3 May 2007
Translate into law
Political parties, MPs and civil society organisations
in
The last Watani Forum session was dedicated to
discuss this topic. Representatives of various political and intellectual
currents were invited to express their views, to produce a coherent vision that
would, hopefully, have an impact on the decision-makers. Reaching areas of
agreement is pivotal in the current phase, to create a climate of tolerance at
a time of disagreement.
The citizenship concept topped the agenda. “Citizenship” was moved to
article 1 of the Constitution. Before, it was only in article 40 which
maintained that “Citizens are equal before the law. They have equal public
rights and duties without discrimination due to sex, ethnic origin, language,
religion or creed.” Legislative defects and malpractice, by the public and the
establishment alike, rendered article 40 mere rhetoric—inactivate and void of
meaning. The new article 1 stipulates that “The Arab Republic of Egypt is a
democratic system based upon citizenship concepts”. Although some see no
relevance in this shift, bringing citizenship to the forefront of the
Constitution is highly significant, especially in face of a widespread tendency
by fundamentalists to abuse article 2 which stipulates Islam as the State
religion, Arabic its official language, and Islamic jurisprudence the principle
source of legislation.
Participants agreed upon the necessity of translating citizenship
concepts into facts on the ground—future legislation that would respect
Egyptians’ rights regardless of sex, social class or faith—otherwise ‘citizenship’
would remain a mere beauty point in the Constitution. Many demanded a
transparent announcement of the ethnic and religious composition of the
population according to the last, recent census. A unified law for places of
worship should be issued as well, to eliminate a major legislative inequality
among Egyptians.
There was consensus that Egyptian men and women, rich and poor, and
Muslims and Copts should all be on equal footing, and the National Council for
Human Rights (NCHR) should be authorised to guarantee
that measures of citizenship are abided by. The NCHR should function
independently from the executive, with unlimited prerogatives to interfere and
correct flaws. It should be allowed to adopt temporary measures of affirmative
action to guarantee equal opportunity—especially regarding appointment to
leading posts—and alert and question bodies involved in relevant malpractice.
Article 5 was amended to stipulate that “Citizens have the right to form
political parties in accordance with the law. Any political activity or
political party shall not be based on religious authority or foundation or on
any discrimination on the basis of race or gender”. Participants said the
political parties law should be changed and the
Committee for Political Parties Affairs cancelled or its prerogatives limited. Freedom
to form political parties should be secured; formation of a party should only
require a simple notification. The committee should focus solely on monitoring
parties’ activities so as to prevent the establishment of parties within a
religious frame of reference. Those occupying posts of sovereign nature—first
and foremost the President, Prime Minister and People’s Assembly and Shura Council speakers— should abandon party affiliation
upon assuming their posts, to guarantee their impartiality.
Article 62 now stipulates that “It is possible for the electoral law to
stipulate a system combining individual parliamentary representation and party
slate system, in accordance with a proportion to be defined by law. And it is
also possible that the law stipulates minimum quota for the representation of
women in the two houses of parliament”. The participants required clear,
detailed legislation on slate system to guarantee equal opportunity and fair
representation for the various sectors of the population. Assigning quotas for
less privileged segments, including women, Copts, and young people, on party
electoral lists was strongly advocated.
In article 88 “A supreme commission characterised
by independence and impartiality will supervise the elections as regulated by
law. The commission will take charge of forming the general committees to
supervise the elections at the level of voting districts and committees which
will supervise polling and vote-counting. The general committees should be
formed of members of the judicial authorities in accordance with the rules and
measures regulated by law” was widely discussed. The committee, the
participants agreed, should be impartial and its members should not be
appointed by the executive.
Article 179 was amended to stipulate that: “The State will assume the
responsibility of safeguarding security and public order in the face of the
dangers of terrorism. Special rules of identification and investigation
required for combating such dangers shall be regulated by the law under the
supervision of the judiciary and in a way that cannot be hampered by the
measures stated in articles 41, 44 and the second paragraph of article 45 of
the Constitution. The president of the republic is empowered to refer any
terrorist crime to any of the judicial authorities stated in the constitution
or the law”. There was consensus that individual dignity and constitutional
rights should be strongly secured. Likewise, ‘terrorism’ should be clearly
defined, so the security apparatus would not exploit fighting terrorism to hold
sway over people’s lives and freedoms. Presidential prerogatives concerning the
innovation of judicial systems—justifying the disregard of normal legal
measures in emergency cases—should be curtailed.
It is strongly hoped the above would be a step forward in the course of
political reform in