Suspension of Tehran Engineering Organization Chief’s Work License Reveals Disputes Between Ministry of Roads and Urbanism and Engineering Organization
According to FCNN news agency report; this morning, the Deputy Minister of Roads and Urbanism suspended the work license of the head of Tehran’s Engineering Organization through a letter and notified it to the Roads and Urbanism Director of Tehran Province.
In this correspondence, it was noted that given the failure to comply with multiple circulars and announcements of the Ministry of Roads and Urbanism by Engineer Hassan Ghorbankhaneh, head of the Building Engineering Organization of the province, holder of a work license in civil engineering, which has caused disorder in the provision of engineering services and consequently created disruption in the activities of stakeholders and relevant institutions, hereby, while announcing the decision of the senior officials of the ministry regarding the suspension of his engineering work license, based on clause (j) of Article 23 of the Executive Regulations of the Engineering and Building Control Law approved in 1996, it is necessary to order that the matter be communicated to him and relevant institutions.
It appears that the conflicts and disputes of recent months between the country’s Engineering Organization and the Ministry of Roads and Urbanism, and numerous protests by the National Association of Contractors, have taken a more serious and deeper form. In the last month of the previous year, Akhondi, the Minister of Roads and Urbanism, issued an order to the heads of Roads and Urbanism departments across the provinces to cancel the deduction of five percent of the supervision fee (supervising engineers) deposited by the project owner to the account of the Building Engineering Organization of the provinces, effective from the 10th of the current month.
Immediately after the publication of this circular, Farjollah Rajabi, head of the Building Engineering Organization Council of the country, informed the heads of provincial engineering organizations through a letter of non-compliance with the minister’s circular due to its illegality and warned them that they are not authorized to implement Akhondi’s circular and violators will be dealt with.
Part of this letter stated: “In response to questions from some provinces, it is hereby announced that the recent circular of the Minister of Roads and Urbanism regarding the guidelines of note (2) of Article 24 of the Executive Regulations of Article 33 of the Engineering and Building Control Law was reviewed in the meeting of the Central Council dated April 9, 2018, and it was decided that given its contradictions with the regulations of Article 33, the matter would be reflected to the respected Minister of Roads and Urbanism and its announcement would be refrained from.”
Based on Article 23 of the Engineering and Building Control Law, which explicitly states that the responsibility for implementing the decisions of the Central Council lies with the head of the council, it can be said that Engineer Rajabi’s viewpoint and his protest in this regard are legal and justified. Because the law can only be changed by a new law and by following the legal procedure in competent authorities, not by a ministerial circular. And in the Engineering and Building Control Law, the General Assembly is the highest authority in the Building Engineering Organizations of the provinces, and it is this same General Assembly that approved this 5 percent. Therefore, only the General Assembly itself can rescind it and reduce or increase it.
On the other hand, it appears that the Minister of Roads and Urbanism has considered the Engineering Organization as a subordinate organization that directly proceeded to revoke the decision of that organization’s General Assembly. And this matter has been subject to many protests. Therefore, the Parliament has become involved in these disagreements and is investigating.
Finally, it should be known that:
1) Whether the circular of the Minister of Roads is in contradiction with the Constitution or other enacted laws or not, and whether the Engineering Organization is fundamentally defined as an independent organization or a dependent one.
2) Multiple circulars from the Minister of Roads and Urbanism covering a wide range of Engineering Organization functions, construction supervision, prohibition of deducting 5 percent of supervisory engineers’ fees, etc.; have become a subject of dispute between the head of the Engineering Organization, the Minister of Roads and Urbanism, and some of Akhondi’s deputies. And in this regard, there should be consistency of approach.
3) Supervising engineers also were not satisfied with the decision to receive this 5 percent and continue to protest. Because they believe that the board of directors and managers of the Engineering Organization during this period, especially in Tehran, with these received amounts, have misused the supervising engineers and have used the money received from them in banks as collateral to advance personal and specific group goals. Including the purchase of multiple properties and the launch of new projects in cooperation and dealings with Future Bank and vague promises to members. While if any incident occurs, only the supervising engineer is responsible and the supporting organization will not support them.
4) Municipalities also play multiple roles in all this and unfortunately in recent years, the selection of a supervisor for each building has been entrusted to the municipality, and the performance of the municipality has become clear to everyone. Because they too, by receiving money, have selected influential supervisors and deprived many others.
