Mr. Governor of the Central Bank, is the Central Bank really the only legal authority for granting licenses in the cryptocurrency market?

A question from Mr. Farzin

In a statement, the Central Bank declared itself "the exclusive authority for organizing the cryptocurrency market and the sole authority for licensing, regulating, supervising, and issuing the necessary instructions in this area."

The bank's statement reads:

Cryptocurrencies, regardless of their underlying technology, function as money, payment instruments, and means of value exchange, and for this reason, they fall under the inherent and legal authority of the central bank. No other entity, including the Ministry of Communications or other agencies, has such a position in current laws.

The argument that the central bank should only supervise the CBDC is incorrect. Central Bank Digital Currency is part of the future landscape of digital banking, but regulating the market for non-government cryptocurrencies (including tokens, stablecoins, and exchanges) also falls within the legal responsibilities of the central bank in managing cash flows, monetary stability, and combating terrorism financing. In other words, the central bank is responsible for 'monetary functions', not just 'monetary instruments'.

Now a simple question:

How is it that after repeated follow-ups, the judiciary finally announced to the special investigator of the case of the corrupt financial group that cryptocurrency exchanges do not cooperate and it is currently not possible to track the cryptocurrency transactions of this group until the infrastructure is completed?!!!!!

In another case regarding this group, if there had not been special judicial and security follow-ups and reminders from the Deputy Governor of the Central Bank, it is unclear whether a response would have been provided so soon.

Of course, it is enough to search the Central Bank's correspondence system with your access to see several very important inquiries about this group right now that have not been responded to, so that they may fall under the statute of limitations and the case can move beyond its current judicial stage?

I don't want to go into more details for now.