Last Update 22:51
Tuesday, 15 October 2019

Egypt's new constitution: Reshuffling old cards

Egypt's new draft constitution reinforces the rule of the state over the people, rather than building a state to serve its citizens and protect their rights

Khaled Mansour , Sunday 12 Jan 2014
Share/Bookmark
Views: 2212
Share/Bookmark
Views: 2212

The new draft constitution whose fate Egyptian voters will decide in a few days is a relatively better document than its short-lived predecessor, but is ultimately disappointing and less than what could have been realistically achieved to enhance the civil, political and economic rights of Egyptian citizens.

The document is underwhelming for human rights defenders, some of whom wrongly expected a vast improvement over the Muslim Brotherhood-driven 2012 constitution.

Many Egyptians struggled as much as they could to influence the text through small windows of public participation that were allowed by the appointed 50-Member Committee charged with amending the charter. These interventions made a marginal difference in articles that handle issues such as civil liberties, the right to access information, the right to food and the rights of the disabled, to name a few. However, the new text is simply a reshuffle of conventional building blocks that have long served to perpetuate the rule of a state over the people, rather than to establish a state to serve its citizens and protect their rights.

The draft constitution puts in legal code what has been informally practiced for several years, namely turning state institutions into fiefdoms and undermining the very concepts of the public good and checks and balances.

The draft reflects the conviction that granting broad powers to the military and official religious establishments is the primary guarantee for the protection of the Egyptian state.

Despite some improvements over the 2012 constitution, especially with regards to personal liberties, the draft regrettably subjects civilians to military trials, an anachronism that is gradually vanishing from the rest of the world. Such trials can be held on vague grounds, and could be easily used against political opponents or innocent civilians.

For example, there are no clear definitions of what are these military sites or operations that interference with could subject a civilian to military proceedings that is short of various basic guarantees for a fair trial. For example, a chief military judge told reporters that army conscripts working in military-owned gas stations serving civilians around the country (part of the vast military economic enterprise) are protected by this constitutional article. This means a dispute with a soldier filling up one’s car tank could easily land one in a military court. Several thousands suffered the tragic experience of a military trial over the last three years. It is a setback that this practice could now be constitutionally protected.

Not only the military, other state institutions too acquired more autonomy to regulate their own affairs in a twisted application of the concept of separation of powers when checks and balances are already in short supply.

The text lost some of the esoteric language that the Muslim Brotherhood inserted to placate the more conservative elements in their ranks and their Salafist allies, such as an article incriminating whatever could be construed as an insult to prophets and religious messengers. However, the new text gave a nod to almost the same Salafists (a large part of whom joined the post-Muslim Brotherhood political process, represented by El-Nour Party) in its preamble regarding the scope of Sharia and the "civil" nature of the state.

Though the new constitution provides some more guarantees, or details the implementation of certain social and economic rights (such as the allocation of a certain GDP percentage for health and education in the state budget), it does not address issues of social injustice and labour rights any differently from previous legal frameworks. Social justice and economic rights were largely relegated to ostensibly unregulated market forces as the draft constitution adopted a conservative neoliberal approach that is totally inadequate for addressing deepening socioeconomic inequalities in Egypt, hoping, it seems, that the invisible hand of the market would take care of what in essence led to the January 2011 uprising.

The constitution lacks guarantees to prevent elected legislators from undermining rights included in it. Many articles indicate that parliament will regulate the exercise of such and such a right through the law, opening wide the door to restrictions and limitations on various rights, extending from unionisation to building houses of prayer.

Over the past three years, the Egyptian people have repeatedly affirmed their overwhelming desire for a state that respects their liberties, protects their dignity, achieves effective political participation and upholds their economic, social and cultural rights so that no regime can arbitrarily infringe on them. This constitution, despite improvements, shows that the old world is dying but the new one is not yet born.

The writer is executive director of the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights.

