CCTV cameras and their use for monitoring individuals who do not wear mandatory hijab have become a challenging issue. Some consider it as a replacement for the morality police, while others have spoken out against its legality. Hossein Ansari Rad, representative of the first and sixth sessions of the Islamic Consultative Assembly, tells Khat-e-Solh magazine that the surveillance of these cameras in regards to the hijab of citizens is not proportional to their social and civil rights. According to the chairman of the Article 90 Commission of the sixth session of the Islamic Consultative Assembly, these cameras and such actions are in conflict with the dignity of the Iranian nation, the dignity of individuals who should be free in their lives, the dignity of the Prophet of Islam, and even Islamic laws.

This Iranian Shiite politician and cleric also stated in a conversation about peace talks that, while considering mandatory hijab as forbidden, he said, “In a conflict between two important and essential commands, the essential command takes priority and the important one should be set aside. Now, it may be considered essential for hijab to be mandatory, but the most essential thing is the sanctity of the Prophet and the Islamic community, which is not compatible with such monitoring and actions.”

Ansari Rad considered purification as a necessity in this conversation and stated that in his belief, “in a free society, the purity of the soul happens naturally, away from evils and ugliness. Meaning, in society, freedom comes first, then purification and cleanliness.”

You can read the explanation of the interview with Hossein Ansari Rad, representative of the previous terms of the parliament, in the following of the monthly magazine “Khat-e-Solh”.

Nowadays, many countries use artificial intelligence facial recognition technology in their surveillance cameras under the pretext of national security and combating terrorism. However, many critics oppose this approach and see it as a violation of privacy, increased policing of society, and widespread censorship. What is your opinion?

I have concerns about the security situation in the country. This means I do not believe in the government’s behavior regarding security – whether it is about assassinations or the issue of hijab. I also believe that some of the problems are caused by the government’s wrong policies. The government cannot ensure security with clubs, torture, prisons, and surveillance cameras. Of course, if national security requires cameras and special controls, this is acceptable.

Basically, the current situation of Iran’s domestic and foreign policies has created and continues to create an insecure environment. This means that the situation is such that it can be said that the people are not completely safe. Therefore, a portion of the country’s insecurity is caused by the government’s wrong policies. Currently, the excuse is the issue of hijab, previously it was issues such as videos, loudspeakers, and shower heads, and there was sensitivity around them. In fact, the government got involved with the people in such issues and the people became upset and unhappy, and then the government backed down.

In the field of foreign relations, it is essential to have relationships that symbolize peace and proper communication with the world. Iran must have proper relations with international organizations and the West. Insecurity is created when, after the victory of the revolution, we declared ourselves enemies of America and wanting to overthrow Israel. Now, there is also a conflict with the government. There is no reason for us to create so much hostility. Conflict with America as a global power and enmity and war will not lead to any results and will only create an insecure environment.

One reason for the introduction of these cameras in Iran is the issue of hijab. Hijab is a personal choice for people. But assuming it is a matter of obligation, I have previously stated that compulsory hijab is forbidden in Islam. The reason for this is that forcing hijab weakens the essence and sanctity of Islam, the sanctity of the Prophet and the beliefs of the Iranian people. What I am saying is not from a rational perspective, but rather from a jurisprudential perspective. If there is a conflict between two rulings, the more important one should be applied and the less important one should be set aside. Let’s assume that hijab is important, but the sanctity of Islam and the Prophet, the preservation of the essence of Islam, the beliefs of the people, the ethics of the people, and the sanctity of human beings in the country are more important than hijab. We must respect human beings and they must have dignity in our country.

“If hijab is a religious matter that has been given a certain degree of fatwa, and perhaps even a small amount of this matter is correct, it must be dealt with through caution and proper handling. Our nation is Muslim and knows its duty. In personal conduct, one should act in a way that is in accordance with their life. We must allow people to live their lives and be comfortable in their daily lives, on the streets, in their businesses, and during their travels. People should feel safe. Naturally, if there are cases where the presence of cameras or similar devices is necessary – in situations where fundamental security policies have been implemented – their existence can be justified.”

You mentioned an aspect of the issue. But the question is whether this surveillance with CCTV cameras regarding the hijab of citizens is proportionate to their social and civil rights?

