26.01.2023

Oil workers join protests

All manner of tiny cracks are opening up at the top levels of the theocracy. Yassamine Mather looks behind the often arcane disputes

The protests in Iran are not so much in the news these days, but - despite the crackdown, the execution of four protestors and the deaths of hundreds, as well as the terrible injuries inflicted - last week thousands of oil workers staged successful protests in almost all refineries, petrochemical plants and offices associated with the national oil company.

The relentless privatisation policies of the Islamic Republic have inevitably reduced the political strength of oil workers. Right now we cannot envisage a repeat of the kind of strike action that helped bring down the shah in 1979. However, the fact that the permanent employees of the oil company managed to coordinate a nationwide strike at a time when the regime is arresting labour activists and limiting access to the internet, means that the strike was a substantial achievement and a sign that historical memories remain a potent force amongst the new generation of oil workers.

Statement

The text below is an extract from their statement:

What do we, Iran’s oil workers, say?

We, the oil workers, have spoken about the current serious situation in our statement of January 21. In that statement, we emphasised our demands for freedom of protest, assembly, strike, demonstration and the freedom to organise political parties.

We demanded an end to oppression, humiliation and discrimination against women.

We emphasised the necessity of equal rights for all citizens of the country, regardless of belief, religion, ethnicity, gender, and the elimination of any discrimination and inequality in society.

We said that there should be an end to attacks by the security forces, that no-one should be in prison because of their opinions.

We call for the immediate and unconditional release of all those arrested and the abolition of the death sentence. We believe execution is state murder.

And today, in response to the uproar of the ‘Political Advocacy’ campaign [a reference to a proposal by Reza Pahlavi, the son of the ex-shah, that he should be recognised as the ‘advocate’ of the Iranian people, representing everyone in discussions with “international powers”!], we insist on expressing our demands even more strongly and firmly, and once again we loudly announce that we will silence those who want to marginalise the voices of our workers and the people.

The decision-makers are the workers and we, the people, and here we draw everyone to the sixth paragraph of our statement on December 21 and announce:

We do not accept any power over our heads, either in work or in life. Our desire is to set up workers’ councils and collective management of society. Declaring these minimal demands is the first step to exercise the collective will of our people to unite and shape our destiny and future.

Workers! The situation is serious. Unity, unity!

Our emphasis is still on nationwide strikes.

On the whole we could say that there is a kind of stalemate in Iran: those who rule cannot continue to do so in the old way: there is no way they can regain the authority they had before the current wave of protests. However, the protestors are not in a position to overthrow the government and, although, when it comes to repression, we are not seeing open conflict between foot-soldiers and their commanders, the cracks in the highest ranks of the Shia clergy are indicative of the kind of crisis the regime is facing.

Some of the arguments between them relate to the execution of protestors charged with moharebeh (waging war against god) and the debate is between very senior clerics.

Iranian criminal law is based on Shia jurisprudence. In theory a judge should be a mojtahed - someone who gives an authoritative interpretation according to Islamic doctrine. However, there are not enough mojtaheds and so the system often uses civilian judges. One of the criticisms expressed by senior ayatollahs is that recent death sentences against protestors were issued by non-mojtahed judges, who are neither sufficiently qualified to issue rulings nor independent in their juridical opinions. Critics include prominent clerics such as ayatollah Mostafa Mohaqeq Damad, who was head of the department of law at Shahid Beheshti University in Tehran. He called for deeper scrutiny before such sentences are issued, warning fellow clerics: “History will never forget errors and negligence over blood and illegitimate punishments.”

After the execution of Mohsen Shekari, a 22-year-old protestor, on December 8, ayatollah Mohammad Ali Ayazi - a senior member of the Shia clergy in the holy city of Qom - told an interviewer:

There is a clear definition of moharebeh in [Islamic] jurisprudence. The crime means using a weapon with the intention of terrifying the people and waging war against god and the prophet Muhammad ... When someone has the right to protest against the status quo and the police try to obstruct the protest, we cannot call it an act of moharebeh.

‘Reformists’

Ayazi went further, implying that that executions could be a case of the jurisprudential notion of ikhafa - an attempt to create a sense of insecurity among the public. Ayatollah Morteza Moqtadaie - who is a member of the ‘Assembly of Experts’, which has the power to appoint Iran’s supreme leader - posted a comment that a perpetrator of moharebeh is someone who displays signs of preparation for war. Moreover, he asserted that not all such perpetrators can be sentenced to death, arguing that only those who have committed murder should be executed.

In late December 2022, Hossein Ansari Rad, a former ‘reformist’ judge, issued an open letter addressed to the supreme leader, criticising his rule. He stated: “The Islamic Republic has failed in all economic, political, social and cultural aspects” and warned that “a big explosion will happen”, should the government continue its current path of ignoring protestors’ demands.

Another significant critic is ayatollah Abdullah Javadi Amoli - an important figure, because he is a marja e taqlid, meaning ‘source to follow’ or ‘religious reference’. In Shia Islam only the highest ranks of the theocracy obtain such a title. Javadi Amoli criticised the performance of “incompetent officials” for the umpteenth time in recent weeks and warned that, “as long as the officials are incompetent and there is astronomical embezzlement in the society, failure is certain”.

The words of this 89-year-old moderate cleric have become more frank in recent months than in previous years. Javadi Amoli often speaks about the country’s terrible economic situation and the living conditions of most Iranians. He had often told official meetings: “If the people are not on the scene, failure is certain” (Iran’s current rulers refer to popular support for their rule as “people’s presence on the political scene”).

His criticism is significant, because the Iranian media usually introduces him with definitions such as ‘philosopher’, ‘of authority’, ‘mystic’, ‘moral teacher’, as well as ‘a member of the Qom seminary assembly’ (a major association of Shia clerics).

Although he is not on par with authorities such as Hossein Vahid Khorasani and Musa Shabiri Zanjani, who are said to be among the most learned Islamic figures, he has an important position among the clerics of Qom and is often quoted by Iranian official media.

Javadi Amoli was one of ayatollah Khomeini’s students, and a result of this is that he became a member of the Supreme Judicial Council in 1979 (appointed on Khomeini’s decree) and played an important role in the drafting of judicial bills. He is also known as a staunch supporter of the concept of Velayat al-Faqih (supreme leadership of the most senior cleric) and, despite his harsh criticism of the country’s economic and political situation, he still supports the current supreme leader. However, in recent days he has been quoted repeating the assertion that “having a good leader is only one side of the issue” and giving the example of the ‘First Imam of the Shiites’. In other words, he is not blaming today’s problems on Khamenei alone, but is instead questioning the entire political leadership.