Abbas Abdi's strong objection to the provisions of the hijab law: Perhaps lawmakers are easily provoked by the slightest behavior or speech, but what does that have to do with the people?

Abbas Abdi:

Article 1 defines indecency as any behavior, speech, or action that is sexually provocative and contrary to religious principles. It’s truly astonishing that lawmakers would define a word and behavior in such an ambiguous, messy, and unclear way and then want to treat it as a crime. Perhaps lawmakers are easily provoked by the slightest behavior or speech, but what does that have to do with the people?

As for unveiling, they wrote that anyone who does not wear a chador, hijab, or scarf is considered to have uncovered their hair. This definition is unprecedented and deviates from the concept of religious hijab. In other words, for the lawmakers, the issue is no longer religious hijab—it's simply a scarf on the head. So, if someone wears a loosely tied scarf, has makeup on, and shows the main part of their hair, is that okay? You’ve come this far, and now you’re just waiting to impose a completely irrelevant scarf on their head?

For example, they've considered adherence to hijab an important factor in university admissions and as a merit for top students, while what does knowledge have to do with hijab? When it comes to choosing the best foreign hospitals for treatment, none of the doctors there are required to wear hijabs. But when it comes to the public, hijab becomes a merit for student admission and their advancement.