Last week I wrote about the round-table discussions among an elite group of Egyptian intellectuals, politicians and many who are genuinely concerned about the homeland; on proposals for Egypt’s new constitution currently being drafted by the constituent assembly.
The discussions tackled the first and second articles—those which define the character of the Egyptian State—in light of the texts proposed by the assembly.
The outcome of the discussions culminated in the five following pertinent questions:
1. Is it essential to cite Egypt as an Arab country? Might this clause be changed to the wider “Egypt is an African, or Afro-Asian, country” in order that the distinction should be based on geographic location and not on common language?
2. Why the clause that Egyptians should work to achieve full Arab unity? Does this have any bearing on the identity of the State, or is it a mere political standpoint that needs not be included in the constitution?
3. Is it of any importance that the State, a legal personality, should belong to any religion? To what extent does this serve to persuade non-Muslims that they are excluded? What clauses or phrases need to be added to make all Egyptians feel included into the State institution not left out of it?
4. Is it adequate to substitute “the intents of Islamic sharia are the main source of legislation” for “the principles of Islamic sharia are the main source of legislation”?
5. How expedient is it to add a clause to Article 2 to indicate the constitution respects all religions and faiths embraced by the citizens of Egypt?
I placed these questions before the readers last week, and asked them to give serious thought to them before I quote what the round-table meeting had to say. Today I cite the broad lines of the outcome of the meeting.
• It is expedient to cite that Egypt is an Arab country in the context of language, culture, and history; but not where ethnicity is concerned. It should be realised that the history of the Egyptian people is vested in Pharaonic, Christian, and Islamic heritage; its destiny is tied to the Arab nation; it geographically belongs to Africa and culturally to the Mediterranean. All this endows Egypt with a uniqueness, wealth, plurality, and diversity which, as the famed Egyptian geographer Gamal Hemdan (1928 – 1993) said in his The Character of Egypt, draws equally from its Nile, Mediterranean, African and Asian origins., none overshadowing the other. These characteristics have, over the centuries built-up, intertwined, and become latent in the Egyptian character.
• Besides being labelled as democratic the “Arab Republic of Egypt”, should be defined as a pluralistic State. The clause “the Egyptian people is part of the Arab nation” is a redundant, non-essential excess; and “the Egyptian people should work to achieve full Arab unity” is a daunting text which tasks the Egyptian people with responsibilities that go beyond the scope of the Egyptian constitution. Its real place lies within the dreams and ambitions of the entire Arab nation and should be achieved through the Arab League.
• The constitution should not be tailored to guarantee the rights of the majority who, by favour of being the majority, are assured of and are themselves the guarantors of their rights. The constitution is rather the guarantor of the rights of minorities. It is a social contract that embraces all forms of diversity and pluralism within the all-encompassing citizenship concept, and is too broad to be confined within the precepts of a single identity. Whereas the definition of Egypt as a democratic State is inaccurate and elastic—no constitution in the world defines a State as dictatorial—the constitution should include a text that Egypt is a civil State within a frame of reference drawn by law, knowledge, and international charters and treaties.
• The first article in the new constitution ought to be: “The Arab Republic of Egypt is a civil State with a pluralistic system based on citizenship, and the Egyptian people are part of the Arab nation.”
• The Al-Azhar document was described as culturally comprehensive and inclusive of all Egyptians. The strong point about the document is that it illustrates the moderate, enlightened Islamic reference frame; and closes the way before fanatic, extremist interpretations. The document does not rely on religious texts alone as reference, but takes into consideration the international charters of human rights, women rights and child rights. It confirms the principles of plurality, respect for the heavenly religions, and citizenship, as the focal point of responsibility in the community.
• The constitution should not attribute a religion to the State; a State has no religion. It may be stated that Islam is the religion of the majority of the population, and that the overall principles of Islamic sharia are the main source of legislation, while religious minorities have the right to refer to the rules of their own religions in family and religious affairs.
• The principles of Islamic sharia comprise the clear-cut, absolute rules—and these are too few—of Islamic legislation. The intents of sharia, however, as cited by [the 11th–century Islamic scholar and theologian] Imam Abu-Hamed al-Ghazali constitute five rules: to conserve the faith, soul, mind, children, and belongings. Everything involved in this conservation is a virtue, whereas anything that breaches it is a vice. Based upon that, the Supreme Constitutional Court (SCC) declared the “principles of sharia” to indicate the “intents of sharia”.
• Why should not the second article read: “Egypt is a nation of multiple religions, sects, ethnic origins, and cultures. The Egyptian identity is one of multiple dimensions, components, and cultural roots. This plurality constitutes the major source of richness and singularity in the Egyptian identity.” Such a text ensures that the constitution secures the diversity of sources of legislation to reflect the various tributaries of the Egyptian identity, and serves to consolidate national unity. It also ensures that there can be no legislation that contradicts the faiths and doctrines of Egyptians.
These notions and perspectives, offered by the round-table, may find their way to the constituent assembly. If they do not, it is our duty to create an awareness of what the constitution should ensure as far as the identity of the State and the rights of citizens are concerned. Once the draft constitution is up for the vote, the people should then know what to vote for.
WATANI International
12 August 2012