Formation of the government
Announcement of the method of selecting the Minister, heads of important organizations, and the Deputy Presidents by Mr. Pzeshkian had two different reactions
One group considered it theatrical and believed that this method is not suitable and efficient for selecting the Minister
The Minister should be selected by the President with a limited number of his advisors and then introduced after negotiations with senior officials and the parliament
This method has been followed in all 13 previous governments, although during Mr. Khatami’s term, there were more advisors involved in this process, and during Mr. Hashemi’s term, they were fewer for various reasons. They were more knowledgeable due to their extensive experience in the parliament in identifying individuals and candidates.
In the previous government, there were also inappropriate news about this process, but the most interesting thing was that even for selecting a deputy, instead of the ministers, several months were delayed. Another group, with a louder voice, defended the second method and the announcement made by Mr. Pzeshkian, considering it much less problematic than the first method if there were any issues.
In this method, a group of experts, former ministers, relevant individuals and entities gather for each position to evaluate suitable candidates who have nominated themselves. They assess them according to a specified table and clear evaluation criteria, and introduce the best candidates based on approved considerations.
This process is accompanied by supervision and validation to prevent any discrepancies in the results.
The list of these individuals is provided to Mr. Pazhuheshi’s Steering Council. After going through the necessary processes and discussions in this council, a re-vote is held. Ultimately, the prioritized sets are sent to Mr. Pazhuheshi and his final advisors for the ultimate decision.
These lists include dozens of managers, experts, and program developers who have undergone managerial and professional competency evaluations. All of them are available, even though many professionals may not have heard of them before.
From now on, the selections are not necessarily in accordance with the order of the submitted list, and there was no requirement for only one person to be introduced.
At this stage, political considerations are also added to the process, leading to a gap between the final outcome and the Steering Council’s list.
However, this should not be considered a flaw because everyone knew from the beginning that such an incident would inevitably happen. With these considerations, the mentioned process has not only attracted the participation of over 500 people but also about 1500 people have put themselves in the position of being judged.
A good archive of competent forces has also been provided, and more importantly, the outcome and final result will be very influential.
So if we still have criticisms about some of the options mentioned, while expressing our criticisms, which should also be based on relatively certain news and not media sensationalism and groundless rumors, supporting this process will help improve the selection of ministers and officials in a non-partisan system.
Naturally, if there was a developed and partisan electoral structure and system in the country, many of the existing flaws would be eliminated.
Nevertheless, we should not overlook or undervalue the essence of the issue and the experience of forming a new government due to some specific flaws or differences of opinion about certain options. It should not be forgotten that the actions of doctors, consultants, and his companions have taken an important step towards increasing transparency and utilizing the capacities and resources of Iranian society in the existing non-partisan structure.
Persian
مشاهده این مقاله به زبان فارسی
