or at all, a merger of these two systems, that is , something that we experienced at the beginning of the revolution, when we had both the president and the prime minister, but if you allow me, i will ask the first question, if you allow mr. zahedi, from mr. sheikhzadeh because of their age. let's ask them, mr. sheikhzadeh , why should the system be used? your presidency , i think you are supposed to defend the presidential system in this program, why are you defending it and what are the disadvantages of this system, in the name of allah , the most gracious, the most merciful. dear channel one, i would like to congratulate you on the blessed birth of agha imam zaman. honorable nation

of islamic iran, let me correct you a bit. see , i know the current system as a semi-presidential and semi-parliamentary system, because it is a purely presidential system, similar to , for example, the political system of the united states of america, and a parliamentary system is actually the original model. a prominent example is the british system. yes, we are currently implementing something similar to france, which is in between and is called a different system . i am a defender of the current system because, first of all, the current system is closer to democracy because at least one more load the people at the ballot box

mean that the presidential or even mixed system is quantitatively closer to democracy, because we have four elections in the islamic republic, and there is almost no system in the world that has this number of direct appeals to the people, this is the first position . this is the current system we have, but the second situation is that in terms of content, we consider the presidential system to be more democratic and the people to be more democratic. indirect democracy direct. at one time, it was implemented in ancient greece

, about 200, 300 to 2400 years ago, where in athens and sparta, all the citizens would gather at the end of the week in the main square of the city and decide on the basic issues of the city government, although that system also has its flaws. it was because the citizen was a man. free sane adults of greek origin, that is, five groups were excluded, which included women, children, people with mental problems , immigrants and slaves, but in any case, the same number of people who remain under the title of citizens, these are directly for themselves, for their country, for their society was making the right decisions, well, in the new centuries , when democracy was restored again, that is, after a thousand-year jurisprudence in the middle ages. when

democracy was restored again , it was not possible to go for direct democracy because the topics had become specialized, the population had increased, and therefore it was not possible to implement that direct democracy. well, today's democracies themselves are indirect. then, if we want to run a parliament, it will be more indirect. this means that, for example, the people choose a member of parliament , then the member of parliament chooses the prime minister . therefore, parliamentarians themselves are not a symbol of democracy direct means weak democracy , weakened, incomplete and incomplete democracy, right, well, this second aspect is actually the position of democracy based on the presidential system . now

, parliamentary or semi-presidential maybe is not a direct democracy, they oppose it, you believe that it is like this, that is, in the system. in the semi-presidential period, people's participation in the election of the ruler will decrease. in the name of allah, the most merciful, the most merciful, have a good time and all my dear ones. it is not, basically, governance is a purposeful identity, that is , we say that in the discussion of rationality , it is a tool . this water should cure your hunger. there is probably something wrong with this drinking water. what is there is that governance must achieve a certain goal. whether the system is presidential, parliamentary, semi-presidential, semi-parliamentary or similar titles.

i don't think these are relevant at all. there are ways to do this. it means that we should have a deep conversation about the content and nature then let's go to him. the form of what exists should be a political system that follows the will of the majority while respecting the rights of the minority. now, which form can better advance this goal is our next issue. the serious problem here is that we basically forgot the purpose of governance. we have completely forgotten that we did not come to protect you. we did n't really come here to determine the assignment. let's say, a nation has a desire , it has a will, the political will of the nation must rule . now, if we want to start from the second step, i think this question of the wrong foundation means that you came

, you left that content, that nature, that purpose of governance , and now i want to pour in the glass or in the bowl, whether it is in the glass or in the bowl of this system. our second step is that you say yes, they usually drink water in a glass, for example . in my opinion, a very basic point is that the form of governance and the form of governance is our secondary issue, what is important is the content and nature, but we we can never say that the form has no effect on the content. if you are a cinematographer, you are a part of the cinema the influence of the form of our author directors that we have, mainly because of my very serious interests , cinema and politics, these two sometimes end up in a marriage

