UHJ can repeal it's own laws on Guardianship

Ijtihad must be based on reason and rational understandings, Taqlid (blind following) is outlawed by Baha'u'llah

Although it would appear that currently there is insignificant cultural motivation to change this ruling, it still is within the purview of the BWF UHJ to revoke, modify or annul it's own laws even those previously made on the Guardianship. Note that almost all the remonstrations against accepting the Aghsan Guardianship is that it is not "textually" based, the argument is that the appoinment of the Guardian must be in writing, although there is no explicit text that has been cited for that requirement other then tradition of Abdu'l-Baha appointing Shoghi Effendi in a will (wasiya) which is the usual custom, does custom trump actual administrative functionaries as inculcated in the appointment of IBC members? Would public knowledge of Abdu'l-Baha's adoption of Mason Remey, which was not publicly known apparently outside a small group of believers have affected such a decision?

If in the future any BWF UHJ were to look at this issue again they would probably first have to decide on whether Mason Remey was an actual or as AB put it "real" son or Aghsan in the legal sense rather then in just a spiritual sense as all Baha'is seem to have been considered. Second, then they would have to see if he was appointed, referencing the Hands letter of 1960 where the Western Hands say as much that the IBC was appointed that would probably prove knowledge of appointment as President of the IBC a position intended by AB for the Guardian.

[my personal opinion is that there is no infallible and legitimate authority in the Baha'i religion absent a UHJ with a Aghsan Guardian, nor can any agency outside of those conditions set by AB in his Wasiyat, namely that all the believers elect the UHJ establish such infallible institution, these conditions are mahtum (ordained) as Shoghi Effendi instructed all Baha'is, hence you have a small band of believers saying that Guardianship exists, and a large body of believers following the previous decisions of the BWF UHJ, a head absent a body, and a body absent a head, not just any group can set up itself with a Guardian and declare itself infallible (like Neal Chase's UHJ for example or the OBF) according to the W&T (wasiya) of Abdu'l-Baha it has to be comprised of a body elected by the universal sufferage of the Baha'is, and by Baha'i I mean those that declare their belief in the teachings of the Mazhar'llah Baha'u'llah through the lineage of `Abdu'l-Baha].

The crux for the BWF is the belief that Shoghi had no other Aghsan to appoint, so therefore there is no appointment they also suggest that the appointment methodology is noted in the Wasiya of Abdu'l-Baha:

The Will and Testament of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá sets out the conditions for the appointment of a successor by the sitting Guardian. These conditions became impossible to fulfill during the lifetime of Shoghi Effendi. As he had produced no progeny, and there was no eligible heir, Shoghi Effendi did not appoint a successor. The Universal House of Justice announced in a message on 6 October 1963 its finding "that there is no way to appoint or to legislate to make it possible to appoint a second Guardian to succeed Shoghi Effendi."^{18 http://www.bahai-encyclopedia-project.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=67:administration&catid=36:administrationinstitutions (accessed 6/27/2011)}

http://en.bahaitext.org/Guardianship_6_October_1963