در جلسه‌ی امروز، مجلس شورای اسلامی برای استیضاح وزیر اقتصاد فرصتی مهم‌تر از پشتیبانی از معیشت مردم، برچیدن مسئولیت‌ناپذیری و پیشبرد ثبات اقتصادی کشور خواهد داشت. به گزارش برخی منابع، ۱۱۶ نماینده از طیف‌های مختلف سیاسی، استیضاح عبدالناصر همتی را می‌طلبن. برخی ۴۰ نماینده نیز موافقت خود را به طور شفاهی اعلام کرده‌اند.

از آنجا که همتی به دور از جوانمردی در فعالیت‌های خود به دلار آزاد که در زمان ورود او ۵۷ هزار تومان بود به ۹۵ هزار تومان رسید، نه‌تنها موفق به حذف دلار نیما نشد، بلکه با اصرار بر این موضوع، نرخ آن را تا ۹۲ هزار تومان برده است. در بازار توافقی، همچنان یک رانت باقی مانده است که اعتراف به فعالیت‌های مثبت همتی را بی‌پایه می‌کند. هر گونه نوسان در نرخ دلار، به نیروهای م惑-negative impacts on people’s lives and the country’s relative economic stability.

Some media outlets and officials argue that the increase in the dollar’s value and inflation are due to the actions of the Central Bank. However, if the currency’s price is the responsibility of the Central Bank, why has Hemyati’s interference in other domains and his media statements led to market instability and increased inflation? Especially when the Central Bank has declared its inability to further raise the dollar’s price.

These same advocates claim that removing Hemyati will not improve the economy, but it is evident that just as his arrival and actions disrupted market stability, his departure could restore it, unless others prevent it. If changing personnel does not solve problems, and the minister has little to no impact on economic issues, why was a “new minister” chosen for the cabinet?

Defenders of Hemyati argue that the increase in the dollar’s value is due to regional events, but the market and other sectors were relatively stable despite these events before Hemyati took office. Some government supporters also say that the rise in goods and service prices is due to the inaction of other ministries like Agriculture, but it is widely recognized that the most significant factor affecting prices in our country is the dollar’s rate.

Therefore, the increase in the dollar’s rate and the removal of Nima’s dollar, at Hemyati’s insistence, disrupted the relative stability of markets, making the cost of living more burdensome for people and affecting their livelihoods. This has only exacerbated the situation.

Furthermore, Hemyati not only disrupted the market with his insistence on removing Nima’s dollar but also set a floor price of 73,000 tomans, signaling an increase in the gold market and making inflammatory statements that destabilized all economic sectors in Iran. Given the extent of his disruptive actions as the Minister of Economic Affairs, it is unfair to frame his impeachment as a political matter. Even the apparent manipulation of content by some reformist media in defense of Hemyati is clear evidence of bias.

The rise in the dollar’s value has made people’s livelihoods more difficult. Therefore, Hemyati’s impeachment and dismissal would be the most effective assistance the parliament can offer to the government and the people. Some argue that his departure will lead to market instability or that nothing will change with the departure of one person, but is Hemyati’s inflammatory actions for the country and government not more detrimental than those of other officials who are also problematic?

This is not the first time Hemyati’s incompetence and disruptive behavior have been evident. He was also ineffective and disruptive during his time at the Central Bank, and his continued activities are detrimental to the government, as seen during the fall of the twelfth government. Hemyati, despite only being in office for six months, has significantly destabilized the country’s economic situation and hindered the work of other members of the economic team, showing that his reappointment by the government and parliament was a mistake.

Masih Zanganeh, a member of the parliament’s Planning and Budget Commission, stated that while six months is insufficient to correct a flawed trend, if the situation continues to deteriorate, it is too long of a deviation. The primary concern is the future and the direction of the thinking and approach of the minister, which he insists on pursuing.

Zanganeh added that while some claim the impeachment is political, is it not also a form of political silence? Moreover, 116 signatories from various political spectrums and around 40 others who could not officially sign due to various reasons, have shown their support. When the impeachment is political, it addresses personal issues, economic missteps, and appointments. However, the main issue is the economic policies of the government, which lack accountability.

The public closely follows this impeachment as they directly experience the economic situation. There are significant pressures from the government on representatives regarding the impeachment. Zanganeh noted that they have held several closed sessions with the minister and the government. The signatories had agreed that if the minister presented a clear path to solving problems, the impeachment would be halted. However, during these sessions, cabinet members pressured for the rapid removal of Nima’s dollar and the introduction of the consensus market, despite the Central Bank’s reservations.

Zanganeh also criticized the method of privatizing Iran Khodro, suggesting that Hemyati’s actions have put the entire cabinet at risk, potentially leading to negative outcomes.

Hemyati has become more of an influencer in the digital space than a minister, but his statements and propaganda affect the country’s economy. He should have been replaced by the honorable president much earlier due to the economic turmoil he caused. However, advisors who label any opposition as “resistance against the government” prevented this from happening. Hemyati has shown that he not only fails to meet his responsibilities but also creates tension in the market.

116 representatives have called for his impeachment, with 43 signing in the first month and 71 others joining later. The delay in additional signatures indicates that they waited for improvements or a viable solution, neither of which materialized. Instead, the dollar’s rate rose from around 70,000 to 90,000 tomans.

Alireza Selimi, a member of the parliament’s presiding board, questioned why some officials use threats, market manipulation, or persuasion to obstruct representatives’ legal right to impeach the minister. Husein Ali Haj Deligani, another representative, revealed that some officials have tried to halt the impeachment process through meetings and promises, but the representatives have remained firm.

Majid Doost Ali, a representative of Kerman and Ravar, affirmed that the parliament will use its supervisory capacities to improve the situation, as the impeachment aims to benefit the public and improve the country’s economic conditions.