Iran Analysis: Why the 2009 Election is Not Legitimate (Ansari)

More than a year later, the fight goes on over the validity of the 2009 Presidential election. In the face of the questions not only about the vote but also the intimidation, state propaganda, and detentions that surrounded it, defenders of the Government re-present a series of flawed polls and A report --- based on the Guardian Council's attempt to vindicate the process --- to put Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's "victory" beyond doubt.



I won't repeat my dissection of those defenders here, since the campaign for civil rights and the issue of the Government's legitimacy are now far beyond the elections. I'll just note that I picked up new information this week that the decision to manipulate the electoral results had been established 72 hours before the ballot.

Ali Ansari, writing for Chatham House's World Review, offers this overview, taking apart seven myths propping up the platform of a rightly-elected President:

Iran's 10th Presidential election, on 12 June last year, was the most controversial and contested poll in the 30 years of the Islamic Republic. Far from anointing President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with a landslide election victory for a second term, the credibility of the result was immediately in question, unleashing the most extraordinary public anger against the governing elite.

The street protests subsided, but there is little sign of the widespread anger the result generated dissipating. The situation remains tense and the governing elite is no less anxious about the future. Unlike other disputeswhich have periodically shaken the Islamic Republic, this one affects and divides the political elite like no other. The government remains determined to promote its account of a free and fair election, convinced that it has defeated a "velvet revolution". This is the reason given for the brutal crackdown, which continues to this day.

A year on, it is worth revisiting some of the urban myths which have come to underpin this standoff:

Those who allege fraud must prove their case; the government is innocent until proven guilty

Not so; in any political system which claims democratic procedures and values, it is the governing elite and holders of power who must answer to the people, not the other way round. Accountability must be transparent and not a matter of faith. Accountability is the basis of any democratic settlement, without it the process of ‘voting’ is mere procedural window dressing.

In Iran, with its fragile democracy under considerable attack, the situation is more acute.
As a consequence of the election victories of President Mohammad Khatami in 1997 and 2001,a plan was implemented to organise and manipulate the electoral system to ensure the desired result. As a result, the parliamentary and presidential elections from 2004 to 2008 saw a gradual collapse in turnout, with optimistic estimates for Tehran in 2008 barely reaching thirty percent. For particular reasons, only the 2006 municipal election was an exception.

Last year, all the major institutions of government, including those with oversight of the
election were in the hands of the government faction. At least three members of the Guardian Council, the Chief of the General Staff, and the Supreme Leader, all voiced support for Ahmadinejad. In such a climate the burden of proof --- and accountability --- lies with the government, not the people.

Read rest of article....