Short link:

 

Email
 
Name
 
Comment's
Title
 
Comment
Ahram Online welcomes readers' comments on all issues covered by the site, along with any criticisms and/or corrections. Readers are asked to limit their feedback to a maximum of 1000 characters (roughly 200 words). All comments/criticisms will, however, be subject to the following code
  • We will not publish comments which contain rude or abusive language, libelous statements, slander and personal attacks against any person/s.
  • We will not publish comments which contain racist remarks or any kind of racial or religious incitement against any group of people, in Egypt or outside it.
  • We welcome criticism of our reports and articles but we will not publish personal attacks, slander or fabrications directed against our reporters and contributing writers.
  • We reserve the right to correct, when at all possible, obvious errors in spelling and grammar. However, due to time and staffing constraints such corrections will not be made across the board or on a regular basis.
3



Saba E. Demian, M.D.
14-01-2014 12:20pm
18-
2+
Same old, same old?!
Mr. Mansour's erudite analysis of the revised constitution is an excellent expose of the ills which are held on to from the defunct 2012 document. The plethora of anti-human rights provisions point to the obvious he so clearly exposed, the leaders are not the servants of the people, rather they are the absolute rulers with very little recourse for the governed to escape totalitarianism. The fact that the military is a state within a state with independence from overview by the representatives of the people, continues the sixty years of Egypt as a 'republic' under a one man despot. The scope and dominance of Shari'a negates the hope for a civilian 'sectarian' state. The elimination of article 219 has no effect whatsoever over the looming power of religious dominance in article 2. Elected legislators in the parliament are guaranteed the power to play fast and loose with the putative rights in the constitution. This is anything but democratic. In short this revised constitution falls way short of the mark in encouraging the building of a free healthy state. Saba E. Demian, M.D.
Email
 
Name
 
Comment's Title
 
Comment
2



Nahla Bayoumi
13-01-2014 10:24pm
18-
3+
author ignores th real problem with this constitution
In article 74, it allows Marxists, Communists, liberlas, secularists and the followere of every commceivable ideology to form political parties of their choosing. Only Muslims who constitute 95% of Egypt's population are denied the right to form a political party based on Islam. This is more than just undemocratic. This is scandalous. Do Egyptians have to change their religion in order to be able to participate in political life?
Email
 
Name
 
Comment's Title
 
Comment
1



Assad
12-01-2014 10:33pm
4-
19+
A great Improvement
The proposed constitution is a markedly great improvement on the perverted constitution ushered in by the terrorist MB. Egypt once the MOTHER OF THE WORLD has slipped backwards by miles since Mubarak was deposed. The Brotherhood are an evil entity that fast tracked the demise of civil law an order in such a short period of time. If egypt and the Army are genuine in their desire for a democracy they would seek the guidance of former western leaders in their quest. People like former prime minister John Howard of Australia would be priceless. The Knowledge and experience people like him possess is priceless and would save a lot of heart ache and avoid the pitfalls of in the path towards democracy. Egypt should be a country people desire to live in not escape from. It is only with the guidance of proven leaders that the transition will occur and propel egypt to its former glory. Egypt MUST be the most democratic and desirable country in the middle east, not a third world poverty stricken hell hole fast becoming a breeding ground for terrorists. Egypt could learn a lot from the technological achievements of Israel. The religious, gender and social divide in egypt tarnishes it as a draconian backward prehistoric society. Tourists avoid the country, big business avoids the country, people will the knowledge to advance the social fabric of egypt shake their heads at the hijacking of the revolution by the MB. I am proud the Army stepped in and stopped the reign of tyranny by the radical brotherhood. This is time to undue the damage, heal the wounds and stop the secular rifts.
Email
 
Name
 
Comment's Title
 
Comment
Anwar
14-01-2014 06:05pm
13-
4+
You are the real terrorist and criminal fascist
People don't become terrorist by winning elections. This is all that the Islamists had done.
Latest

© 2010 Ahram Online.