The Nour Party has finally made up its mind to join the Committee of Fifty charged with drafting the amendments to the 2012 constitution. After some wavering, the party said it would take part, so early last week when the names of the 50 members of the committee were released it was revealed that the Salafist party would be obtaining one seat and that the other seat reserved for the Islamist trend would be taken by Kamal Al-Helbawi, the breakaway former Muslim Brotherhood leader. Over the weekend leaks from within the Nour Party indicated that it might change its mind and withdraw. However, by the beginning of this week the party had apparently resolved its dilemma and announced that it would be accepting what it called a “paltry level” of representation. The reason the party gave for absenting itself from the inaugural session of the committee on 8 September was that it had not yet reached a decision over whether or not to take part, citing as a cause for the delay the interruptions in the train services and the curfew hours that had made it difficult for the members of the Salafist Calling and the leaders of its political wing, the Nour Party, to meet. Nevertheless, an official statement added that following consultations between the leaders of the Salafist Calling and the party's central committee, a majority of those present had voted in favour of remaining on the committee in spite of strong reservations voiced during the discussions. Nour Party leader Younes Makhioun said that the decision was motivated by the party's sense of responsibility at this critical juncture in Egypt's history and by the desire to safeguard the gains the Egyptian people had obtained following the 25 January Revolution. It would be an honour for the party to defend these gains, especially the constitutional articles pertaining to Islamic identity, he said, adding that his party would strive to collaborate with all honourable Egyptians in the interest of surmounting this difficult phase in order to restore stability and revive the cohesion of the Egyptian people. However, the party has voiced a number of reservations over the composition of the committee which, it claims, is inconsistent with the principle of consensus. It has noted that 17 of the members are drawn from leftist and Nasserist trends, whereas only two seats are reserved for the Islamist trend. It also maintains that the fact that Al-Azhar and the Egyptian churches have an equal amount of seats (three each) does not reflect the actual religious composition of society. In addition, certain segments of society, such as teachers, are not represented on the committee. But, in spite of such concerns, the party decided to give priority to the challenges of the current phase which “cannot tolerate any departure from the patriotic ranks,” as party leaders put it. Some liberal forces have expressed concerns over the Nour Party's decision, seeing it as an obstacle to the committee's work because of the party's determination to retain the controversial Article 219 of the 2012 constitution in the amended version. They argue that to retain this article, which is an explanatory provision that narrows the definition of “the principles of Islamic law,” stipulated in Article 2 as the main source of legislation, would be to pave the way for the continued hold of the Islamist trend on power. The Democratic Front Party had said that if the Nour Party had acted on its threat to withdraw from the committee, it would have only affected the committee numerically, not in terms of national consensus. Democratic Front spokespersons suggested that the Nour Party was trying to convey the impression that the committee was not representative of a national consensus and that it was trying to circulate unfounded rumours that the committee would turn the country into a secular state in which Islamic law was not applied. The April 6 Movement, which spearheaded the 25 January Revolution, has also objected to the inclusion of the Nour Party in the committee. 6 April spokespersons stated that the Nour Party did not participate in either the 25 January Revolution or the second wave of that revolution on 30 June whose aims and aspirations it now purported to defend. The only achievements to which the Nour Party could lay claim were its drive to abolish English-language instruction from the educational curriculum, the refusal of its members to stand when the national anthem was played, and incitement to the murder of Egyptian Shia, said one 6 April member. The movement also believes that the Nour Party is working to present itself as an alternative to the Muslim Brotherhood. The Nasserist Party criticised the Nour Party's objection to the proportion of seats accorded to the Islamist trend in the constitutional committee. Nasserist Party spokespersons maintain that the Salafist party is both politically inexperienced and politically suspect. “The Nour Party has gone from the seclusion of the home to the fire of politics,” said a Nasserist Party spokesperson, referring to the fact that the Salafis had shunned political involvement before the 25 January Revolution. “Then it played such an ambiguous role during the period of Muslim Brotherhood rule that no one could determine whether it was a supporter or opponent of the Brotherhood regime.” Some Nasserist Party leaders hold that the Nour Party was a chief partner of the Brotherhood during the period before the 30 June Revolution. They argue that it was only because the Nour Party parted ways with the Brotherhood that it was able to make a place for itself in the post-30 June period. The party was driven to this course by the underhanded acts against it by the Brotherhood's Freedom and Justice Party, which dismissed the Nour Party members from government positions, they add. The Nasserist Party has stressed that the committee must not work to promote partisan interests and it has pointed to the presence of many independent public figures on it. Even so, Sameh Ashour, head of the Lawyers Syndicate, has urged political parties taking part in the committee to rise above partisan affiliations or personal interests in order to “create a national synthesis that takes what is best for the country as its guide and that strives to draft a consensual constitution.” Although Yasser Burhami, director of the Salafist Calling, believes it is important for the Nour Party to take part in the committee, some Salafi leaders have indicated that the party's participation in the committee will be governed by directives that it cannot disobey. They suggest that certain developments may compel the party to withdraw from the committee either in order to save face or because it was instructed to do so. In its own defence, the party insists that its purpose in taking part in the committee is not solely to defend what it calls the Islamic identity articles in the constitution. Egypt's Islamic identity is not in danger, but there is not a constitution in the world that does not define the identity of the state and its relations with other states, it has said. The party has also objected to the criticism levelled against it that it is only interested in certain articles, rather than in the constitutional drafting process as a whole. The Nour spokesmen refute such criticisms and insist that the party does not see its role as restricted solely to the defence of article 219. Sources from the Salafist Calling, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told the Weekly that the Nour Party member on the committee would try to persuade his fellow members to defer amendments that are sources of contention until after the interim period. The hope is that committee members will be able to unanimously approve the bulk of the constitutional articles, thereby paving the way to the end of the interim period and the establishment of permanent institutions and a government capable of solving the problems of the people. But the fact remains that the Salafist Calling is also divided. Member of the Salafist Calling Said Abdel-Azim has led demonstrations called for by the National Alliance to Support Legitimacy, and it is said that two other Salafist Calling members, Mohamed Al-Muqaddem and Sheikh Abu Hatiba, are also dissatisfied with the position of the Salafist organisation and its political wing. Nevertheless, it is telling that the chapter in the governorate of Marsa Matrouh has recently announced its withdrawal from the Salafist Calling, which may presage further internal troubles ahead for this leading Salafist organisation. Some find it ironic that the Nour Party is taking part in a committee that is working on a constitution that is likely to prohibit political parties based on religious affiliation or a religious frame-of-reference. One cannot help but wonder whether the party leadership has thought ahead to the time when it might be asked to dissolve itself on the grounds of such a provision. Perhaps this is one of the reasons why the party has been so intent on defending Article 219, or at least on persuading the members of the committee to defer discussion of this and other “identity articles” until after the interim period. But what if the committee insists on abolishing Article 219, and what if the Nour Party senses that it is destined for dissolution? Most likely, it will withdraw from the committee and try to mobilise public opinion against the constitutional amendments. Such a scenario confirms the opinion of some political analysts that the Nour Party's real purpose in taking part in the committee is to cast itself as an alternative to the Muslim Brotherhood and the sole defender of Islamic identity in the political arena.
