The appointment of Mohammadreza Tafaghod Rasti as CEO of Apadana Petrochemical has once again brought his past performance in previous responsibilities into the spotlight. This manager, who has spent a significant part of his career in security and oversight roles, is now at the helm of one of the major petrochemical complexes, raising questions about the manner of this appointment and its backing.
Some informed sources believe that reviewing Tafaghod Rasti's management background and his career path requires precise transparency. According to these sources, there are ambiguities regarding his performance during his management at Jam Sanat Karan, the manner of some contract signings, and the process of project assignments and economic opportunities in this complex; issues that have not yet received clear answers.
Critics' Questions About the Appointment
One of the questions raised by critics is how a manager, after the end of his tenure at Jam Sanat Karan, which led to his dismissal due to corruption and misconduct, could quickly achieve a new managerial position in the petrochemical industry. The revelation of some assets in Rasti's possession resulting from dealings during his management at Jam Sanat Karan is another document of his corruption. Some sources have said this manager must explain how he acquired an expensive house in the Saadat Abad area and several foreign cars between his management at Jam Sanat Karan and his dismissal.
Additionally, some sources are demanding explanations about the noticeable changes in his financial status and assets in recent years and emphasize that this issue requires transparent investigation and official accountability.
Ambiguous Contracts and Raised Claims
Another part of the criticism returns to Tafaghod Rasti's management period at Jam Sanat Karan; where, according to presented information, the execution of some foreign and local currency contracts and the contractor selection process were accompanied by questions. Some sources claim that during that period, the mechanism of contract assignments and selection of business partners was conducted in a way that created special benefits for individuals close to the management. These claims have not yet been officially addressed by Tafaghod Rasti or related managers, and reviewing financial and contractual documents could clarify the real dimensions of this issue.
Before his presence at Jam Sanat Karan, Tafaghod Rasti had experience in the security sector of holdings and companies affiliated with the petrochemical industry. Critics believe that this background and the network of connections established over the years played a significant role in his path to managerial positions.
After being dismissed from the management of Jam Sanat Karan in May of this year, he once again began efforts to occupy higher managerial positions and eventually reached the CEO position at Apadana Petrochemical; an appointment now accompanied by questions about the criteria for selecting managers in the petrochemical industry. Critics emphasize that in a situation where petrochemical companies operate with extensive financial turnover and significant economic roles, the appointment of managers should be based on expertise, performance record, and financial transparency, not merely on organizational connections and managerial lobbying.
