The leadership foundation of Baha’ism called the universal house of justice appointed its followers’ political path in its message in order to achieve its golden era; that is, creating the Baha’ism government. In the first part of the message, the Baha’ism organization changed the explicit teaching of not meddling with policy into the prohibition of meddling with the party policies and then through 10-page justifications, it tried to perk meddling with policy and participating at elections and cooperation with organizations and social agents as legitimate to Baha’ism.

Nevertheless, two notes must be investigated concerning this message of the universal house of justice:

1)   If we compare the justification of the foundation of the Baha’ism leadership with the text written by the Baha’i leaders (concerning the prohibition of opposing against rulers, obeying them absolutely, considering policy as pestilence and declaring not meddling with policy as a Baha’i criterion[2], we will figure out that the Baha’ism organization has deviated the Baha’i leaders’ text. Indeed, how can a Baha’i meddle with policy (in any case) and also possess the Baha’i criterion introduced by Abdul Baha “The lack of meddling with policy[3]”? Isn’t it the deviation of Baha’ism leaders’ speech that they have even prohibited their own speech interpretation?![4] The universal house of justice limited to appoint commandments[5].

2)   Changing the concept of not meddling with policy into meddling with party affairs, the Baha’ism organization allows the Baha’is to meddle with policy and wants to prevent the Baha’is to be attracted by non-Baha’is.

As a matter of fact, 9 people (That is 9-people members of the Baha’i universal house of justice who are considered as the Baha’ism leadership council) who are assumed as fallible by the Baha’i leaders[6] get together through a vague elections and tell the world people to obey them without question because we are aware of the hidden inspirations. It is really an absolute despotism. Those who may decide differently. For instance, they may assume homosexuality as illegitimate a day and the next day, they may defend it.[7] They consider proselytizing as legitimate in a place (such as Iran) and at the same time introduce it as illegitimate in Israel![8] How can they rule human being!!!