Televised Speech on the Occasion of the 32nd Anniversary of Imam Khomeini's Passing

In the Name of God, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

Thanks be to God, the Lord of the worlds, and peace and blessings be upon our master Muhammad and his pure family, especially the Awaited One on earth.

Another fourteenth of Khordad has arrived, and the public atmosphere of the country is filled with the memory and recollection of that great personality, that great man, that irreplaceable leader, that compassionate heart, that steel will, that determination full of firmness, that deep and clear faith, that wise and far-sighted sage. Our nation and our country today and for distant futures need to safeguard this dear memory and recollection.

The Islamic Republic; the most important innovation of Imam Khomeini (may his soul be sanctified) The discussion I wish to present today to our dear nation is about the most important innovation of the great Imam. The Imam had many innovations, but this is the most important one, which is the "Islamic Republic"; this was the Imam's innovation; this is the same religious democracy that gained legitimacy under the title of the Islamic Republic and became the system arising from the thought and will of the Iranian nation and the leadership of the great Imam.

The firmness and decisiveness of the Imam and the victories of the Islamic Republic silenced the enemies of the system I begin the discussion from here: among the systems of the world—revolutionary systems and those formed in the last one or two centuries—I do not know of any system that has been predicted to decline, perish, and collapse as much as the Islamic Republic has. From the very first day the Islamic Republic was established, the ill-wishers, the enemies, those who could not digest and tolerate this great phenomenon—both inside and outside the country—would sometimes say that the Islamic Republic would not last more than two months, sometimes they would say six months, and sometimes they would say it would not survive more than a year and would be destroyed. Well, the firmness of the great Imam, the decisiveness of the great Imam, and then the great victories of the Iranian nation in the eight-year war and various other events silenced these clamorings; that is, gradually they diminished and almost came to an end by the late life of the Imam, and these clamorings no longer existed. However, after the passing of the Imam, the ill-wishers revived, found hope, and began to repeat their wishes in the form of predictions, saying the same things once again. An old, worn-out party (1) and, of course, very pretentious issued a statement in 1989, declaring that the Islamic Republic was on the brink of collapse; their expression was that the Islamic Republic was on the brink of collapse; meaning that if it were to be shaken again, the Islamic Republic would be destroyed and toppled; this was in 1989.

A few years later, another group—a faction that unfortunately was also responsible, part of the representatives of one of the sessions of the Islamic Consultative Assembly (2)—in a letter announced that little time remained for the Islamic Republic; meaning that the Islamic Republic would soon cease to exist and must be eliminated. This was another group that, of course, had tendencies similar to those of the first party, or to some extent leaned towards it. Before and after these, individuals, groups, and factions—both inside the country and outside the country under the shadow of foreigners and the enemies of the Islamic Republic—spoke of such things, which were broadcast on radios and similar platforms, heralding the collapse of the Islamic Republic; that is, they expressed their wishes in the form of news and analysis. Ultimately, just a year or two ago, the esteemed Americans (!) made the final statement in this regard; a high-ranking American official (3) firmly declared that the Islamic Republic would not see its fortieth anniversary. These predictions and forecasts regarding the Islamic Republic are unprecedented. I do not recall any other system having been subjected to such extensive predictions of decline and collapse from its inception until many years later.

Of course, those who made such predictions looked at many revolutions and systems arising from revolutions; because many movements, uprisings, and revolutions—whether in Southeast Asia, West Asia, Africa, or even Europe, such as the Great French Revolution—after a short period following their establishment, disappeared; they began with enthusiasm and ended with bitterness. The Great French Revolution, which was against monarchy, faced a strong dictatorial monarchy about fifteen years after its establishment, which was the government of Napoleon Bonaparte; and similar occurrences happened elsewhere; such systems have occurred worldwide.

