Sakinepad, a lawyer and assistant to the president in the 13th government, said about the approval of the general amendments to the dowry law: what was approved and the gentlemen announced and said that there are apparently 7 articles. Rather, it is the amendment of some of the articles on financial convictions.

He continued: In fact, they put the dowry in the heart of the law on financial convictions. However, this also shows that a bad feeling is transmitted to the women’s society because this plan, which is beyond dowry, was recognized as dowry, and this shows how much the psychological security of women was messed up. According to the statements of the supporters of this plan and what has been discussed about it and what is obtained from their own interviews, it is that a legal mechanism that was in criminal lawsuits and related to the discussion of the use of electronic systems is apparently wanted to be included in the legal discussions in this matter. When its totality is beyond the dowry, it can be an innovation in our legal and judicial system.

Why don’t they pay attention to other rights of couples?

This lawyer said: My position is that I am clearly very opposed to dowry being considered as part of the obligations of a sacred contractual relationship in our customs and religion and it cannot be compared with other financial issues that are presented here. Therefore, I agree with the whole of that plan, if it is for legal claims and other financial convictions, that imprisonment should be released because it is stated in our macro policies and also in our judicial reform document, but I disagree with the discussion of dowry in this matter because I believe that dowry is one of the obligations under the marriage document and marriage relationship. Why don’t they pay attention to other rights of couples? But every once in a while they only discuss dowry. A dowry that is both a sign of friendship and love between a couple and the fact of the matter is that considering other rights of women in marital relationship and marriage, it is considered as a conventional support.

Pad said: When other rights are not paid attention to, i.e. custody, submission and even the right to leave the country, discussions are raised among women as concerns and issues, and these issues are not seriously addressed, but they only touch on the issue of dowry, which women look at as a support. In fact, our legislator insists on defining the dowry, which is supposed to be a seal and a sign of love, under financial penalties. This means the first deviation from that cultural reality and in fact they put the marriage contract under the rest of the issues and then they expect that the woman will not deal with the dowry like this.

Instead of insular work and fingering one of the family law systems, we should implement justice

He emphasized: This seems to be a duality in the concept, that is, duality is felt in the understanding of the concept. Therefore, I believe that this issue causes mistrust of women’s society and causes dissatisfaction. Finally, we have to look at this issue in the family system as a right and a duty, and I believe that instead of doing these isolated things and from time to time a fingernail to one of the family law systems, we should implement justice much more strongly. In fact, when we bring up gender justice, we must respect it within the family as well. The Iranian woman does not feel very well and feels dissatisfied with her rights in many cases. Therefore, if we want to have a new policy in the field of dowry and we want to make it a law, this action should not fuel this discrimination and feeling of injustice. It should give a woman a pleasant feeling, and it seems that this feeling has not been transferred to women as of now that we are talking to each other. And a worry and a feeling of being helpless and not seen by the legal system is instilled in the woman.

Male supremacy is seen in having the upper hand in terms of laws

The assistant to the president in the 13th government said: “If I want to answer why this is the case, I must say that the representatives should speak very clearly and directly with the people and say that we, as your representatives, do not prioritize this work for this reason.” If these things are explained to the people apart from the politics of work, then the task of all of us will be clear.

Pod clarified: But what we can generally answer in this regard, is that this issue goes back to a different macro view of culture that is strongly governing itself. That is, part of this view goes back to the same patriarchal view, and they see the male patriarchy as having the upper hand in terms of laws, and here, in my opinion, they are not worried about the family passing the bill prohibiting violence against women, while the Supreme Leader has also said that we should legislate within the family. If there is violence against a woman, now this violence may be by father, husband or brother, because of their physique, violence may occur. Therefore, Hazrat Agha says that you should pass this law.

When other rights are not paid attention to, i.e. custody, obedience and even the right to leave the country, discussions among women are raised as concerns and issues, and these issues are not seriously addressed, but they only touch on the issue of dowry, which women look at as a support, this shows that we have a bad position and we look at dowry along with other financial punishments.

