MP: Attacks on Ghalibaf over negotiations mirror those on the late Larijani and the JCPOA / Internet cut off, and one lawmaker was unable to speak in defense of the nominated minister!

Mehrdad Baouj Lahouti said: Anyone else in Ghalibaf's position who went to negotiations would face the same criticism. What happened to Ghalibaf during the talks also happened to the late Larijani during the JCPOA affair.

According to the report of Ambassador Arjan Mehrdad Bauj Lahovi, the member of the 12th Parliament said: Regarding the holding of online meetings and the possibility of connecting people to make their suggestions and suggestions, I must explain that we were facing a legal problem at the beginning of the war. According to the law, the meetings had to be held in the public hall of the Majlis. For this reason, we amended the law to allow holding meetings in different ways, including face-to-face and webinar.

According to Ambassador Arjan, you can read the most important parts of this conversation below:

* In practice, the same actions that are taken in face-to-face meetings are followed in virtual meetings and the representatives who are able to attend participate in person, in such a way that those representatives who have a speech or defense participate in the meeting in person and those who are able to, appear in the courtroom virtually. In the public meetings of the Majlis, the number of attendees is usually around 260 to 270 people. Due to the mission of the representatives, vacations and other issues, the number of attendees was usually around this; Except on special occasions such as vote of confidence or impeachment, when the presence of representatives increases.

* In the meetings we hold now, the number of attendees is almost the same and the representatives are well present. Of course, from next week, the composition of the meetings will change and the meetings are scheduled to be held again in the public hall of the parliament, and one-third of the members of each committee will participate in face-to-face meetings.

* Meetings of the parliamentary commissions have been held throughout this period. Even at the beginning of the war, meetings were held in person and in different places, and things did not stop, but continued at a faster pace. However, because people had a certain image of public meetings in the Majlis floor, holding meetings in other places might not match that image. We hope to be able to return to the previous routine from next week.

*This very day, one of the respected representatives could not communicate in the meeting of the commission where Mr. Ethaki, the proposed minister of the Ministry of Defense, was proposed, the reason was that the representatives were present in their constituencies this week and some may be in villages or other areas where there is no possibility of proper access to the Internet. Of course, these incidents are not uncommon in holding virtual meetings, and such problems may occur in other meetings as well.

*One of the results of the joint meetings of the parliament and the government was the increase in the prestige of Kalaberg. In one of these meetings, the central bank agreed to increase the credit of Kalaberg. Mr. Qalibaf, who presided over the meeting, also agreed and the Minister of Economy also supported this increase. The interesting thing was that Mr. Midari was against this proposal and his argument was that this action would increase inflation. After his speech, I also spoke and said: When all the members present in this gathering agree with the increase in the credit of Kalaberg, why do you oppose it? You are the Minister of Cooperation, Labor and Social Welfare and one of your main duties is to pay attention to people's livelihood. You are not responsible for inflation, you are responsible for improving people's living conditions.

* Regarding Mr. Qalibaf, I personally asked him this issue. He also explained in the public meeting that in my opinion, accepting this responsibility was a kind of self-sacrifice. Because according to him, all the members of the Supreme National Security Council agreed that he should be the head of the negotiating team. What should he do in such a critical and difficult situation? You know the personality of Dr. Ghalibaf. Due to his military experience, he could also help on the battlefield, but at the same time, he accepted the responsibility of leading the diplomatic delegation and was placed at the head of it. Qalibaf negotiated with the enemy. I am really surprised that some of our friends make such comments about those who have gone to negotiate with the enemy. The other party had entered the field with the aim of overthrowing the government of the Islamic Republic and destroying our system, but it did not succeed.

Who should be responsible for the negotiation? If Mr. Ghalibaf did not go, would another person who accepted this responsibility face the same criticisms? In my opinion, such discussions would have been raised in any case. In conclusion, I must say that the issue of Mr. Qalibaf has also turned into a story similar to the one that was raised about the oppressed martyr, Mr. Larijani. I have worked in the parliament for 12 years and I believe that he did not pay attention to anything other than the national interests of the country and always obeyed the leadership. In my opinion, he had a rare performance in leading the country and managing the legislature, and it is really impossible to find a similar example for him. Similar to this story that happened to Ghalibaf in the negotiations, it happened to Shahid Larijani in the case of the JCPOA.