In our own Iran, similar events have occurred. The Constitutional Movement in Iran, with all its noise and excitement and fatwas and other things, came into being, and fifteen years after the decree of constitutionalism was signed, someone like Reza Khan came to power, with an extraordinary dictatorship, with a black despotism that was far worse than the despotism of the Qajar era. Then again, in 1949 and 1950, during the years of the national movement, a movement arose, and the people took to the streets and "nationalized" Iranian oil, meaning they took it from the British; however, one or two years later, a British-American coup occurred, and Mohammad Reza initiated a very dangerous and complex dictatorial despotism for a long time. That is, such events have occurred in the world; their expectations were based on such occurrences. But thanks be to God, the revolution and system of Imam Khomeini not only did not collapse and did not stop but became stronger day by day; it did not surrender, did not stagnate, and increasingly clarified and manifested its independence, achieving great successes and overcoming obstacles; how many obstacles were continuously placed in the way of this revolution and this system; various types: political, economic, security, and so on. It overcame all of these and advanced. Today, the Islamic Republic is both more developed than it was forty years ago and more advanced, and in every respect, it is ahead, by God's grace.

The secret of the endurance of the Islamic Republic: the companionship of Islam and the people Well, the question arises: what is the secret of this endurance, what is the secret of this progress? Why has the Islamic Republic, despite all this enmity, not suffered the fate of other systems and revolutions? What is the reason and what is its secret? I say the glorious and honorable secret of this system and its endurance is encapsulated in these two words: "Republic" and "Islamic". The companionship of these two words; and the entity formed from these two words must remain steadfast; both republican and Islamic; people and Islam; republican means people, and Islamic means Islam; religious democracy.

The creation and realization of the theory of the Islamic Republic: the great work of Imam Khomeini (may his soul be sanctified) The great work of our great Imam was to create this thought, this theory—the theory of the Islamic Republic—and to introduce it into the realm of various political theories—where at that time, various political theories, Eastern and Western, clashed in the realm of political issues and political mentalities—and then to realize it, to actualize it. It was not merely the creation of a theory but rather its realization and the establishment of the Islamic Republic system. This is the great work of the Imam.

The deep knowledge of the Imam about Islam and his deep trust in the people: the foundation of the creation and realization of the theory of the Islamic Republic Well, the Imam (may God’s peace be upon him) was a great man in many respects, including in terms of religious knowledge and understanding. The foundation of the creation of this theory and its realization was, on the one hand, his deep knowledge of Islam—he knew Islam and understood that Islamic governance pertains to the main message of Islam—and, on the other hand, his deep belief in the people; the great Imam had great faith in the people; in the capabilities of the people, in the determination of the people, in the loyalty of the people; and we have memories of this, his extraordinary faith, meaning in 1961, when the movement was just beginning, the Imam brought the discussion to political issues in class and referred to the desert of Qom, saying that if we call upon them, the people will fill this desert! In 1961, when no one imagined that people could be mobilized in such a movement. And both aspects of this theory, namely the Islamic aspect and the republican aspect, the Imam considered to be related to Islam; he derived them from Islam, and his mastery over Islamic principles and his deep understanding and comprehensiveness in understanding Islamic issues gave rise to this theory in the mind of this great man.

Opponents of the theory of the Islamic Republic Well, there were also opponents; let me mention this. Both sides of the issue, both the Islamic nature of governance and the governance of Islam, and the popular aspect of governance and democracy, had fierce opponents from the very beginning; and of course, there are still opponents today who have their opinions, and I will now refer to them.

1) Groups opposing the governance of Islam: secular non-religious and religious secularists Regarding the governance of Islam, that the country’s system and life must be governed by Islamic values, Islamic standards, Islamic lines, and Islamic laws; there were fierce opponents in this regard; of course, these opponents were not uniform: one group consisted of secular non-religious individuals who believed that religion has no right, no status to intervene in social issues, and to take charge of the country’s political system and social management; religion has no such status at all; now, if someone believes in religion, it is for prayer, fasting, personal matters, and heart issues; that is, they had no belief in the governance of religion. Some of them even considered religion to be the opiate of society, claiming that religion is harmful to society; not only does it have no benefit, but it is also detrimental. These were one group of opponents of the governance of Islam. Another group consisted of believers in religion who, from the standpoint of defending religion, argued that religion should not enter politics, that religion should not be tainted by politics, that religion should sit aside, preserve its sanctity, and should not enter the political arena, which is a field of conflict and disputes; these individuals, if one were to judge them correctly, are religious secularists; they are religious but, in reality, secular; that is, they have no belief in the intervention of religion in the affairs of life. These were opponents of the governance of Islam.

