if the legislator meant that your guardian council must meet these conditions , he would not have mentioned the word non-approval at all. just the lack of approval would have been enough. there was no need for it . this is not the way to say. well, now you said that you must verify , do i have to approve? there is no need anymore . if you didn't approve

, you didn't vote, there is no need for this phrase anymore. this is the first reason. the second reason is that i go ahead of the election law. who approved the election law , which after all was the product of one of the efforts of the guardian council, that is, this law was written by me. the guardian council, i am taking issue with the interpretation of the guardian council . you see, in the interpretation, we must be subject to murad mughnen , all the lawyers know this , the authors of our constitution are characteristic wherever you look at the negotiations , the writers of the constitution, who set the powers for the guardian council, never intended that we let's reach a situation where probably 40-30% of people will not participate. in

the elections, they did not mean this, that is, their will was that these conditions should be investigated as much as possible may more and more people be able to participate. the third reason is the nature of the conditions mentioned in article 31. the five conditions that i said, then you should not leave it to the council to determine.

the guardian council, as one of the institutions involved in this issue, that is, the ministry of interior , as an executive, must ensure that the candidate who enters, actually wants to be exposed to the people's vote, has the authority, and the guardian council , which supervises on this special task, the executor of both of them should actually be able to do these things. control

therefore, we either have to move in a direction in our own legislation that makes the criteria quantifiable , measurable, and more transparent, or we have to change the burden of proof in this field, that is, we return the issue to what the islamic council of parliament should be able to establish. thank you, dear mr. mansoorin. well, let's go back to mr. khamsa , mr. doctor. what is your opinion? i would like to ask you to give me an explanation regarding the things that i have said. look at this logical principle so that we don't really know the answer to the question. in my opinion , it is not possible to have any conditions that i have mentioned rationally, in legal systems all over the world, in iran and in everyday life, there is a condition that needs to be met. you want to go. i don't know if your wife told you to go and buy fruit . buy big fruit. you go . we choose blindfolded. you can

see that the fruit is big, mr. saberi does not reject the main issue, but only now because it was their order. yes , now that is the next part of my argument. therefore, the conditions must be met, this is to separate the part from the condition, because the difference in what my servant said, mr. doctor , is in this part, which he says is part of the condition. they must be fulfilled. part of the conditions must not be fulfilled . this is what i mean. yes, what i mean is that any condition anywhere in the world must be fulfilled. the nature of making a condition is fulfillment. they say that it is not possible to fulfill it. well, look, mr. doctor, when t.k. if someone's wife says, go buy oranges, one orange should be big, two should be juicy, 3. for example, if it is this model

, the orange should be from northern oranges, then she will say, but if it is orange , i will like it.

of course, it is much easier to accept. i accept this . for example, we say the age characteristic of the person's birth certificate. or we say that it has not been reached, assumption b'. for example , we open his birth certificate to say that he has a citizenship. in his citizenship, he wrote a degree, and this year , it is not so easy to verify the same degree. is there or not, but there are some conditions, their quality conditions means they don't have zero and one metering capability. yes, but this. the qualitative conditions of the debate is whether these qualitative conditions can be accepted or not. see the principle of saying that in relation to the presidential elections. it was discussed, yes, that was an example. in the evening of 99 , i told you about the type of election . he said that the supervision is all with the guardian council. one example

is the clarification that it is necessary to confirm the conditions. elections are no different like everyone else. but in another place , article 62 of the constitution has said something. article 62 of the constitution now has a phrase at the beginning, which we will skip. the phrase below is that the conditions of the electors and the elected and the quality of elections are determined by the law, contrary to article 115, which states that the conditions of election are actually the audience. face yourself because of the different status of the presidential election, the constitution has stated that it has not been stated here, but it has stated the principle that it must have conditions, it must have conditions, now who determines the law of the parliament. you see, the requirements of the islamic system require that we simply cannot impose conditions on

citizenship . quality, so let's put it aside. yes, there is quality it has few features. this difference does not mean that it does not want to be tested. i will give an example , mr. doctor, in the universities, from morning to night, the same thing they are saying cannot be done and they are doing it. i do not know why they are not asked there , in fact, they are volunteers. to become a member of the faculty, they go to the universities, and they say, "actually , verify this person's academic qualifications. academic qualifications can be measured, like age, like citizenship . what will happen in reality? how many professors will sit? each professor knows what he knows." he asks himself about his specialty, he expects all this the specializations that all professors have together, that person must have scientific qualifications. is it not a quality thing?

