Speaking on Sunday, Ghalibaf warned that if the executive fails to address rising prices of basic goods, parliament would have a “duty” to take action.
But moderate voices in Tehran argue the episode is less about procedure than positioning.
“These remarks indicate a fundamental shift in relations between the presidency and parliament,” wrote the news website Rouydad24, arguing that Ghalibaf is recalibrating his role from co-manager of the system’s crises to its chief overseer.
By adopting an openly critical stance, the outlet said, Ghalibaf is seeking to distance himself from shared responsibility for deteriorating economic conditions while presenting parliament as an independent check on executive failure.
“If reshuffling occurs, parliament will claim victory; if not, impeachment becomes the ‘last unavoidable option,’” it wrote—placing political costs squarely on the government.
Moderate politician Hossein Nourani-Nejad said impeachment threats are being used to reshape the executive politically.
“The government is centrist, not reformist,” he said. “But the right is trying to gradually turn it into a conservative government.”
Parliament has already impeached and removed Economy Minister Abdolnaser Hemmati, with pressure building on ministers overseeing agriculture, roads and urban development, industry and trade, sports and welfare.
Parliamentary attacks have focused disproportionately on reformist or centrist ministers aligned with the government’s discourse.
Some lawmakers have gone further, openly calling for Pezeshkian’s resignation and even floating his impeachment on grounds of what they describe as “political incompetence.”
Most of those voices belong to the ultra-hardline Paydari Party and are closely aligned with Saeed Jalili, Pezeshkian’s rival in last year’s presidential election.
“That the head of another branch of power would threaten the president and government by invoking impeachment demands from a specific parliamentary minority is novel,” Esmail Gerami-Moghaddam of the Etemad-e Melli Party told Etemad.
By sharpening confrontation now, critics argue, Ghalibaf is seeking to shed collective responsibility for economic distress while signalling readiness for a future political contest—one in which blame, distance and “oversight” may matter as much as policy.
The backdrop is Ghalibaf’s own defeat to Pezeshkian in the last year’s presidential race—and widespread belief in Tehran that the coming years could bring major political shifts, creating incentives for senior figures to reposition early.
Deputy Speaker Ali Nikzad acknowledged the stakes, noting that if more than half the cabinet were removed or resigned, the government would lose its quorum.
He added, however, that “the position of the system”—a reference to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei—is that the cabinet should complete its term.