2) Groups opposing the governance of the people: secular liberals, religious individuals indifferent to the people Opponents of popular governance, that is, democracy, were also divided into two fronts: one front consisted of secular liberals who believed in democracy, but claimed that democracy has nothing to do with religion; they argued that in the realm of republicanism and democracy, liberals, technocrats, and, as they put it, technocrats should come forward; therefore, religious democracy and the Islamic Republic are meaningless; thus, they opposed the republican aspect. A number of others were individuals who, again, believed in religion, but said that the governance of religion has nothing to do with the people, that the people are irrelevant, that religion should govern; these were also a group whose extreme examples you have seen recently in the likes of ISIS, who, in their own misguided belief, claimed to believe in the governance of religion, but considered the people to be irrelevant.

The theory of the Islamic Republic based on the text of Islam The Imam, relying on God, with faith in the people and based on the deep knowledge he had of religion, stood firm and advanced this theory and realized this great innovation in the social environment. Well, I must briefly state that this is a scholarly interpretation; this is not an emotional matter; that religion must govern and in this governance, the people must be present, that is, religious democracy, this emerges from the text of Islam.

The governance of religion, derived from the Quran and traditions The governance of religion is clearly stated in the Quran; truly, if someone denies this, it indicates that they have not pondered correctly over the Quran. On the one hand, the Quran declares, in the noble verse of Surah An-Nisa, "We did not send any messenger except to be obeyed by the permission of God"; (4) the prophets were sent so that people would obey them; well, in what should they obey? What is the subject of obedience to the prophets? Hundreds of verses of the Quran clarify this subject; for example, verses of jihad; verses related to establishing justice, verses related to limits and punishments, verses related to transactions and contracts, verses related to international treaties - and if they break their oaths (5) - and so on; these are governance; these verses indicate that in these matters, obedience to the messenger is required; in the matter of defending the country, in the matter of executing limits, in the matter of social transactions and contracts, in the matter of treaties with other countries, in the matter of establishing justice and fairness in society; in these matters, obedience to the prophet is required; this means governance; governance does not mean anything else. The governance of Islam is reflected and clarified in the Quran with this clarity.

And of course, in the traditions and sayings of the Prophet and the words of the infallibles, there are abundant references. The Prophet (peace be upon him) when the representatives of the people of Yathrib came to Mecca to invite the Prophet to Yathrib—which later became Medina—spoke with the Prophet at the Aqabah of Mina, and he took this covenant from them; he said, "I will come, but you must defend [me], you must support [me] to the end of your lives"; and they accepted, they promised. Then, when the Prophet entered Medina, he established the Islamic government, created governance; this governance was related to his prophethood; there was no other issue; because he was the Prophet, because they had faith in him, that is why he established governance.

After the passing of the Prophet, despite the differences regarding succession—of which you know there were disagreements regarding the succession of the Prophet—no one among the Muslims and among those who had disagreements about succession doubted that any government formed must be based on religion and the Quran. Therefore, the issue of the governance of religion, the governance of Islam, is a very clear matter and a necessity of belief in Islam. That is, if someone believes in Islam, if they pay attention to the foundational knowledge of Islam, they must also believe in the governance of Islam in society.

The responsibility and duty of the people in establishing an Islamic government and the right to determine their destiny by themselves However, the issue of republicanism, democracy, and the validity of the people's vote; this is also a very important matter. This issue must be viewed from two perspectives: one perspective is the religious aspect of the matter, the aspect of belief regarding responsibility and rights; the other perspective is the practical possibility of realizing the governance of religion, which is not possible without the people.