that is, for example, saying i am pleased to attend your research is one point for having an article, for example , two points for a book, three points for an article that has been officially published in a licensed publication of the ministry of science , they say whether to give it two points or not, we have to check it ourselves. let's do it, even though it has been printed, they say officially, we say these two points. that these qualitative conditions must be met and we cannot set non-qualitative conditions, but at least we have to conditions. let's put quality because of the special requirements here, when we ask how friends

meet the special requirements , they try to take into account the special requirements. do you have this one, in fact, they invite a few people to sit as a professor, they ask the person a few questions , can they finally pass this with one question? they seem to be expelling him. is this hundred percent without mistakes? do we all trust the conditions of academic faculty members, such as their personal concubines? for example, if he doesn't like my appearance , if he doesn't like my political beliefs, he doesn't care, no, but we have it everywhere in the university, we do the same thing, having these special requirements does not mean that it is necessary to abandon that condition. let's say that we have nothing to do with the individual, for example, the nation. revolutionizing so many martyrs

, i ask for your presence after the revolution in an imposed war until now, for example, when islam, the revolution, the constitution, etc. are stable, so it doesn't matter whether you accept the constitution or not, for example, you are not a secularist, are you? put it now i am mr. doctor, you, mr. doctor, now you are saying that this should be the point of discussion, why not , when you see all my applications together , this is my condition, exactly from the examples that you have mentioned so far, say

that this volunteer is very good. the faculty member says that his claim is that he has the scientific qualifications , we have to go and prove that he doesn't have it, they say no, you prove it, we ask questions, you defend yourself , argue, answer, and see if he has the necessary scientific qualifications or when he adheres to islam. let's say that it must be fulfilled, in principle, every condition, including qualitative or low. in the preliminaries that i mentioned, it is useful here , there is no doubt that it must be verified. i am their example. now, since it was a common example , let's go a little further with that example. it might not be bad. they say that my wife said, "go buy oranges. she mentioned a few characteristics." it should be big, it should be juicy, for example, it should be orange , it can be verified, he said , i like this quality, yes, it is not possible to ask , for example, if i like it, what are its dimensions? a little bit. blood orange can come to mind he likes, he knows, orange

, for example, he likes the presence of the north, that is, again, a series of little things like this. yes, it definitely has some background . when we say adherence to islam, it means that we are supposed to sit in the place of god and judge the inner person. no, when we say adherence to islam, it is a condition. it has an appearance, for example , whether he prays or not, whoever prays means that he is committed to islam , there is no doubt, no, but there is a minimum condition for him to say what he intended. you just said that you pray is not enough. you just said that you pray is not enough. it needs two more conditions. on the other hand, let me finish my presentation , let me finish my presentation, i said, in truth , the one who is praying is praying out of hypocrisy , god recognizes this from the inside of a person, we do not recognize that

my presentation now has legal precedents. i don't want a lot of discussion about those legal challenges . you say islam or, for example, let's assume repentance. where do you verify the condition of reducing the punishment or, for example, removing it? yes, islam has internal conditions that god can verify, and it is true that there is no mistake in it , but according to the appearance of islam, it does not have any conditions, that is, only the quality has no criteria. well , we know that a person who does not pray is not committed to islam, even if he is a muslim, that means he is not committed to islam. we can understand this. or we can briefly understand the fact that you pray , one of the important conditions of a muslim is that he fasts . we already know that it's not so much a qualitative issue as, for example, like that example in portugal, someone said, "i like it" and then not that person, we know that person, don't we?

the characteristics that we know in his mind are not such that the amendment of the commitment to the constitution , for example, is really something that cannot be recognized at all. someone whose behavior, speech, frankness of expression, or his own confession, for example, indicates that he says that he does not accept this constitution, we can say. that he is committed to the constitution and, for example, suppose that he has behaved in such a way that shows that he is not committed to the constitution, well, these are not so broad according to mr. gole's interpretation that he did not make any judgment about him. i have to check the important feature someone says that i will check four of them, someone says that i will check two of them. we can talk about it, but this requirement is a qualitative condition, but in the same example, the academic board is sitting in the same meeting where 5 professors are sitting and asking this candidate to join the academic faculty. what do we do? there is another rational picture in all legal systems

. there is an issue that requires quality, for example , right now in the courts from morning to night . our legal system apart from everyday life, it is not a question in the courts, for example, they say whether the party has good intentions or no bad intentions. how do you guard this , mr. doctor, bad faith and good intentions are another esoteric matter. we don't know what they are doing here, or for example they say let's assume specialized issues, they say we will refer them to a specialist . for example, let's assume there is a topic, we go, we give it to the psychic , we give it to a doctor, for example, we give it to an expert, for example, housing , let them diagnose it as a quality issue. it doesn't have the ability to be quantified, but the principle is obligatory or necessary, like good faith, like a thousand and one more examples, we can't say not to check it , we have to check