These monitoring actions are very wrong. I told you that these actions are in conflict with the dignity of the Iranian nation, the sanctity of individuals who should be free in their lives, the sanctity of the Prophet of Islam, and even the laws of Islam. The issue here is that in a conflict between two important and crucial commands, the more important one should be prioritized and the less important one should be set aside. Now, let’s assume that the hijab is an important matter, but the most important thing is the sanctity of the Messenger of God and the Islamic community, which is not compatible with these types of monitoring and actions.

In this matter, the discussion also concerns the private sphere of citizens. Are these supervisions a type of intrusion into the private sphere of citizens?

Yes, it exists and it is a very important issue. The Holy Quran explicitly states, “Do not spy on one another and do not backbite each other.” (Verse 12, Surah Al-Hujurat). Spying on people’s private lives is considered a forbidden act in Islamic law and the Quran.

What is inside people’s cars? Some say that inside people’s cars is not part of the private sphere.

Spying in this field is very ugly and falls under the same general discussion that I mentioned. In my opinion, such actions towards the people of Iran and interference in their clothing, attire, or personal vehicle and their presence on the street is not right.

You have been a representative of the people in the first and sixth sessions of the Islamic Consultative Assembly, and in the sixth session, you were in charge of the chairmanship of the Article Ninety Commission. Does this discussion of cameras and such monitoring have a history in the laws of the country?

I don’t remember things being the way they are today. But at the same time, I can say that since the beginning of the revolution, we have made the country secure. The country should not just be secure, it should also be calm and peaceful. If any insecurity arises from external or internal sources, it should be addressed. However, we have put the principle of insecurity in our country and have created an environment for it in society. We must reform these policies so that the country is in peace, tranquility, and freedom, and individuals are free in their personal conduct and private lives. But if an extraordinary insecurity arises from within or outside, then necessary measures must be taken.

The issue of the Inspection Tour of the Ministry of Guidance began in the middle of the 1980s. Does this Inspection Tour have a legal basis in the current laws of the country?

It doesn’t matter at all. Of course, the law is in the hands of lawmakers who may not have the competence to legislate. They may pass laws like the laws of retribution and stoning, which are unjust. They have now come to the conclusion in our country that such a law is not appropriate, so currently the law of stoning is not a common practice in our country. The purpose of bringing up this example was to say that even if such a matter is a law, it is unjust. From a religious perspective, this issue ultimately requires interpretation. This means that it is not the case that anyone who reads a verse of the Quran or a hadith can interpret. These words and laws are the result of incorrect references and misunderstandings, and a lack of understanding of the essence of human beings and their sanctity. God sent the Prophet of Islam to purify and cleanse human beings. It is not possible to purify someone with a sword or torture. It is

Hijab, in terms of society, is a religious and cultural phenomenon. Is it necessary for the government to intervene in this area and extend it to the legislative sphere?

“Governance, whoever it may be, has made a mistake from the beginning in entering this field. When a young lady asked me about it in 1358 in a girls’ high school in the city of Neyshabur, I immediately said that in my opinion, it is not necessary for you to wear a hijab. The pressure that is put on hijab in society is completely irrational. It is neither reasonable nor in accordance with religion.”

Does that mean you believe there is no sovereignty over the right to enter and legislate in this area?

When the command is against reason and religion, the law in it is also baseless.

I asked this because in recent months, we have witnessed the proposal of the Hijab and Chastity Bill and its approval in the parliament, as well as discussions between the parliament and the Guardian Council.

This is a big mistake and there may be irrational behaviors and selfish motivations involved. Ignorance is definitely present in it.

Despite all the limitations, we have somehow witnessed a change in the clothing of citizens in Iran in the past ten years. In your opinion, what factor has caused these changes?

A portion of this matter is the result of societal changes in human society. The issue of freedom, as it is currently being discussed in human society, was not previously brought up. Human history has passed through centuries of tribal, individual, and despotic rule. History is a history of despotism and despotic rule. As time has passed for humanity, the issue of freedom has gained more strength. Therefore, a part of this change is due to the consciousness and evolution of humans and their correct understanding of life. By fate, freedom is also a principle in the Quran and it is strongly emphasized.

Another part of this change is also caused by the actions of ignorant and unwise individuals and rulers who think that by imposing restrictions, they are serving the law and humanity, which of course these restrictions do not serve humanity.

Thank you for the time you have given us in the monthly magazine of the Peace Line.