The Assembly of Experts has the power to remove the Supreme Leader if deemed unfit. However, this has never happened in practice. The process for determining 'unfitness' is not clearly defined, and the Assembly is itself vetted by the Guardian Council, making it unlikely they would act against the establishment.

The most common trick is to attribute specific executive functions directly to the Supreme Leader that are actually carried out by the President or other government officials *on behalf of* the Supreme Leader. Examiners will try to blur the lines between *ultimate authority* and *day-to-day administration*.

Freedom of speech is guaranteed, but criticism of the Supreme Leader, the government, or Islamic principles is often suppressed. Dissent is frequently met with arrest and prosecution, effectively nullifying this right for many.

The protests following Mahsa Amini's death challenged the *interpretation* and *application* of the constitution, particularly regarding personal freedoms and the role of religious law in society. While not directly challenging the constitution's text, the protests questioned the legitimacy of its current implementation and the authority of the religious establishment.

Critics argue that *velayat-e faqih* is inherently undemocratic, concentrating excessive power in the hands of unelected clerics and undermining popular sovereignty. A supporter might respond that it ensures moral guidance and prevents the government from deviating from Islamic principles, which are seen as essential for a just society. They might also argue that the Assembly of Experts provides a check on the Supreme Leader's power.

There is inherent tension. The republican elements (elections, parliament) provide a degree of popular participation, but the religious elements (*velayat-e faqih*, Guardian Council) prioritize religious authority, often overriding democratic choices. This creates a constant push-and-pull between popular will and religious control, leading to political instability and social discontent.

The 1989 amendments, made after Ayatollah Khomeini's death, removed the requirement that the Supreme Leader be a *marja* (a religious scholar widely recognized as an authority). This allowed Ayatollah Khamenei, who was not a *marja* at the time, to become Supreme Leader. The amendments also abolished the position of Prime Minister, consolidating executive power under the President (though still subordinate to the Supreme Leader).

Being a member of the Assembly of Experts is *not* typically a full-time job. Most members hold other positions within the religious establishment or academia. The Assembly meets periodically to discuss national issues and, theoretically, to monitor the Supreme Leader. However, their primary function is to select the next Supreme Leader.

Unlike some purely theocratic states, the Iranian Constitution incorporates elements of republicanism, such as elections and a parliament. This blend of religious authority and popular participation is unique. However, the ultimate authority of the Supreme Leader and the Guardian Council's power to veto legislation based on religious principles distinguish it from secular democracies.

The Assembly of Experts has the power to remove the Supreme Leader if deemed unfit. However, this has never happened in practice. The process for determining 'unfitness' is not clearly defined, and the Assembly is itself vetted by the Guardian Council, making it unlikely they would act against the establishment.

The most common trick is to attribute specific executive functions directly to the Supreme Leader that are actually carried out by the President or other government officials *on behalf of* the Supreme Leader. Examiners will try to blur the lines between *ultimate authority* and *day-to-day administration*.

Freedom of speech is guaranteed, but criticism of the Supreme Leader, the government, or Islamic principles is often suppressed. Dissent is frequently met with arrest and prosecution, effectively nullifying this right for many.

The protests following Mahsa Amini's death challenged the *interpretation* and *application* of the constitution, particularly regarding personal freedoms and the role of religious law in society. While not directly challenging the constitution's text, the protests questioned the legitimacy of its current implementation and the authority of the religious establishment.

Critics argue that *velayat-e faqih* is inherently undemocratic, concentrating excessive power in the hands of unelected clerics and undermining popular sovereignty. A supporter might respond that it ensures moral guidance and prevents the government from deviating from Islamic principles, which are seen as essential for a just society. They might also argue that the Assembly of Experts provides a check on the Supreme Leader's power.

There is inherent tension. The republican elements (elections, parliament) provide a degree of popular participation, but the religious elements (*velayat-e faqih*, Guardian Council) prioritize religious authority, often overriding democratic choices. This creates a constant push-and-pull between popular will and religious control, leading to political instability and social discontent.

The 1989 amendments, made after Ayatollah Khomeini's death, removed the requirement that the Supreme Leader be a *marja* (a religious scholar widely recognized as an authority). This allowed Ayatollah Khamenei, who was not a *marja* at the time, to become Supreme Leader. The amendments also abolished the position of Prime Minister, consolidating executive power under the President (though still subordinate to the Supreme Leader).

Being a member of the Assembly of Experts is *not* typically a full-time job. Most members hold other positions within the religious establishment or academia. The Assembly meets periodically to discuss national issues and, theoretically, to monitor the Supreme Leader. However, their primary function is to select the next Supreme Leader.

Unlike some purely theocratic states, the Iranian Constitution incorporates elements of republicanism, such as elections and a parliament. This blend of religious authority and popular participation is unique. However, the ultimate authority of the Supreme Leader and the Guardian Council's power to veto legislation based on religious principles distinguish it from secular democracies.