. your question is raised, now that goal is actually the governance that the majority wanted to pursue. there are people, of course, the majority of the people may stand in the direction of demands that the rights of the minority must be respected. here, the form comes up . for example, bureaucracy is a form that makes us answerable, makes us transparent. monitorability is sufficient, so i will add a question, then you can answer. mr. shayame's main question is how to advance people's votes. let's not forget that if we want to talk , let's not forget the people 's request , let 's

not forget the fight over what the form should be. preparing different opinions in this regard , compiling this report, we will see it, we will return , we are at your service with pride, ali larijani, the former speaker of the parliament in favor of the parliamentary system, moving away from the system. a presidency towards a parliamentary system is a kind of regularization of the country's structure. some countries implement a completely parliamentary system in their political system . this method has positive points. with the establishment of the parliamentary system, the coordination of powers will be more and decision-making will be easier, and some differences of opinion. the constitution clearly says that republicanism and islamicism are two inseparable pillars of the islamic republic of iran system. looking at this principle, we can say that

no factor is acceptable to limit republicanism and islamism, and in my opinion, turning the president into a prime minister who he must get votes from the representatives democracy is limited by the system. amir hossein ghazizadeh hashemi, the former vice president of the parliament, is in favor of the parliamentary system. it is necessary that the parliamentary system has been ruling in the country for a long time. the cabinet can be dismissed many times after the second world war, one party ruled japan for 50 years, but the average lifespan of its cabinets was less than two years. we need to change people quickly when necessary, but in a presidential system, if anyone let's go , there will be a political crisis. elias hazrati, a political activist in favor of our presidential system, a period of parliamentary system. we experienced it in the 60s, but the answer was positive we didn't get on the other hand

, we have not heard anything about the presidential system and its weaknesses. people who propose changing the presidential system to a parliamentary one should have a summary of the weaknesses of the presidential system so that we can look for a parliamentary system. well, thank you very much. let's go back to dr. sheikhzadeh. mr. dr. sheikhzadeh, you are saying that you are actually a supporter of the presidential system. one of the requirements of the presidential system is the formation of strong parties and the entry of these parties into the political arena. considering that all the experts agree that it should be as it should be and maybe the parties it has not been formed in our country and most of the political currents are formed from time to time on the occasion of elections and then either disappear. or at least, their activities are becoming less colorful, despite these conditions, do you still think that the presidential system can

solve the problems of our country or not ? i wanted to raise a serious question here , friends, who are talking about changing the system. they bring up politics and the creation of a parliamentary system. i have a question for them, what are you looking for? parliament is to deepen democracy and democracy , which means that this is a goal in itself, or whether you want to use the parliamentary system

. i have arguments that the parliamentary system neither deepens democracy nor increases the efficiency of the system . the summary is that a phenomenon like ahmadinejad does not emerge from the heart of the mani regime, which i am currently having serious discussions with. it does not emerge from the heart of the trump parliamentary regime . there is a rationality in the heart of the parliamentary regime now with its requirements and i will talk about it in detail. there is an elitism in that populism, populism, if i want to walk with a green shawl and get votes, these things will not happen, that is, in the heart of the parliamentary regime, you have a refinement, you have a rationality, it is not that

people want to express themselves on the wave of public opinion, but now we still don't understand. in any case, whether iranians have historical memory or not , there is a very historical dispute, but in any case, the very deep point in my discussion is that the parliamentary regime guarantees a percentage . the above-mentioned conservatism means that i want, for example, one to be bad and one to be bad let me label it, i say you are liberal, you are also conservatism, if there is a rationality hidden in conservatism, a monitoring is actually happening, which is in the heart of the parliamentary regime, but it says, what love made it easy at first, but problems fell , problems fell. according to mr. shayameh, we can talk about the parliamentary regime. that there is mr. shayan, mr. doctor of the party , the monitoring of the elections should not be the responsibility of a few people who

