|
A Committee for Constitutional Amendments
at Assyout's Constitutional Platform
|
1/4/2006
The members of the Egyptian Constitutional Platform, on their meeting in Assyout, agreed on forming a committee for drafting amendments to some Articles of the 1971 Constitution, concerning the powers granted to the President, checks and balances between the three governmental authorities, independence of the judiciary, and promoting rights and freedoms. Professor Ahmed Yassin Nassar the Secretary General of Al Nassery Party at Assyout Governorate was chosen as the committee's rapporteur.
The platform discussed during its meeting at the Lawyers' Club in Assyout many issues related to the constitutional reform, the vision of law professors, civil society activists, and university professors from Assyout, for the nature of the constitutional amendments suggested for a new constitution consistent with the needs of the current stage, and the political reform Egypt is currently witnessing.
Hafez Abu Seada the Secretary General of the Egyptian Organization for Human Rights (EOHR) stressed upon the importance of intense presence in all Egyptian Governorates, in order to argue with the thinkers, intellectuals and politicians about the suggestions for amending the constitution, before undergoing the final collective meeting that shall be held in Cairo in order to present an Egyptian constitution in which all the Egyptian Governorates participated in drafting, then it shall be provided to the People's Assembly, the government, the President and all parties concerned. And it thus considered as a result of the discussions between the Egyptian intellectual elite, representing all political and intellectual movements in the Egyptian society.
Abu Seeda added that there are two views concerning the Constitution, the first sees that the current constitution is a good one, but shall be provided with some necessary amendments related to the Executive and Legislative authorities, beside the powers of the President, his election and some articles related to the economic system. This view is adopted by the government and the National Party.
While the second view sees that the Constitution came in a certain historical moment that came and went, and that we shall draft a new social contract with a new Constitution, because the philosophy and spirit of the current Constitution is not consistent with the current status of Egypt. As when we say that the system in Egypt is a social democratic one, this is inconsistent with the current government's economic philosophy, and concerning the notion of democracy in this constitution, there are certain contradictions with the powers stipulated in 1971 Constitution that makes the powers of the Executive authority in the hands of the President only. Concerning the public sector and its role in development there is contradiction between the constitution and the current public sector's context. Therefore, there are certain defects in the constitution that makes it fall short of securing Egypt with a path to safe power transition, providing safeguards for rights and freedoms, promoting the role of the People's Assembly in its control over the Executive authority, providing real checks and balances between the three authorities and securing real independence of the judiciary.
EOHR Secretary General pointed out that there are certain problems facing the new constitution in need, and solutions shall be found. Namely they are: What's the most adequate governmental system for Egypt, Presidential or Parliamentary? Or is it better to have another system possessing the characteristics of the two systems? The French system for example grants the President powers related to the army and the foreign affairs, while the day to day affairs are managed by the government that the President is accountable to, in front of the Parliament, and it can suggest a vote of no confidence. There are other methods by which the head of the government can be responsible for the balance between the three authorities and can not practice executive powers, transferring to the Prime Minister all powers of the head of the government, so as to be subject to questioning and trial and no confidence vote, and the majority party forms the Cabinet.
Abu Seada confirmed that each political system has its advantages and disadvantages either parliamentary of presidential, but it's better to separate the three authorities and make the government subject to questioning. Among the other problems in drafting the new constitution is the method of electing the President, as the last amendment in Article 76 is considered longer than any Article in any other constitution.
Professor Ahmed Yassen Nassar, Assyout University, commented saying it's evident that there are three trends in drafting the constitutional reforms, the first seeks the continuation of 1971 Constitutions in spite of all of its contradictions in a shifting state of affairs. The second trend seeks the amendment of the constitution to a degree enough to make it consistent with the changes witnessed by the society. The question now is: Are we in need for a new constitution?
For any society to fulfill its historical role, he added, there must be some codes and laws to regulate it. These codes are the social contract called: Constitution, which regulates the social affairs network. The constitution also determines the duties and rights of each individual. He also said that the absence of a constitution commonly agreed upon will lead to chaos and disintegration of the society, and the loss of individual rights and duties.
Professor Nassar held that the amendments needed for the Egyptian Constitution must see to the reform of institutions managing the legal system, and protect the individual rights; Most important of which is the Presidency, followed by the Executive authority that determines the society's roles and fulfills its hopes, then comes the Legislative authority, regulating the codes and laws ruling the society, then the Judicial authority.
On his part, Gamal Asaad Abdulmalak, the ex-member of the People's Assembly, said that the year 2005 witnessed unprecedented political movement, influenced by the political movement on the regional and international levels, in the context of the so called political reform. Especially that the system we are witnessing adopted the privatization policy fifteen years ago, in the context of the economic reform that didn't find its counterpart in the political arena. Therefore, the political movement started where seeking political reform started.
