In a letter to Belgium’s foreign minister and deputy prime minister, 16 prominent figures argued that the former shah’s son represents a dangerous alternative to clerical dictatorship and called for Iran’s future to be determined through free elections and a democratic republic.
In a letter addressed to Maxime Prévot, Belgium’s deputy prime minister and foreign minister, the signatories expressed deep concern over the invitation extended to Pahlavi to speak at the Belgian parliament before the invitation and planned appearance were canceled. They urged the Belgian government to oppose such invitations and defend the Iranian people’s right to determine their political future through an inclusive democratic process.
The letter draws a clear distinction between supporting the Iranian people’s struggle for freedom and granting political legitimacy to a figure whose family history and proposed transition arrangements, the signatories argue, raise fundamental questions about democracy and the concentration of power.
“We stand firmly with the people of Iran in their struggle for freedom, democracy, and human rights,” the letter states. “Precisely for this reason, Belgium should not legitimize an individual whose political project represents a return to another form of dictatorship.”
Warning Against Rehabilitating the Shah’s Dictatorship
The signatories recall the record of the monarchy under Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, describing its suppression of political pluralism, establishment of a one-party system, and systematic repression by the SAVAK secret police.
They cite torture, political imprisonment, and the persecution of opponents as defining features of the former monarchy. For millions of Iranians, they argue, these are not distant historical events but painful experiences that remain embedded in family memories.
The letter contends that Reza Pahlavi has repeatedly failed to distance himself clearly from this record. Rather than unequivocally acknowledging the repression associated with his family’s rule, he has publicly expressed pride in his family’s history and actions, according to the signatories.
Their objection is not limited to historical accountability. It concerns the political implications of presenting the former ruling dynasty as an alternative to Iran’s current system.
The signatories argue that Iran’s population should not be forced to choose between clerical authoritarianism and a restoration of monarchical rule. A political transition that fails to establish democratic safeguards could reproduce the concentration of power that characterized previous systems of government.
Concentration of Power Raises Democratic Concerns
The letter also questions Pahlavi’s vision for a political transition, particularly arrangements that would concentrate executive, legislative, and judicial authority around a single individual.
Such a model, the signatories argue, is fundamentally incompatible with democratic principles. A transition toward democracy requires institutional checks and balances, political pluralism, and the separation of powers—not the transfer of extensive authority to a figure on the basis of hereditary claims.
The authors insist that Iran’s future must be determined through free and fair elections rather than through the restoration of a monarchy or the assumption that a political leader is entitled to power because of family lineage.
Their position places popular sovereignty at the center of the debate over Iran’s future. No individual or political faction, they argue, should be entitled to determine the country’s political system without a genuinely democratic process through which the Iranian people can express their will.
Concerns Over Intimidation of Iranian Opponents in Europe
The signatories further raise concerns about documented reports of threats and intimidation against Iranian opponents in Europe by individuals associated with pro-Pahlavi monarchist networks.
These reports, they argue, warrant particular attention because political pluralism and freedom of expression must be protected not only in a future Iran but also within European countries where Iranian dissidents live and organize.
The letter also criticizes Pahlavi’s repeated calls for foreign military intervention in Iran. The signatories present such appeals as an additional source of concern, emphasizing that the country’s political future should be determined through an inclusive democratic process rather than imposed through external military involvement.
Together, these concerns underpin their warning against extending institutional recognition to a political figure whose supporters and proposed transition arrangements, in their view, raise questions about democratic accountability and respect for political opponents.
A Democratic Republic, Not a Return to Hereditary Rule
The letter sets out an explicit alternative to both the current clerical system and a restoration of the monarchy.
“The people of Iran do not want to choose between the dictatorship of the mullahs and the dictatorship of the shah,” the signatories write.
They describe the Iranian people’s aspirations as centered on a democratic republic based on popular sovereignty, political pluralism, human rights, gender equality, and the rule of law.
This framework, they argue, requires a political system in which authority derives from the people rather than religious privilege, hereditary entitlement, or the personal dominance of a single leader.
The letter therefore calls on Belgium to support democratic principles consistently and to avoid actions that could confer legitimacy on a political project the signatories consider incompatible with those principles.
Its central argument is that opposition to Iran’s current regime should not automatically translate into support for the former monarchy or any other system that risks concentrating power without democratic accountability.
Prominent Belgian Figures Sign the Appeal
The 16 signatories bring experience from Belgium’s judiciary, universities, parliament, and civil society organizations.
Among them are Jean-François Neven, a former judge of the United Nations Appeals Tribunal and former president of a Brussels labor appeals chamber; Franklin Dehousse, a former judge of the General Court of the European Union; and Pierre Galand, a former Belgian senator and former secretary-general of Oxfam Belgium.
The signatories from academia include Pierre Klein, head of the Faculty of Law and Criminology at the French-speaking Université libre de Bruxelles; Filip Reyntjens, professor emeritus of law and politics at the University of Antwerp; and Thomas Spijkerboer, professor of migration law at Ghent University.
Other signatories include Patrik Vankrunkelsven, a professor of general medicine at KU Leuven and former senator; Serge Gutwirth, professor emeritus of human rights law at the Vrije Universiteit Brussel; and Marc Swyngedouw, professor emeritus of political sociology and social science methodology at KU Leuven.
The appeal also includes political representatives and civil society figures, among them Celia Groothedde, an Ecolo-Groen group leader in the Belgian Senate and member of the Brussels Parliament; Jonathan de Patoul, a Brussels parliamentarian and municipal council member; and Arnaud Zacharie, secretary-general of Belgium’s National Centre for Development Cooperation.
The remaining signatories are Rik Vanreusel, a criminal law specialist and lawyer; François Dubuisson and Olivier Corten, professors of international law at the French-speaking Université libre de Bruxelles, with Corten also a member of the Institute of International Law; and Stephan Parmentier, professor emeritus of criminology and human rights at KU Leuven.
Belgium Urged to Uphold the Iranian People’s Right to Choose
The appeal comes amid continuing debate over who can credibly represent an alternative to Iran’s ruling establishment and what principles should govern a political transition.
For the signatories, the answer cannot be the rehabilitation of hereditary rule or the concentration of power in the hands of another individual. Nor, they argue, should opposition to the current regime be treated as sufficient justification for endorsing a political project without examining its democratic credentials.
Their message to the Belgian government is that support for the Iranian people must be measured against principles of political freedom, accountability, and popular sovereignty.
The letter concludes with an appeal for Belgium to stand behind an inclusive democratic process through which Iranians can determine their own future. Its underlying principle is unequivocal: replacing one authoritarian system with another would not fulfill the Iranian people’s aspirations for freedom, equality, and democracy.