Taheri on Egyptian Constitutional Reforms

Egypt is an ally of the United States, the first Arab country to make peace with Israel, and a dictitorial regime run under martial law for over 25 years since the murder of Anwar Sadat by a group of islamists that included amongst its number the current al Qaeda number 2 man, Ayman al-Zawahiri. Egypt's president since Sadat's death, Hosni Mubarak, has resisted democratic reforms, largely arguing that a democratic election would see Egypt come under the control of Islamists. Egypt's government today is authoritarian and nominally secular, and it is a government that significantly curtails freedom of speech. (See here)

Now, the 80 year old Mubarak is in an end game, trying to force through constitutional reforms that will end martial law, that may set the stage for a pluarlistic democracy, and that will outlaw political participation by any religious party. The largest such party in Egypt today is the century old Muslim Brotherhood. (For background information on the Muslim Brotherhood and MAS in the US, see here)

As Taheri explains:

The proposed reforms are certainly significant, partly rewriting or totally replacing 34 articles of the Constitution.

On the positive side, they would end the state of emergency under which Egypt has lived since President Anwar Sadat's assassination a quarter-century ago. On the negative side, the changes could pave the way for draconian laws to limit political freedom in the name of counterterrorism.

While secularist and liberal opposition groups have criticized the proposed reforms as a step away from democratization, the most determined opposition has come from the Muslim Brotherhood, a semiclandestine fraternity that won 88 seats in the 454-seat National Assembly in 2005.

The proposed reforms target the Muslim Brotherhood in two ways:

* They would make it illegal for any political party or group to be based on religion, forcing the Brotherhood to drop the word "Muslim" from its name and its old slogan, "Islam is the Solution."

* They would enable the government to stop the Brotherhood and similar Islamist organizations raising funds and establishing welfare networks as a means of recruiting members. The authorities may use the new constitutional provisions as an excuse to seize the Brotherhood's considerable assets, accumulated over some 80 years of business activities.

Hoping to avoid a ban, the Brotherhood has taken several steps to placate Mubarak. Notably, it has eschewed armed struggle by announcing that the security forces have the right to capture or kill anyone bearing unauthorized arms.

Last week, the Brotherhood swallowed another bitter pill when the government announced that 34 women had been appointed as judges, in direct contravention of Islam's rules. The historic step helps Egypt join the half-dozen Muslim-majority nations where women are admitted into all branches of the judiciary. Despite years of campaigning to drive women out of the judiciary, the Brotherhood has been forced to tone down its criticism of the government's latest move.

Despite the Brotherhood's objections, the idea of banning political parties based on religion appears to have substantial support across Egypt. Mubarak's liberal and leftist critics support the measure because it forces the Brotherhood and other Islamist outfits to fight for votes by offering political programs rather than fomenting religious passions.

The idea that political parties should not be based on religion is gaining ground in much of the Muslim world.

Both Algeria and Tunisia have amended their constitutions to prevent the formation of faith-based parties. Iraq's new democratic constitution also imposes restrictions on the use of religion for party political purposes.

. . . The issue is of greater importance in Egypt, where the Coptic Christian community (some 15 percent of the population) feels specially targeted by the Brotherhood and other Islamist groups.

. . . What is certain, however, is that Mubarak is trying to do all he can to prevent a power grab by the Islamists.

Over the last quarter-century, he has defeated a dozen armed jihadi groups in one of the longest anti-terrorist wars in modern history. He has also all but dismantled the Soviet-style economic system created by Gamal Abdul Nasser, who ruled between 1952 and 1969.

The proposed reforms could include a step backward, if future parliaments allocate unsupervised power to the army and the security services in the name of the War on Terror. Nevertheless, that need not happen - especially if the democratic opposition captures a greater share of the popular vote in future elections.

On balance, the end of the emergency is a positive development, as is the clarification of the relationship between the executive and the legislature. More important, the separation of religion from partisan politics is a step in the right direction. Egypt cannot build a democracy by setting the stage for religious wars.

Those who support democratization in Egypt should give these reforms qualified support - but remain vigilant to ensure free and fair elections in the months and years ahead.

Read the whole article here.