Abdulmalak held that the constitution is a document between the ruler and the people regulating the relationship between both, and also regulating the relationship between the three authorities. No doubt that discussing any constitution in the world needs such meetings and opinions of all political, social and intellectual classes for any people, until a consensus on a certain document is reached. No doubt that such consensus creates an intellectual argument about contradictory economic, social and ideological issues and trends.
The ex-MP said that not all the 1971 Constitution is refused, but in the same time there are certain Articles that became out of time and policy as well. However, are such Articles still operating? Is there a certain mechanism for effectuating the public and political movement by means of parties and civil society, so as to practice such rights? Certain questions shall be taken into consideration nonetheless.
There is no doubt that some Articles in the 1971 Constitution are totally refused, notably the Articles that turns the President to someone over the law and controlling it. Such a practice was well known in Egypt since the time of Pharaohs. To secure the ruler. But now there came a time when shrinking the powers of the President to a limit not surpassing the other two authorities is inevitable. For example, how could the Judiciary practice its powers in the presence of a Minister of Justice who appoints the Higher Judicial Council to control the judiciary, in spite that the Judges are the true defenders of the rights and constitution. Certain checks and balances shall be provided and the Judicial authority must be independent of any relationship with the Executive authority. The powers of the President found support in many ways in the powers of the Executive authority, so the Prime Minister, Ministers, and those in their shadow, are controlling the people, drawing on the idea that they are Presidents in their fields of practice and have the powers of the President at such. Therefore, certain Articles in the Constitution shall be added for the trial of the President and Ministers.
Gamal Asaad asked whether there is a Legislative authority in Egypt. At such point and when we think about the state of the Legislative authority, we find that the separation of powers is the best solution possible for promoting a real democracy, or helps in the presence of a real democracy. When the PA member or the PA has the right to discuss the Balance Sheet of the Army, the Mass Media and Presidency and such prohibitions, no member of the Legislative chambers or a member in the PA is thus representing the people. While concerning economic rights the current system is unjust to workers and peasants a hundred times more than before.
Abdulmalak refused that the Constitution determines a certain percentage of Copts in the Parliament, indicating that such a thing promotes religious discrimination in Egypt. What is needed from the Constitution is providing harmony between various political and social forces of the society. It is unacceptable to corrupt a political or intellectual trend for the good of liberalism. Is it possible now in the context of the de facto political circumstances to cancel the second Article of the Constitution? It is hard to cancel an Article in a way or another, but when problems are found in the Article, it could be written in a manner reducing the discrimination and turn it to an Article advocating the right to citizenship.
Dr. Abdulaziz Khalaf, the PA member, said that the constitutional reform is a public demand before being the demand of the authorities, holding that the country is in need for reforms and amendments, and that new amendments will not necessarily lead to changing the whole Constitution, but there are certain Articles that need amending, confirming that the problem is carried on the back of a sentence put in each Article, which is "In accordance with the rulings of the law", which leads to restricting the Constitution by the law, while the Constitution is supposed to rule over the law and not the other way around. He demanded abolishing the emergency law, especially that the country is living a state of peace since a very long time ago.
Nasser Al Koumy, lawyer, stressed upon the necessity of cooperation between the Legislative authority and the Civil Society organizations in drafting a new Constitution. Saying that new Articles shall be drafted, for the powers granted for each authority, not the person in such authority.
Abdulrahman Shahat, lawyer, asked: are we in need for a constitutional reform? Indicating that we are not in need for a new constitution, but in need for amending some of the Articles of the current one, which are related to the powers of the President.
While Azza Mansour, student and Nassery Party member, added that the people must participate in amending the constitution, and not granting this right to certain people, because the Constitution is for the people, adding that the human rights organizations shall prepare the people, especially the illiterate and those with low level of education, to actively participate in the constitutional reforms.
On the other hand, Wael Hassan, student at Assyout University, said that there are certain constitutional Articles that are in critical need for amendments, most eminent of which are the Articles related to the method of choosing the President and the powers granted to him, and the Articles securing the independence of the judiciary. These are the priorities in drafting the amendments, and they are not only the second Article of the Constitution.
Then came the comment of Gamal Asaad Abdulmalak over the previous arguments, saying that those who draft the Articles of the Constitution are specialists in their fields, and they take into consideration the citizens' opinions. The goal of the platform is to collect opinions from many citizens concerning the needed constitutional amendments.
At the end of the meeting Hafez Abu Seada commented on the idea of foreign interference, especially from the USA, over the constitutional amendments, saying that when the people and government are two faces of the same coin, no one can penetrate the Egyptian society… we are not in struggle with anyone, or any party against any other, but we are supporting the promotion of the people's acceptance to the government.
Abu Seada concluded his word saying that the Constitution is not a holly book, we made it to change our daily lives, so it is a vision, and a vision shall be granted by the Egyptian intellectuals to the people in order to adopt.
|
|