The first part—which is the definite presence of the people in the matter of Islamic governance—can be understood from the responsibility of individuals. In the Holy Quran and in our traditions, there are clear and abundant discussions regarding the responsibility of the people towards the fate of society: "All of you are guardians, and all of you are responsible for your charges"; (6) that is, all members of society are responsible for the state of society. "Whoever wakes up and does not care about the affairs of Muslims is not a Muslim"; (7) the affairs of Muslims mean the affairs of the Islamic society, which encompasses all matters. Or in that famous sermon of Siffin, where there are many discussions regarding governance, Amir al-Mu'minin (peace be upon him) has a phrase that I find very important: "But among the most important rights of God, the Exalted, upon His servants is to advise with all their effort and to cooperate in establishing the truth among them"; (8) one of the most important and necessary rights of the Lord is that: "They must cooperate in establishing the truth among them"; they must work together to establish the right in society; that is, this is the responsibility of the people; the people are responsible; they must help establish the government of truth in the country, the government of God.

The duty of enjoining good; this is a public duty that is one of the most important goods, which is the government of justice and truth. In society, there must be a just government, a government of truth; the people must enjoin this [good]; this shows the responsibility of the people. Or the necessity of fighting against societal deviations, which Amir al-Mu'minin in the sermon of Shiqshiqiyyah considered one of the reasons for accepting governance: "And God has taken a covenant from the scholars that they should not agree to the oppression of the oppressor and the hunger of the oppressed"; (9) that is, the Almighty God has taken this covenant from the scholars—who I will discuss later—that they should not accept social gaps, that one should become close to death, and another should suffer hunger. Now, when he said "scholars," it may be because scholars are an esteemed class, and this right is more applicable to them, or because scholars mean the knowledgeable; that is, anyone who becomes informed; someone who is not informed, naturally has no responsibility; someone who becomes informed, naturally has a responsibility. Therefore, this responsibility is universal. Now, how this responsibility is exercised varies over time; today it is through elections, it may be one day through another means; therefore, this responsibility exists. This "responsibility" on one hand, and on the other hand, the "right"; [that is] the right to determine one’s destiny exists; humans are free; "Do not be a slave to others; God has created you free"; (10) this is the saying of Amir al-Mu'minin; do not be a slave and follower of others; God has created you free, choose for yourself, determine your own destiny; this is one of the certainties of Islam.

Thus, the issue of the governance of the people and democracy is based on these religious teachings; both the Quran is in it, and the hadith is in it, and Nahj al-Balagha is in it, and the behaviors of the times of the Prophet and Amir al-Mu'minin are in it, where Amir al-Mu'minin in the same sermon of Siffin says: "Do not refrain from advising me with truth or speaking justly"; (11) that is, do not refrain from advising me; intervene in my work, in my method and way of working; this is how it is. Therefore, the responsibility of the people and the right of the people certainly emerges from the text of Islam; this is the first perspective.

The need for governments to have popular support The second perspective, which is the perspective of support and the need for popular backing, is also clear. Governance, not just religious governance, but other governments as well, if they do not have popular support, and the people do not support them, they are forced to rule with sword and whip; that is, the continuation of governance is not possible. Now, an Islamic and Quranic government, which does not rule with oppression and sword and whip over the people, therefore cannot move without the support of the people. Therefore, it was neither possible for the Islamic Republic to come into existence without the support of the people, nor after it came into existence was it possible for it to continue. [Now] thanks be to God, it has continued, and after this, it will continue in the same way, God willing.

