal obedience, laws, and political security. The most powerful ministers of the country, like Ali Akbar Nategh-Nouri (during the presidency of Hashemi Rafsanjani) who also held an important position in the leadership, could not and did not want to ignore what the leadership had determined. The fact that organizations or institutions such as the law enforcement forces, the Ministry of Intelligence, the Minister of Interior, or the Minister of Foreign Affairs are entrusted to the President, the responsible person ultimately gains this position with the confirmation of the leadership and the organization of the leadership in the

The reason they do not directly entrust it to leadership is that if an incident occurs that leads to widespread criticism from the people, it will not be legally linked to leadership and the principle of leadership will not be questioned. This is a fact that various layers of the people know beyond the experts.

Thank you for the time you have given to the peace line.