Problems on hold

I am not about to comment on a court ruling since I believe the criticism of any ruling ought to be handled by none other than the legal experts, according to legal principles. But last week’s ruling by the Supreme Administrative Court approving a lower court’s previous ruling which obliges the Coptic Church to allow the remarriage of divorcees has caused heated debate. It cannot be denied that the ruling raised eyebrows, since the personal status affairs of Christians is the exclusive responsibility of the Church, it alone being in charge of stipulating the regulations governing these affairs, based upon the teachings of the Bible. It is then natural that the Church should present its draft regulations to the State institutions concerned in order to enact them into laws, or to modify existent relevant laws, to apply in cases involving Christian personal status affairs.
The Coptic Church is not and never was above the law. It is the religious authority that embodies the spiritual and legislative umbrella under which Christians live. And it is the role of the legislative authorities to take the necessary measures to enact the laws governing Christian personal status affairs, so that no contradiction should exist between the civil and the religious. Any delay or procrastination in such matters poses a threat to social peace.
Concerning the case in question, it is worth pointing out that the current personal status law for Christians is based upon what is termed the 1938 code, which constitutes a set of rules at the time drawn by the Coptic Community Council. The code, which stipulates lenient rules for divorce, was opposed by the Church which sticks to the Biblical teaching that divorce can only be sanctioned in case of adultery. In 1980 the Church drew a draft personal status law and presented it to the Minister of Justice who should have in turn presented it to Parliament. For some unknown reason nothing was done in this respect and, in 1998, the Church again presented it to the minister, only this time it had the added advantage of having gained the approval of all the Christian sects in Egypt. Even so, the Justice Ministry did not appear to think there was any urgency in the matter, and again nothing was done. The draft law remained inside some drawer in the Justice Ministry, while judges continued to issue rulings based on the 1938 law. The outcome was a plethora of rulings which contradicted the Church’s beliefs and, worse, a climate where both the judiciary and the Church stood at counterpoints with rulings that stipulate that “the Church is obliged to …” and the Church reiterating that it was “in no way obliged…”.
No one can be blamed for this deplorable image of the Church as being above the law save the Justice Ministry’s unjustified procrastination. How come a draft law of such magnitude was frozen for some 20 years? And how can the Church be asked to implement a law it does not acknowledge and demands that it be changed? Will the Justice Minister now hasten to get the draft law moving in order to avoid a confrontation between the Church and the judicial authorities? And will our honourable MPs present an interpellation to the Justice Minister on that account?
It is lamentable that both the executive and legislative authorities procrastinate so much when it comes to Christian or Coptic concerns, no matter how urgent or sensitive they may be. One need only observe the strange disregard with which the unified law for building places of worship or the law governing the official vestments of Coptic clerics have been handled to realise that Coptic matters are being placed on hold; this is the real problem. As for the judges who issue any rulings, they are not to blame since they merely apply the existing laws.

Comments

comments