The Position of the National Consultative Assembly in the Political Structure of the Second Pahlavi Regime

The primary problem that guided this research was explaining the question of why internal and external political developments after August 1941, which were coincident with the opening of the thirteenth Parliament, did not lead to a fundamental change followed by an increasing role of the National Consultative Assembly in different fields. In the analysis of the problem, it is assumed that the development of the structure of the modern absolutist state, along with the aggravation of social fragmentation and the continuation of the traditional and patriarchal political culture as major obstacles to political development, had left the Parliament in an unstable and subservient position in the subsequent years, so that in the historical period of the 1950s, despite the internal critical situation caused by the weakening of the power of Shah as the top of the pyramid, strengthening of the political and military bureaucracy, and the foreign rule of the Allied Forces, the National Consultative Assembly lost its ability to monitor the affairs and make its ideal legislation. Consequently, despite the weakness of the monarchy and the young Shah’s lack of command over the affairs of the country, and with the struggle between the internal power groups and the weakening of territorial independence, we witnessed another interregnum in the legislative arena, and at this time, Domestic and foreign issues had a heavy shadow on the nature and functioning of the democratic institution of the National Consultative Assembly. Thus, achieving the ideals of Constitutionalism was given second priority, and attention and efforts remained focused on gaining or maintaining the democratic and political aspects of Constitutionalism, leading to a disregard for other constitutional organs. In this way, one of the most important aspects for the crystallization of Constitutionalism, that is, the development of the political culture in the new society based on participatory culture was postponed. Moreover, the sequence of events after the Constitutional Revolution was such that the efforts to “preserve the Constitution and the institution of legislative assembly” replaced any attempts to “develop the Constitution” and institutionalize its goals. Indeed, this is the key to the interpretation of all the events after the Constitution. By referring to historical sources and documents and studying the structure and function of the Parliaments in the 1950s, which encompasses the social and political life of thirteenth to sixteenth Parliaments, we can analyze the situation where, despite Reza Shah's departure from the political scene of the country and the subsequent political openness and in spite of the beginning of a new round of decentralization in the political and social structure of power, this temporary change did not mean progress in the path of development nor the dominance of new political-social institutions, such as the Parliament, parties, and social organizations, over the system of political power. The continuation of the structure and nature of the traditional political system and the rise of the political elite from the traditional sources of power, the most important of which was the traditional political culture, led to the reproduction of the absolutist domination in the Constitutional era, which was evident in the form of the confrontation between the structure and action of the Parliaments in the 1950s and the parallel centers of power.