Pezeshkian Got Parliamentary Vote of Confidence on Cabinet Invoking Khamenei’s Authority

On August 21, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian surprisingly managed to get a parliamentary vote of confidence for his proposed 19-member-large Cabinet. The president’s triumph over a Parliament dominated by his political opponents, however, appears less due to his power of persuasion than his ability to lobby for his Cabinet picks prior to the parliamentary process. When defending his Cabinet picks in the Parliament, either out of political naivete or craftiness, Pezeshkian disclosed that some of his Cabinet picks, who were subject to harsh parliamentary questioning and opposition, had been preapproved by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. A political triumph for Pezeshkian, his disclosure was a scandal for the Parliament, which prides itself on independence from other powers of the state.    

• August 22: Under the headline “National Consensus,” reformist Shargh Daily wrote: 
  • “Following Pezeshkian’s stormy address … the Parliament gave a vote of confidence to all the ministers of the national unity Cabinet.”
• August 22: In his address to the Parliament in defense of his proposed Cabinet, Pezeshkian said, as quoted by Shargh Daily:  
• • “The proposed ministers represent diverse political preferences and factions, but we share the same fundamental perspective and the general policies of the regime. We give you our pledge, to which we shall remain true. We promised to cooperate with you, and we certainly shall cooperate with you and execute the law in consultation with you … A covenant, however, goes both ways. You help us remain principled. Allow different political preferences to work in unison.” 
  • Remarkably, Pezeshkian also said he had cleared his Cabinet picks with the IRGC: “I had certain ideal candidates in mind, but when I realized there was no convergence,” between those candidates and the Parliament, “I discarded those choices. For me, convergence is more important … We reached an understanding with the security services and the Revolutionary Guard before presenting these individuals,” to the Parliament for a vote of confidence. 
  • More controversially, Pezeshkian disclosed the outsized role of Khamenei in the formation of the Cabinet: “What I am trying to say is that we coordinated our efforts prior to presenting the Cabinet to the Parliament. For example, Ms. Sadeq Malvajerd,” minister of roads and urban development, “was His Lordship’s pick,” referencing Khamenei. “Why are you forcing me to say things that I ought not say?” Pezeshkian rhetorically asked this question because he is not supposed to disclose unconstitutional interventions of the supreme leader or IRGC in the formation of the Cabinet. The Constitution of the Islamic Republic tasks the president with presenting cabinet ministers to the Parliament, and it is the privilege of the Parliament, not the supreme leader or IRGC, to either give a vote of confidence or dismiss the proposed ministers. Pezeshkian asserted that Abbas Araghchi, his candidate for foreign minister, “was the first person who was accepted by His Lordship. Even before mentioning the names of the ministers to him, His Lordship said it. Don’t make me disclose the details. Give us the vote so we can form a Cabinet!”   
• August 22: An editorial by IRGC mouthpiece Javan newspaper criticized Pezeshkian for disclosing secret negotiations with Khamenei prior to presenting his proposed Cabinet to the Parliament:  
  •  “In his final defense of the proposed Cabinet, the president transgressed a certain custom, the custom of not disclosing consultations at an open parliamentary session … Now, there are those who talk of” Khamenei’s “intervention in the work of the Parliament, or an infringement on independence of the Parliament. This is a superficial claim. The three powers of the state, the bureaucracy of the Leader, the military and other institutions are each independent of each other … Independent institutions are somehow entangled in each other … Absolute independence is reflected in the duties of institutions and does not count when there are joint responsibilities … Coordination and consultation is inevitable when it comes to joint responsibilities … Should appointment of a Cabinet minister, or a deputy minister, be subject to consultation with the Parliament or with the bureaucracy of the Leader or other powers of the state … well, this is just common sense and does not mean infringement on independence.” 

The views represented herein are the author's or speaker's own and do not necessarily reflect the views of AGSI, its staff, or its board of directors.