The Islamic Republic: a pure and unadulterated religious plan, not adopted from the West Well, therefore, the religious democracy that took on the title of the Islamic Republic and gained legitimacy and was proposed by Imam Khomeini, this is a pure and unadulterated religious plan; that is, there should be no doubt about this. That some have said that the Imam took elections, democracy, and the like from the West out of consideration and embarrassment and so on, is a very baseless claim. The Imam whom we recognized and worked with for years, and the people saw the Imam, was not someone who would abandon God's command due to embarrassment with this or that; no, if democracy were not in religion, if it were not from God, the Imam was not someone who would submit to that. The Imam expressed his decisive opinion. You have observed in the life of the Imam, the day the Imam raised the issue of hijab—an obligation that women must have hijab in the social environment—many opposed it, even individuals close to the Imam. One of the Imam's close associates came to me that day and said, "What is this that the Imam is saying? What is this that the Imam is saying? You should go tell the Imam to withdraw," which, of course, was our opinion as well, which was also the Imam's opinion; that is, many opposed it, but the Imam's view was to firmly raise the issue of hijab, which was also the right thing to do; and similar matters.

Utilizing the capacity, ability, and will of the people by the Imam and increasing the power and dignity of this nation Well, the great Imam carried out this religious innovation. This progressive and new school, this beautiful and astonishing interpretation of Islam, which was based on that clear thought and deep knowledge, he presented and with this solid and logical plan was able to bring the Iranian nation, which had been accustomed to despotism for centuries, to the forefront, to empower the country, and to make the Iranian nation believe in itself. For you dear youth who did not see the pre-revolution period, it is very hard for you to know how it was; we lived there, we breathed in that era; in that era, the people were completely irrelevant; if someone told the people that you have the right or can intervene in the affairs of the country, this statement was not believable to the masses; the people were entirely on the margins; they were completely irrelevant; especially during the dark period of Pahlavi despotism, which we experienced the last twenty or thirty years of it; the people were like this; they had lived under oppression. The Imam, with a leap, brought this nation, these people to the forefront, the youth believed in themselves, the nation believed in itself, the immense capacity and will of the nation was utilized by the Imam, and with his leadership and guidance, he was able to bring it to a stage where they accomplished great things, toppled a millennia-old monarchy, brought the people to the forefront, and made them stand and resist with their faith, knowledge, and understanding, so that the people would stand and become stronger day by day.

One day, the Islamic Republic was a slender sapling; today it is a robust and flourishing tree that no storm can uproot. Catastrophic events occurred; this nation was able to maintain itself through these catastrophic events, advance; like the eight-year war. For eight years, all the great powers of the world stood behind a government that attacked us; they provided it with equipment, information, taught it tactics, and provided financial assistance—all of them—to be able to destroy the Islamic Republic; the Iranian nation stood firm and brought them to their knees and, to their dismay, did not surrender and did not kneel and expanded its sphere of power and dignity.

The key to solving the people's problems from the Imam's perspective: Islamic orientation and the governance of the people's will in managing affairs The Imam considered these two words, "Republic" and "Islamic," to be the key to solving the country's problems. He believed that the key to all the country's problems was to observe Islam and for the people to be present in the scene; this was the Imam's view. When he said, "Not one word less, not one word more," one word less means a republic without Islam or Islam without a republic; this does not make sense. The Imam said, "Islamic Republic." That is, the governance of Islam and the governance of the people, which are intertwined and have no contradiction with each other. The governance of Islam means that the contents, values, and orientations are determined by Islam; the governance of the people means that the form of governance is constituted by the people. The governance of Islam, the governance of the people; the will of the people is effective, and the laws of Islam also have an effect; the Imam considered this to be the key to solving problems; the reality is that the key to all the country's affairs is this. Wherever we engaged the people and observed Islam, we advanced; both during the Imam's time and in the decades following the Imam's passing until today; I assert this categorically and can provide numerous evidence that is visible to the people. Wherever we engaged the people, wherever we made Islam the main criterion and measure of our work, we advanced; wherever either of these two faltered, we did not advance. For example, consider that we engage the people in economic matters; that I have been repeating for several years that we should develop and support small and medium-sized industrial workshops, this means that these small and medium workshops feed millions of people, they concern millions of people—this is the presence of the people, after all—if we had strengthened this, today the economic situation would be better than this.