it, there are special requirements, yes, what are we doing, we give it to the expert, we give it to the expert. no now, if you break your ankle, you tell 10 doctors, 6 of them say that he should operate, 4 of them say that he should not operate , what do we do when this happens ? the second logical principle here is that we tell the expert, if there is a difference of opinion, we reject the majority. you think that you are the criterion of the majority everywhere the situation is that all the members of the guardian council think the same way, they always discuss or convince or not convince. if you don't convince, you get a vote . that's right, mr. doctor, let me leave your discussion on a point here . there is a discussion that now they are pointing out that when we cannot actually reach a conclusion , we vote on the majority. any reason for not reaching the certification or a document to reject or confirm the qualification, they cannot feel the judgment let the people vote and actually the people vote

whether these people are qualified or not by choosing them and by participating in the elections and voting. you agree with this issue, mr. mansooryan . look, from the point of view of legal logic and rational requirements , it is not acceptable for us to claim that the legislator has foreseen a condition, now this condition has not been verified, then we want to leave this to the people themselves. what is intended is that people should now choose those people who have the basic qualifications. and those people who are now among these people the qualification is more in line with their taste and in fact their cousins ​​are more inbred to choose him. it is not acceptable for us to say, well, let's actually put a principle of truth here, let's say, well, now anyone can enter in the cases that we have predicted the condition.

i think we should be careful. the main challenge now is that once we talk about the current situation , the current situation of article 31 is clearly included in the election law of the islamic council and provides 10 clauses , just as you mentioned. well, this is it. conditions of its origin. most of the lenses are qualitative. well, in the lenses there is no challenge, for example, citizenship, age , in fact, the executive history of cases like this can be verified easily , the main problems come to the head. it must be verified, there can be no doubt because these are conditions, mr. mansourian and mr. saberi are suggesting that we cannot verify, that is why we have to put the principle on the fact that it is verified. you say that it can be verified.

we say that in this credit we did in is this method of legislation that we had beneficial for us or not? well, if this is the question, i would say that we can find a more favorable situation, that is, we should go with the method of legislation. to face fewer challenges. how can these challenges be less? for the reason that we can create more transparency for the minds of our contacts, the minds of citizens, the minds of political parties, and the minds of duff talabban. for example, if committing these verbs, these actions and reactions , they actually cause them to be non-committal, mr. mansourian, excuse me, i will formulate your argument. you will return it. which in fact can be done with these qualitative conditions with the legislation a little more specific and to a lesser extent that in the current situation, if we

want to talk about what the ministry of interior is doing, the guardian council is doing the right thing. in the law , my law required these things, now these things may not be recognized in a person or it may be impeached against it, it becomes non-appreciation. see mr. dr. khamse's statements, the main examples , the examples where all of them were the approval of my applications , for example, i don't know the status of admission to universities. taking the faculty as an example

, by the way, this is exactly what i can use. in the universities , there was a time when there was no correct standard , there was no index . they said, for example, so -and-so is a revolutionary kid. it is about to be indexed. who is coming now? of course , i have not commented on recruiting anyone as a faculty member, but if there are cases , there is a specific form. indexing is 70% of definable indicators. how many articles do you have? we give points, you have a book, all these are quality indicators no, doctor, if the quality index is less than 30%, less is allowed. a university from a prominent university came to me during the interview session

and said, "we know that you are qualified to be a scientist here, but because in terms of syria , it does not have the necessary conditions, i am not upset if they have no choice, because if we take them away." it can be misused. you can see that the criteria can be indexed . it is not possible to find clear cases contrary to this, for example, if we have a document that so-and-so drinks alcohol, we can say that you do not adhere to islam , we can disqualify this. i agree with this. someone has openly said that i don't accept the constitution . for example , you can disqualify me for this example . you don't want to participate , he says, because i don't have a voice in this parliament, why

don't you have a voice? he says, from now on, you will allow time, repeating that the claim is not proven. you say that the party wants to vote. the reason is determined by scientific research and work, not mr. doctor my claim and not your claim , the polls say that people's participation is based on the people's own consent, it means going to the people and asking them why you did not participate

. that both of them should be banned, mr. doctor, everywhere, doesn't it mean this, or what he says means that this will happen, or if he had said non-approval and non-dismissal , it means that both of them should be disqualified, which means that it is obvious that we cannot deny the law, after your guardian council, your claim is that we should if he acts against the law, mr. dr. mansouri said this part correctly, yes, i would like to come to your presence when this law of the guardian council, which was not written by the parliament , says that these conditions should be imposed and that these conditions should be impeached. the guardian council says that i want to do something against the law, then you, as a professor of law, want to be a promoter of breaking the law . the guardian council's duty is based on this law, which the guardian council has written as the duty of shaze, in the

name of god, the most merciful, the most merciful. dear viewers, hello, good night at 8:00 p.m. 30 minutes. with some news in we are at your service. at the same time as the birth of hazrat (peace be upon him), the traffic of iranian pilgrims to iraq from the border of mehran increased. according to the announcement of the general director of highways and road transport of ilam province , 1,335 people also went to iraq from the border of mehran. in the same game, 3885 people returned to the country. in shaban the other day too.