If you want to gain the trust of an Iranian woman, you have to change your perspective

He continued: But there is probably a thought, and because he knows that this violence is done by men, so according to that patriarchal view, he says that if I pass this law, men will be condemned more, unfortunately, there is this sexist view, and if someone criticizes this view, they will tell him that he is criticizing us with a sexist view. In fact, this is a strange and unique situation that happens in Iran. Therefore, I have said this many times: if you want to gain the trust of Iranian women, if you want Iranian women to trust politics and be happy, you must change your perspective. While if a woman is not happy, you know what social damage threatens the society, this view must change. The cultural outlook needs to change and you need to avoid being afraid to pass protective laws for women.

This lawyer said: “Unfortunately, they are looking for laws that are rooted in the lack of understanding and incorrect interpretation of Sharia.” That is, they think that men should be superior. While one of the rights of a woman in marriage is dowry, and dowry is one of the financial rights of women, when we want to consider the issue of financial independence, we clearly refer to the issue of dowry. I definitely do not agree that the man should go to prison. Society does not agree with this. But it is conditional on the rationality and wisdom of the legislation to include a condition that upon marriage, the institution of dowry is defined in such a way that it is cultured and the Iranian man knows that if he wants to cheat on his wife, he will be watched by a seeing eye in the government, and his guarantees must be respected in the matter of dowry.

A woman can not be subject to a man until she receives the dowry

Pod said: “Dowry cannot be included and modified under articles of the law of financial penalties without automatically providing any guarantee for the woman.” In such a situation, the woman remains with the right to divorce, which she does not have, and her dowry is raised in this way. Of course, the issue of 14 coins was raised before, but apparently, fortunately, at least they have passed the issue of setting a ceiling, and it is very unfortunate that we have to say about this, fortunately, the ceiling has not been set, because they have no right at all, and this is a private contract in terms of Shariah and law. If these cases were taken into consideration, there would be no problem in considering the dowry under financial penalties, but they have not designed any mechanism in this regard so that this woman can benefit from it from the beginning when she enters life.

He continued: While it is important for our Sharia that says that a woman can not be subject to a man until she has received the dowry, it is important for Islam that the woman receives her dowry. But how is Islam’s emphasis on dowry ignored? In other words, we forget how important Islam considers this dowry for the marriage contract, and then we legislate in the direction of placing it under financial contracts, but the system should be such that a man cannot legally escape from this guarantee for dowry. In fact, when this issue does not exist, this is where it is felt that this plan, if it becomes a law, has an angle with justice.

The argument of some representatives is to close down the environmental organization and only implement the law of chastity and hijab

In another part of his speech, the assistant to the president in the 13th government stated that despite the leadership’s emphasis on maintaining national unity, we see that some members of the parliament have ignored this unity with their statements. Recently, one of the members of the parliament considered the lack of water and the lack of rain to be the problem of Mr. President and declared that due to the lack of promulgation of the law on chastity and hijab, rains will not be carried out. and we don’t need to allocate a budget for the environmental organization. We should also remove Article 50 of the Constitution, which raises the issue of the environment, because the most important element in the environment is water.

He continued: It seems that a minority that does not have the ability to analyze the macro-governance cannot analyze the interest of the country, the expediency of the political system, and the interest of the people at the same time. Therefore, they come and say something like this. A word that really lacks scientific and even Sharia validity, our Sharia is all about reason and science. Then, when they say such a thing and tie it to otherworldly issues, in fact, they are harming Sharia, rationality in governance, and destroying wisdom altogether. These are very ugly things and I am sorry to hear such words.

If the hijab law was not so supernatural, the Security Council would not have prevented its implementation

Pad said: The important issue is that these friends degrade Sharia to the level of their own written law. Anyone who disagrees with these words seems to have disagreed with God, and the story of this is self-conceit. In fact, if this law was not so transcendental, the Supreme National Security Council and the Secretariat of the Supreme Security Council would not have prevented its implementation. There is no need for a psychologist or a sociologist to give an opinion about these statements, but it is obvious that an immature child knows and can give an opinion about it.