In various other matters, it is the same. If this issue were to be established among the esteemed officials of the country, that they should consider both Islamic matters, meaning that they should fully observe Islamic limits—whether in internal matters, external matters, economic matters, cultural matters, political matters, and so on—and also ensure the presence of the people, meaning that they should create mechanisms that allow the will of the people, the presence of the people, and the desires of the people to intervene, all the problems of the country will be resolved.

The Imam's views on the Islamic content of the system and the characteristics of Islam in the Imam's thoughts and statements Well, this was the main issue; the Imam's statements are also important. He has remarkable statements that I have noted a brief sentence here to mention. The Imam has clear and firm statements regarding both Islam and democracy. The Imam categorically rejects the Islam of the rigid and the Islam of the eclectic. On one hand, he rejects the rigid, and on the other hand, he rejects the eclectic, meaning those who, in the name of Islam, feed the audience and society with the words of others; the Imam categorically rejects these. The Islam that the Imam believes in is one that seeks justice, is against global arrogance, and is against corruption; these are clear and evident in the Imam's statements; they are in his will, and in the twenty-some volumes of the Imam's statements that have been published; observe them. Now, we who have directly heard from the Imam, those who were not there and did not see, should refer to these statements; the text of the Imam's statements is clear.

The Islam that the Imam believes in is against global arrogance; that is, it is against America; it is against the domination of foreigners; it is against the interference of foreigners and foreign powers in the internal affairs of the country; it is against kneeling before the enemy. The Islam against corruption; the Islam that the Imam believes in is one that fights against corruption, against favoritism; and these things that are specified in the presence of corruption in some sectors are certainly the opposite of Islam. Islam is one that fights against corruption; an Islamic government is one that fights against corruption. Against rigidity; that is, bringing such outdated and backward thoughts into the field of life, distancing from the new Islamic thought and the new thought of the great Imam. Islam is against elitism; Islam is in favor of the deprived. Islam is against class differences, against the gaps between the poor and the rich.

In one of his letters to an official—this pertains to the last months of the blessed life of the great Imam; a few months before his passing—he writes: "You must show that our people rose against oppression, tyranny, rigidity, and retrogression and replaced the thought of pure Muhammadan Islam with the Islam of monarchy, the Islam of capitalism, the Islam of eclecticism, and in a word, the American Islam"; (12) this is related to January 1989; it is not that we say this is from the era of revolutionary fervor at the beginning; no, the Imam wrote this a few months before his passing. Well, therefore, the Imam's view regarding Islam is like this.

Elections; the manifestation of democracy and the presence of the people from the Imam's perspective Regarding democracy, the Imam considered elections to be the manifestation of democracy—and so it is; that is, today democracy and the presence of the people are possible through elections; there may come a time in the future when elections become meaningless, and other forms may emerge for the presence of the people and the expression of the people's opinions; today it is elections, and during the Imam's time, it was elections—regarding elections, the Imam has important statements: he considered elections to be a religious obligation; the Imam explicitly stated that elections are a religious obligation. In the Imam's will, there is a very alarming phrase where he says: "Not participating in elections, at certain times, may be a sin among the gravest sins"; (13) that is, regarding elections, this is the Imam's view. Or in another statement, he says: "Shortcomings in participation—meaning participation in elections—have worldly consequences, perhaps for generations to come, and entail divine accountability"; this is the Imam's statement, which with these statements and with these firm assertions established the Islamic Republic, made it steadfast. And thanks be to God, after the passing of the Imam, the Iranian nation preserved this divine gift—namely, this religious democracy that was a divine gift and was bestowed upon the Iranian nation by the great Imam.

The steadfastness of the Iranian nation against the plots of the enemies The Iranian nation firmly stood against the plots of the enemies of Iran and the Iranian enemies who made various efforts and carried out various plots to separate the people from this system and to make them indifferent to Islam and religious democracy; they stood firm and thwarted these plots; and each time and in every form they entered, they faced the iron wall of the Iranian nation. Today, it is the same; today, the enemies are lying in wait, their eyes wide open, hoping to create a rift between the Iranian nation and the Islamic system, but they are faced with the broad chest of the Iranian nation and the iron wall of the Iranian nation; they have carried out security plots, political plots, clear economic enmities, and intellectual assaults; and of course, in all of these, they have failed.

