Egypt's constitution: How 5 stakeholders would shape the document

With elections now over for Egypt’s parliament, lawmakers are are deciding who gets to write the country's new constitution. There is much at stake including the role of Islam in the state and the power of the military. Yet for such an important document, the timeline is rushed: The constitution is expected to be put to a referendum before presidential elections, scheduled to begin May 23. Here’s what key stakeholders want Egypt’s new constitution to look like.

1. The Muslim Brotherhood

Khaled Elfiq/Reuters/File
Mohamed Saad al-Katatni of the Muslim Brotherhood speaks to other members of parliament during the first Egyptian parliament session, after the revolution that ousted former President Hosni Mubarak, in Cairo January 23.

The Muslim Brotherhood’s political wing, the Freedom and Justice Party, proposed in the joint parliamentary session in early March that parliament members should make up 40 percent of the constituent assembly, the body tasked with writing the constitution. That would give the FJP, the largest party in both houses, a significant say in drafting the document.

Party leaders have said repeatedly that the constitution should reflect a national consensus, and should not be dominated by any one party or ideology. “We already have a national consensus about the first four chapters – the essentials,” says party leader Essam El Erian. “The genuine debate will be about the political system,” whether authority is centered in parliament or the president.

Power has been concentrated in the presidency for decades in Egypt. The new constitution is widely expected to give parliament more power – the question is how much. Though the FJP’s platform endorses a parliamentary system, the party has come to endorse a “mixed” system, where power is divided between parliament and the president. Under such a system, the prime minister would come from the largest party and have a more powerful role. The parliament would likely be given responsibility for internal affairs, while external affairs would be left for the president.

Another important debate will be to what extent the new constitution asserts civilian control over the military, which wants to preserve its power and privilege and exempt itself from civilian oversight. FJP leaders say they will reject military influence on the constitution or a political role for the military. But in recent months, it has declined to challenge the military council on other issues.

On the issue of Islam’s role in the state, party leaders say they have no plans to change the second article of Egypt’s previous constitution, which states that the principles of Islamic law are the principal source of legislation.

1 of 5

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.