, in fact , categorize the expressions of people according to their political tastes, the monitoring of the elections regarding the selection of people should be the responsibility of the parties. mr. doctor, by the way , i am completely with you on this point, as long as the real party is not formed , if you want the political regime from this current situation. change to a parliamentary or semi-parliamentary state , this semi-democracy, this quasi-democracy will also disappear because, in reality, i am coming with my own political will. i will move forward in the form of guided election management. this is the current situation that the leader said, diversity and competition in your elections. look , the elections are a week away. no, in many constituencies, you

are facing people who are now fighting over who should go on which list , mana, shana, and anna, and in general, it leads to political vulgarity, because political vulgarity is the product of the fact that you do not have a real party. the people who get scams in swimming pools, the scams they get in restaurants, the scams they get in circles and religious groups, turn this into political conflicts . today is another week of elections and you don't know who they really are. it doesn't matter if they are going to enter the parliament at all, because at all there is no competition, competition happens when there is a party. and that party that provides the platform for the parliamentary regime. well, you have mentioned a very good point. i mean, in fact, i can answer the question of the respected moderator regarding the discussion of parties and actually have a purpose with his highness . you see, when we raise the discussion of parties, civility

and the existence of a real party are also necessary for the system. if we want to give a score and determine a percentage , the parliamentary system depends more on the party, because in the world you can see, for example, england, which has a clear example of the parliamentary system of strong parties and society. the class society has actually suffered from plurality and pluralism.

it is not institutionalized, or to put it better, in my opinion, the pluralistic tax is the thing that does not exist , those people or those groups who do not want to recognize pluralism, that is, we put a ruler, we say that you have a role model in every field, now if you become like that role model you can get incentives , you can be employed, you can become a faculty member, you can become a member of parliament, and if you distance yourself from the ideal model that i have on the society, you will be punished or you will be deprived. you will be deleted can you do a purification project ? the point is that there is pluralism in society. the one who doesn't want to recognize pluralism is the wrong place. i mean, you say that society is not pluralistic. society

is definitely pluralistic. i am blind, so i can't see pluralism. i want permission. see if i disagree. you see, our society is pluralistic, but it is traditional pluralism, that is, now in the cities, you can see the parties , giving their place to relatives to clans, this did not happen in a natural process, it is not at all that i can direct a stream of water in such a way that the water falls towards the house . i will manipulate my garden i engineer, who manipulates the ministry? you see the country as a symbol of this story , for example, many parties that can represent the reality of iran's political society , you see me as someone who is related to the reformist parties, which are almost all the general secretaries of the reformist parties. bringing the parties to the article 10 commission and these are facing the problem of confirming the qualifications of the general secretary and

the members of the central council . mansouri, you don't recognize someone who is reflecting, in fact , why recognize at least a significant part of the society. you don't know, because the point of view he is representing has nothing to do with my political taste , so no, it doesn't exist. if i don't want to recognize it, that's another matter. look , what we call parties now is unfortunately different from society, we have parties. . that 5 people are not 6 people means that he and his wife , his wife's brother have gone to one side, and that they are going to make a party. this is more of a beggar's act, and by the way, i want to say that his fight is about shareholding.

it was in 1976 that it spread. this is from mr. khatami's policy the principle of the work was correct , but giving permission to their own friends is the bane of tourism. now, these are friends, and in fact, these are literature. in fact, in my opinion , other circles are politically active. mr. doctor, i think that this is not the place of naza, the place of naza is a little earlier. iranian society, whether you like it or hate it, it has multiplied , you see, iranian society, i happen to be a member of it, i am also a member of i'tikaf , a member of arafahm, and a member of arbaeen, i have not been there yet, but this

is not all of iranian society, there are young people who go to cafes, iranian society is a society. that you, if an hour passes later, in the same alley so, if you go to the streets of tehran, shiraz to the north , you will see people who almost do not look like you, nor do they talk like you. they don't dress like you, they don't listen to music like you, and they don't watch the movies you watch, they don't watch the top programs, and they don't watch the entire radio and television . i am not among you, we did not want to recognize them, and we did not want to be the echo of their voices, and we declared the parties that could represent the whole society or their licenses in an illegal process. we declared it illegal, the society has become oppressed