Various plots of the enemies and opponents to strike at the Islamic Republic and its Islamic nature Unfortunately, there have been and are those who repeat the words of the enemies in some way inside; this ideology-devoiding that you sometimes see in some expressions is the same as the words of the opponents; ideology-devoiding means that we should set aside Islam and Islamic thought regarding the Islamic Republic and religious democracy and turn to the corrupt and deviant liberal democracy that has made the people of the world miserable today. Some also enter from another route, claiming that the sanctity of religion is to set it aside; [this] is the same argument that was made at the beginning of the revolution; this is also the enemy's argument and the repetition of the words before the victory of the revolution and at the beginning of the revolution. That some again pretend that "if we want to observe Islamic regulations, it cannot be reconciled with democracy," is among the words of the enemies of the Islamic Republic and the enemies of the Iranian nation; and of course, it is possible that some may say these words out of negligence. I do not accuse that anyone who says these words is necessarily a premeditated enemy; no, sometimes it is out of negligence, but they should know that this statement is the enemy's statement, and the enemy wants to uproot the Islamic nature. Now, some express concern for democracy, saying, "Oh! Democracy has been lost"; however, in reality, they do not care much for democracy; they want to uproot the Islamic nature, to set aside Islam so that it does not exist; and it is truly a great mistake if we alienate democracy from Islamic thought and Islamic spirit.

Well, the constitution has also clarified the obligations. You see in the constitution, political and religious figures are designated as the president, the head of the government, the head of the executive branch, meaning the one who is in charge of all matters of the country. Why is the clause "political and religious figures" there? It is so that they can consider the interests of the country in the political arena and also guide and assist the people in their beliefs and religion, and act wisely in both cases; or the issue of piety and trustworthiness, which is emphasized in the constitution, is a very important matter that is emphasized in the constitution.

Non-participation in elections weakens both the Islamic and democratic pillars of the system Of course, there are some individuals—since these days are election days and we are approaching the elections, and fortunately, the election atmosphere is warming up, thanks be to God—who want to disregard the duty of participation in elections under false pretexts. This is acting according to the wishes of the enemies; the enemies of Iran, the enemies of Islam, and the enemies of religious democracy. And both pillars must be fully considered; both democracy and Islamic nature, and if either of these two pillars is weakened, certainly both Islam and Iran will suffer blows from the enemy.

Resolving existing disarray through correct selection, not non-selection Well, let me say a few sentences about the current elections. It is said that some, due to the existing economic pressures, which we all know and feel, are hesitant about whether to participate in the elections or not; or some say, "We voted for someone with enthusiasm in various periods, and it led to disappointment, and in the end, we became disappointed; therefore, it is better not to participate in the elections"; some of these statements are made. It seems that these are not correct arguments. We should not let these things discourage us from participating in the elections. If there is disarray, if there is inefficiency, we must compensate for it with correct and good selection, not by non-selection. Well, if there is indeed a weakness in management, what is the solution? Is the solution to not intervene in management at all, or is the solution to intervene and create a truly Islamic and popular management? That is the solution; that is, if there is disappointment, it should be compensated in this way, not by refraining from entering the electoral arena.

The necessity of examining the effectiveness and promises of candidates through their past performance Of course, care must be taken in selection. I emphasize that promises and words cannot be trusted. We say the same thing regarding others; regarding foreigners who constantly deliver promises and words to us, I always say to the esteemed officials in the ongoing nuclear negotiations that they should not trust words and promises: actions speak louder than words; (14) one cannot trust mere words; the same applies to important matters of the country. Well, words are easy; anyone comes and makes a claim, gives a promise, says something; one cannot trust these; one must look and see whether there is a past action of this person that confirms and validates this promise or not; if there is, one can trust them; otherwise, no. Therefore, effectiveness cannot be determined by words.

