Government Acknowledges Directive on Hijab Enforcement
The Iranian government has officially confirmed its receipt of a directive from Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei concerning the enforcement of the mandatory hijab. This confirmation, made public around December 3, 2025, comes amidst a renewed political storm surrounding the contentious issue of compulsory veiling in the Islamic Republic.
The directive was reportedly prompted by an 11-minute leaked audio file, attributed to Azim Ebrahim-Pour, the alleged head of the national 'Jihad Tabyin Headquarters'. This audio claimed that the Ministry of Intelligence had presented a 'shocking' report to Khamenei detailing widespread cultural dissent and growing defiance of compulsory veiling. According to the leaked recording, Khamenei reacted with alarm, instructing the government to take 'severe action' through intensified intelligence operations and confrontation with alleged organizers of non-compliance.
Administration Advocates for Non-Coercive Methods
Despite the alleged tone of the Supreme Leader's instructions in the leaked audio, the administration of President Masoud Pezeshkian has publicly emphasized a more restrained approach. Elyas Hazrati, head of the government's Information Council, confirmed the directive's receipt but asserted that the leaked audio was 'incomplete, imprecise, and based on misinterpretations'.
Hazrati stressed that the government would not revert to 'previous coercive methods', explicitly labeling the 'morality-police model' as 'ineffective and socially damaging'. He further disclosed that a special committee has been established to examine the issue and develop 'new, rational approaches' rather than confrontational strategies. President Pezeshkian and his cabinet members are reportedly opposed to 'coercive methods such as the morality patrols' that have often 'worsened the situation'.
Societal Shifts and Internal Divisions
The current debate underscores significant societal changes in Iran, particularly since the 2022 death of Mahsa Amini in morality-police custody, which ignited nationwide 'Woman, Life, Freedom' protests. Since then, non-compliance with compulsory hijab has become widespread, especially among young women in major cities, and the visible presence of morality-police vans on the streets has significantly diminished.
The new Hijab and Chastity Law, passed in 2024, has seen its full implementation blocked by the Supreme National Security Council, although some provisions, such as SMS warnings and limited service denials, are reportedly still quietly applied. This complex situation reveals deep contradictions within the state, as the government attempts to balance signaling firmness to its conservative base with avoiding aggressive enforcement that could trigger further public unrest. Notably, Supreme Leader Khamenei himself avoided directly addressing the hijab issue in a recent televised address, focusing instead on themes of unity, a move widely interpreted as intentional and strategic.
Conclusion
The Iranian government's confirmation of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei's directive on hijab enforcement, coupled with the administration's stated commitment to restraint, highlights a delicate political tightrope walk. As hardline factions call for stricter measures, the Pezeshkian government seeks to navigate public discontent and internal divisions by advocating for non-coercive methods, reflecting the ongoing struggle over state authority and social norms in Iran.
5 Comments
eliphas
Acknowledging the ineffectiveness of harsh tactics is a huge step forward.
anubis
Finally, some common sense from the government. Morality police were a disaster.
paracelsus
The leaked audio reveals the true hardline agenda. This government spin is insulting.
anubis
The administration's tightrope walk between hardliners and public unrest is understandable given the context. But true progress would involve addressing the root causes of dissent, not just managing the symptoms of enforcement.
eliphas
While it's a relief to hear that 'coercive methods' might be avoided, the article highlights the state's internal divisions rather than a genuine shift in ideology. This makes any long-term change seem uncertain and dependent on political maneuvering.