Definition of political competition and political transparency
Political competition is defined as competition for political power where political parties or individuals compete to define and govern the direction of public policy. This kind of rivalry has always resulted in questionable public policy decisions made by the government. The government often allocates the society with resources of living, and more often, these allocations are unequally distributed.
Some parts of society get a greater part of the resources, thus having a higher advantage over the others. This results in political conflicts and ultimately leads to competition in politics. The main issue will be who has more power to control the government and its legal power. There are different people from different parts of the society who are affected by the unequal distribution of resources, thus the government’s decision cannot please everyone. This provides a basis for continuous political conflict and competition (Barrington, Bosia and Bruhn, 2009).
In politics, transparency means fighting corruption and ensuring that public officials are responsible for their actions. A government can hold its meetings in a way that they are open to the press and public. For instance, financial budgets should be reviewed by the public, and all the laws and decisions made should be as well open to discussion. This makes it less easy for public officials to abuse authority for their own selfish interests. Participative democracy is more likely to achieve the goal of transparency because the people are allowed to participate in it, and it is connected with the will of the people.
Overview of Iranian Guardian Council and IFE
Iran Guardian Council is part of a council in the Iranian constitution that has the right to provide changes in the constitution and “examine if the laws passed by the Majlis (parliament) comply with the Iranian Constitution and conform to Islam” (Iran Guardian Council, 2007). It has the power to prohibit any laws passed by the Iranian Parliament. It consists of twelve members who should be Muslim clerics and jurists. The Supreme leader chooses six members of the Council who are clerics.
The remaining six members are jurists who are nominated by the head of Iran Judiciary Power and voted in by the parliament (Iran Guardian Council, 2007). Once the twelve members are elected, they are expected to serve for a period of six years. However, after three consecutive years six, these members are replaced by new ones. The Guardian Council of the Constitution is responsible for prohibiting or approving legislation passed by the parliament. It could prohibit a law based on two things, whether the law goes against Islamic laws or it is not in accordance with the Iranian constitution (Iran Guardian Council, 2007).
The IFE was formed on October 11, 1990 (Morris 1995). This was done due to a number of constitutional reforms in 1989, and the passing of new legislation. It is comprised of the juristic division of the national government, national political parties, and the general citizens. The IFE has undergone significant reform processes since it was put in place which in turn has had an impact on its integration and acknowledgments (DomĂnguez and McCann, 1996).
The most recent reforms were implemented in 1996 and advocated for setting the IFE free from the executive branch. The most special feature of the IFE is that it allowed organizing federal elections. Its main office is located in the Federal District where it operates under a regionalized structure that allows it to exercise its authority throughout the country (Brandenburg 1964).
Role of Iranian Guardian Council and IFE in elections
The Iranian Guardian Council has the right to screen candidates before they are allowed to run for the presidency in the country. This has often been criticized and termed as undemocratic. This system lacks transparency because it does not involve citizens. The screening of presidential candidates is not open to public discussion. There were protests when president Mir Hossein Mousavi was elected as a president. There are no exit polls in Iran yet he knew that he had won even before the votes were counted. However, he lost the election to his rival President Ahmadinejad (Hossein-zadeh, July 2009).
The Guardian Council is responsible for overseeing all elections since 1979 and has been able to conduct ten undisputed elections since its inception. There exists competition in Iranian politics. Individuals competing for power and authority do so in order to be able to make decisions that influence the government. Mr. Mousavi did lose to Ahmadinejad in the elections and claimed that the election was “stolen” even though there was no evidence to substantiate these claims. It was not clear whether these were just means for Mr. Mousavi to hijack the elections, but the fact remains that he did not expect to lose.
The IFE, on the other hand, is responsible for ensuring that there is exact and timely registration of all Mexicans allowed to vote. This is considered to be an essential requirement, in order to guarantee the transparency of the electoral process. Citizens that qualify to vote are registered and given the opportunity to exercise their right to vote. Political conflict and competition existed especially when an analysis of the 2006 elections was done.
Felipe Calderón won the elections, but his political rival Andrés Manuel López Obrador contested the results citing that there had been irregularities. However, Calderon met all the constitutional requirements of being elected as a president and was immediately declared the one. The desire for power and authority drove Obrador to lead protests in an attempt to change the country’s political opinion. The IFE was accused of being corrupt and, therefore, tarnished its image of being transparent. There were allegations that the IFE was provided with a biometric database for voters by a French company.
References
Barrington, Lowell, Bosnia, Michael J. and Kathleen Bruhn. 2009. Comparative Politics: Structures and Choices. Boston: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
Brandenburg, Frank. 1964. The Making of Modern Mexico. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
DomĂnguez, Jorge I. and James A. McCann. 1996. Democratizing Mexico: Public Opinion and Electoral Choices. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Hossein-zadeh, Ismael. 2009. Reflecting on Iran’s Presidential Election. Web.
Iran Guardian Council. 2007. “Iran Guardian Council within Iran Political Structure”. Web.
Morris, Stephen D. 1995. Political Reformism in Mexico: An Overview of Contemporary Mexican Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.