A few points addressed to the candidates: 1) Avoid making unsupported promises I also have an expectation from the esteemed candidates that I would like to express: they should not make promises that they are not sure they can fulfill; these promises are detrimental to the country; why? Because you make a promise, and then if you hypothetically reach the presidency and do not fulfill that promise, you discourage the people, you discourage the people regarding the system, you discourage the people regarding elections; therefore, making promises that candidates are not sure they can fulfill is not permissible; of course, promises that are certainly clear, evident, and confirmed by experts as achievable can be made, but saying that we will do such and such a thing—and similar statements—I do not want to specify further—these promises that have no practical backing should not be made; because later it will discourage the people, and this is a sin.

2) Avoid making slogans without belief in them Another expectation I would like to express to the esteemed candidates is that they should make slogans that they believe in. Well, we know the individuals; we know that many may not genuinely believe in these slogans; this is not right; one must be honest with the people; God forbid, slogans that imply disbelief in what one is saying should not be made.

3) Candidates must commit to social justice, fighting corruption, and strengthening domestic production Another expectation from the candidates is that they should decide that if they succeed and reach their goal, they should commit themselves first to social justice, to reducing the gap between the poor and the rich; that is, they should consider this as one of their most fundamental tasks. Secondly, they should commit to fighting corruption; without hesitation, without consideration, they should commit to fighting corruption; they should commit to strengthening domestic production. I have repeatedly stated; this is also the opinion of economic specialists; I have emphasized repeatedly that the key to saving the country's economy is strengthening domestic production; strengthening domestic production; fighting against smuggling, fighting against indiscriminate imports, fighting against those who fill their pockets through imports and do not want to allow domestic production to stop and break the back of domestic production with imports; they should consider this fight as one of their main issues and commit to it. This candidate today should commit to this and state that he is committed to this, so that if he is elected and does not fulfill this commitment, the supervisory bodies can question him and confront him, saying, "Why did you not fulfill it?"

The necessity of all people to invite everyone to participate in the elections I previously, last week (15), had a discussion with the esteemed representatives of the parliament; there I said a sentence, I said those who have persuasive words should encourage the people to participate in the elections; I said this there; now I want to add that this is not limited to those with persuasive words; [rather] all individuals, every single person should consider themselves obliged not only to participate in the elections but also to invite others to participate in the elections; this is enjoining what is right: "And enjoin one another to the truth" (16) which is in the Holy Quran; this is recommending what is right; this is a duty, and they should do this; invite family members, friends, colleagues, acquaintances, and all those you interact with to [participate in the elections].

The necessity of restoring the dignity of some individuals whose qualifications were not confirmed My remarks have concluded. There is a necessary reminder that I want to mention at the end of my speech, which is a religious and human matter, and that reminder is this: in the process of not confirming qualifications, some individuals who were not confirmed were wronged, were oppressed; either to themselves or their families, false accusations were made against them that were not true; their families were subjected to such accusations. Well, there were false reports, mistakes; later it was proven that they were false, it became clear that they were false, but unfortunately, they were spread among the people, and unfortunately in the virtual space—this is an example of the virtual space being unregulated—these things were published without any restrictions. Preserving the dignity of individuals is among the most important issues, among the highest rights of individuals. My request is this, and my demand from the responsible authorities is to compensate for this. Cases where a false report was made regarding someone’s child, regarding someone’s family, and later it was proven to be false, should be compensated for and their dignity restored.

May God protect us from sin, from oppression, from violating the sanctity of the believers. May God protect us from deviating from our duties. May God, God willing, by His grace and mercy, include our great Imam in His vast mercies, unite him with His great friends in the Barzakh and in the Hereafter, and be pleased with him. May God, God willing, make the souls of the pure martyrs pleased with us, and unite us with them by His grace and mercy. And may God, God willing, bring good to the Iranian nation, and make this election blessed for the nation and among the elections that break the enemies, God willing; and by God's grace, it will be so, God willing.

Peace be upon you and God's mercy and blessings.