Skip to footer

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

Here’s what key stakeholders want Egypt’s new constitution to look like.

5. The military council

  • By Kristen Chick Correspondent

Egypt’s military rulers have indicated a desire to control the constitution-writing process, likely because they want to keep a new civilian government from asserting control over the military and curtailing the power and privilege the institution currently holds. Since the coup led by Army officers that overthrew Egypt’s king in 1952, the military has held an important place in Egypt’s power structure.

Last year the military council released to political parties a proposed draft of constitutional principles which would have shielded the military’s budget from civilian oversight and given the military a say in choosing the constituent assembly. The military council abandoned the document after a massive protest, but in an interview with foreign journalists in December, SCAF Maj. Gen. Mukhtar El Mullah made clear that the council intends to have a role in selecting the members of the assembly.

General Mullah also had an opinion on what should change in the constitution itself – very little. “A lot of legislators say that we have a very good constitution, a very unique one, except for Article 5 which is concerning the presidential elections. So we will only amend this chapter,” he said in the briefing.

5 of 5
Mark Sappenfield
Editor

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.

Subscribe to insightful journalism

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