because when a party comes, it invites people to riot. well, if i tell you now, when we read the alphabet of political science , that is, the undergraduate student of political science who is in the first semester. a country is formed and operates within the framework of the constitution, and its purpose is actually to secure national interests. mr. doctor , don't say pamphlets, god, i don't say pamphlets, it's not exam night, it's been a month, it's not these , the first word, what does politics mean? politics means competition. politics does not start with elimination. you can talk about politics at all when the other and

recognize addresses. the purification project that started one day after the 1998 elections reached the day when mr. ali larijani, the representative of the leadership in the supreme council, i do not know national security and the speaker of several terms of the parliament today, reached the university faculty members today. in the most important humanities higher education center of the country, some ignorant people have been confiscated . if they were in the university institution under normal conditions, they would not have the right to enter the university institution with the purification project . i think that first of all, the discussion we are going astray when it comes to parliamentarism, and so are we controversy and all that we can't come to a conclusion , but you have one or two parties that don't respect the framework and didn't pray

for you, mr. dr. managing a character, the wife of one of the main characters of the system. he came and said to the people, sir, if the fraud of 2088 is thrown out into the street , you have repeated this over and over again in the same legal space , what does mrs. marashi's talk have to do with the brokers' party, they are her children , and mr. doctor, the children of others from the top of the system. even under the regime, mr. jannati's children are of the same quality, which means, after all , i am his daughter, who was a member of the vice-president's party, who said the same thing, saying, "no, now, i am a lawyer, now you are a politician, mrs. faezeh hashemi." he went to jail after talking, yes , yes, why did he go to jail? now maybe you were the one who knew

, we don't know, i have detailed information. what is the basis of the parliamentary regime and the presidential regime? the infrastructure of the real party is completely inside the content , ironically. a party is a party when it reflects the voice of the nation , and the voice of the nation is when you and the nation are handpicked do not do. the nation is facing iran for all iranians and this plurality should be reflected in the party. i

want to ask that if the system is now semi-presidential or parliamentary or assembly-oriented, this group that you say has no participation in the political system can express your participation. the same young people that you mentioned, you said that they don't see the radio and television. if they do, they see it because of me. see, it's a fact . see, a very important point is that we are my main issue. i use the word that i say, i am aware of what i am thinking about the main issue is not the parliamentary or presidential regime , the main issue is whether you want to reflect the political will of the nation or not, the rest is a game of camel, gaff, leopard , the rest

, i have a healer. and a party that reflects the plurality can really be able to move forward. yes, doctor , i would like to know your opinion. i believe that with the current state of the parties, and soon, at least for two decades, i do not think that we will achieve a real party system. look at the calculations. this is how we started when we started 45 years ago we have reached here, and then we are going through a steep slope , that is, at one time, because after a figure like mr. khatami, a phenomenon like mr. ahmadinejad came, 8 years of the country's progress, i want to say that if you want to do two courses of future research , consider what we we had tragedies in the governance system

, for example, with 50, 60 and so on . i think france is like this, the number of parties is too many. well, you see, we have countries that have a multi-party system, they have a large number of parties. well, this party system has different factors, one of which is the system. electoral means wherever there is an installed majority election usually, the number of parties increases when the election requires an absolute majority, because

the elections are usually in the second round. it will be stretched and they will form an alliance with each other, in the long run they will move towards two parties, that is, one of the factors that determine the country's party system and their electoral system . i am against them, mr. shai. my colleagues are ready to see this report . we will come back to continue the discussion. we are at your service. this is the first period of the parliamentary elections in which our voice is the basis of election campaigns. 200 local networks it was established so that the candidates can get their words heard more cheaply, the competition becomes fairer , and the people get to know the candidates more easily. in addition, in various election programs, including candidate introduction programs and debates , common issues have been seen, which are people's issues.