Head of Judiciary: Define responsibilities of each institution during crises to prevent overlapping efforts
According to the Judiciary’s Media Center, Mohseni Ejei, during a meeting with the head and several deputies of the Iranian Red Crescent Society, highlighted shared responsibilities between the judiciary and the Red Crescent in terms of the nature of their duties.
He noted: “With over 3 million members, the Red Crescent shares similarities with the judiciary in the type and nature of responsibilities. For instance, a key constitutional duty of the judiciary is crime prevention. However, crimes stem from various factors, such as declining employment and growing economic hardships, which directly contribute to increased crime rates. Naturally, the judiciary cannot directly address job creation or economic challenges. Therefore, I strongly urge relevant judicial authorities to mobilize all responsible entities and hold them accountable to enhance crime prevention efforts. In this regard, we share similarities with the Red Crescent, as part of your responsibility involves predicting and preventing incidents. But when, for example, engineering authorities fail to ensure building safety, leading to incidents that double the Red Crescent’s workload, what mechanism exists to hold those negligent entities accountable?”
The Head of the Judiciary emphasized: “Regarding the recent incident at Shahid Rajaei Port, where the Red Crescent provided commendable services, a comprehensive analysis must be conducted to prevent similar incidents and to hold accountable those individuals or entities that failed or were negligent in their responsibilities, ensuring legal measures are applied.”
He added: “The Red Crescent undertakes responsibilities that overlap with those of other institutions and ministries, such as providing medical services during crises or aiding refugees and displaced persons. In such cases, the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Interior also have roles. Therefore, the scope and boundaries of each institution’s responsibilities must be clearly defined to avoid overlapping efforts during crises and to identify which entity is responsible for any shortcomings, enabling accountability and legal action.”
The Head of the Judiciary further stated: “The Red Crescent should share its analyses of the causes of unforeseen incidents and crisis management with all relevant institutions to help develop a national, comprehensive program for preventing such incidents and strengthening crisis management. Such a program would undoubtedly foster greater coordination and synergy among entities responsible for crisis management.”
He noted: “When an unforeseen incident occurs, responsible entities sometimes provide conflicting explanations for its causes, leading to significant discrepancies. The Red Crescent can step in, presenting its specialized findings to align perspectives on the incident’s causes, facilitating cohesive action to prevent future occurrences. Differing explanations can obscure the primary cause, diverting focus to irrelevant issues and wasting opportunities for proper analysis. When the cause of an incident is clear, it must be addressed without hesitation or bias.”
The Chief Justice added: “If necessary, Red Crescent officials should prioritize updating the organization’s charter and regulations to align with current needs. Some institutions have not revised their charters in 30 years, despite significant changes in their operational contexts. While some principles remain fundamental and unchangeable, many aspects can be updated to reflect evolving circumstances.”
Mohseni Ejei concluded: “Health diplomacy has significant global applications today, often proving more effective than political or economic diplomacy. This is an area where the Red Crescent can make a substantial impact. Additionally, the organization can play a vital role in promoting a culture of kindness, charity, cooperation, and support for the underprivileged and those affected by crises.”