In an exclusive interview, Speaker of the People's Assembly tells Gamal Essam El-Din why he is not in favour of redrafting the constitution in its entirety It is 15 months since the presidential campaign in which President Hosni Mubarak promised sweeping constitutional reforms. When do you expect President Mubarak to request parliament begin amending the constitution? I cannot give a specific date. All I can say is that the date is not far away. Chairman of the Shura Council Safwat El-Sherif has said the amendments will be ready to go before the public in a referendum before the council's mid-term elections on 24 April while Prime Minister Ahmed Nazif says the referendum will be held in summer. Who is right? Again, I cannot give any date. It depends on when President Mubarak requests parliament to begin amending articles. As I said, that date is not far away. How many constitutional articles do you expect to be amended? In light of the objectives set by President Mubarak's presidential election programme I would assume more than 20. What will be the guidelines governing constitutional amendments? The long-awaited constitutional amendments will focus on achieving the goals set out in President Mubarak's presidential election programme. They will also include re-amending Article 76 in a way explained by President Mubarak in his speech before the combined session of the People's Assembly and Shura Council on 19 November. Expected constitutional amendments will be divided into four groups. The first will deal with general executive powers. These include re- amending Article 76 to make it easier for political parties to field candidates in presidential elections. At the same time they will also aim at regulating the relationship between the president of the republic and the government in a way that gives the cabinet greater powers at the expense of the president's executive prerogatives. They will reinforce the role of the People's Assembly in overseeing the government in terms of withdrawing confidence, without the matter having to be referred to a referendum, and in scrutinising the annual budget. There will also be stipulations placed on the president exercising the powers contained in Article 74, the introduction of guarantees to avert the kind of national crisis that might obstruct state institutions from performing as they should. The second group of articles concerns the qualifications required to run in parliamentary elections. They will aim to ensure that the electoral system is capable of allowing voters to select their parliamentary representatives freely as well as ensure that there is a minimum quota of women present in parliament. The third group will focus on ridding the constitution of socialist principles launched in Egypt in the 1960s. They will be a response to Egypt's embrace of economic liberalism while at the same time enshrining the state's continued commitment to social justice. The final group of amendments will pave the way for anti-terror legislation to be promulgated to replace the emergency law which has been in effect since 1981. What about the powers of the consultative Shura Council? Under the current constitution (Article 195) the Shura Council can be consulted on any draft laws to be referred by the president of the republic. The new amendments will make asking the opinion of Shura Council on draft laws compulsory rather than optional. In a recent meeting with members of the Egypt-Canada Business Council (ECBC) you said you were not in favour of maintaining full judicial supervision of elections as stipulated in Article 88. Why? What I suggested was that a supreme election commission be created to supervise elections from the beginning to the end. It is a recommendation that the main opposition parties have also made during a recent meeting. Nobody can dispense with judicial supervision because it is the main guarantee of the integrity and legitimacy of elections. The judiciary forms one of the regime's cornerstones and its role is essential if the will of the people is to be credibly expressed. Some people seem to leap to the conclusion that Egypt will be the subject of a constitutional coup whenever the matter of judicial supervision of elections is raised. This is an erroneous position to adopt, and one that effectively blocks debate over reform and change. President Mubarak has spoken about the importance of reinforcing and expanding the role of political parties. Does this mean there will be a switch from the current individual to a slate candidacy system? This is a difficult issue, a thorny one not only in Egypt but elsewhere in the world. Each system -- whether candidacy or slate -- has it pros and cons. The coming debate over the system best suited to Egypt will have to address two basic points. How far will it free elections from the influence of money and acts of intimidation? How capable will it be of enhancing the legitimacy of the regime, that is, will it produce elections marked by integrity? When President Mubarak chose to amend Article 76 in February 2005 there was a great deal of speculation that this was a response to US pressure... These analyses were way off mark. The amendment came within the context of President Mubarak's continuing efforts to ensure that the exercise of power in Egypt be democratically grounded. It was a logical amendment, and a necessary one: as long as the president of the republic is also chairman of the executive authority he should be elected by direct ballot rather than be nominated by parliament and then referred to the people in a plebiscite. I would point out that Egypt had been facing pressure, and enormous political challenges, since well before 2005. Do not forget the recommendations for political reform voiced at the Bibliotheca Alexandrina's conference in 2004. President Mubarak chose not to respond to this pressure until the time was ripe for a new round of political and constitutional reform. In your meeting with ECBC you said you did not favour the wholesale change of the constitution. What did you mean? The existing constitution was introduced in 1971, in the early days of the presidency of Anwar El-Sadat. It ended the era of "revolutionary legitimacy" enshrined in Egypt's post-1952 constitutions, replacing it with a "constitutional legitimacy". And while the 35 years that have passed since then have seen a host of political changes inside and outside Egypt they are changes that can still be accommodated by constitutional amendments rather than the drafting a new constitution. Since the main pillars of constitutional legitimacy remain in place it seems better to make the necessary adjustments than change the constitution as a whole. Let me make a comparison with France where, in 1958, more than ten amendments were introduced without changing the constitution as whole. Why should Egypt change its constitution as a whole when the main tenets of the existing constitution, such as espousing the republican system, multi-party democracy, sovereignty of law, independence of the judiciary and respect of human rights and freedoms, remain applicable? You have indicated that the constitution will be purged of 1960s socialism yet at the same time insist that free education will continue, as well as reserving 50 per cent of parliamentary seats for workers and peasants... I spoke about purging the constitution of economic socialism, such as state control of the means of production. Allocating half of parliamentary seats to the representatives of workers and peasant farmers was a remarkable feature of the 1952 Revolution rather than a principle of socialism. President Mubarak believes it should be maintained. I also said the new amendments will aim to constitutionalise Egypt's switch towards economic liberalism while maintaining its commitment to social justice. Access to free education is a feature of social justice which is why it must be maintained. Opposition parties believe that changing Article 77 so that the president is restricted to two terms is at the core of meaningful reform... I do not agree that without changing Article 77 in the way the opposition wants all other reforms are meaningless. Will the amended articles be put to the public in a single referendum or will they be able to vote on individual reforms? In 1980 several articles were put to the public in a single referendum. It is a scenario that could easily be repeated. There are plenty of precedents from around the world. How is the People's Assembly going to discuss the constitutional amendments? There will be a repeat of the pattern of discussions that surrounded the amendment of Article 76 last year. The People's Assembly and Shura Council will conduct hearing sessions to gauge the views of MPs, constitutional experts and political commentators. The final draft of the articles expected to be amended will once again have to be approved by the People's Assembly before they go before the public in a referendum. Independent MP Talaat El-Sadat was sent to a military jail in October. Why has the assembly not stripped him of membership? The assembly is not empowered to comment on or discuss judicial rulings. The assembly is keen to respect the principle of separation of powers. The recent parliamentary debate over the veil has led many to fear that Muslim Brotherhood MPs will use such issues to polarise the nation into religious moderate and extremist camps? The parliamentary debate over the veil was originally raised by NDP MPs because they thought it a public opinion issue. I would emphasise that the assembly will never let itself become a forum for the discussion of religious issues. It is a forum discussing public issues, and these include cultural values. I will never let any issues prevent the assembly from exercising its supervisory and legislative roles. Do you think the assembly has enough time in its current session to discuss new legislation in addition to constitutional amendments? The discussion of the expected constitutional amendments will take most of the assembly's time and as a result only a very limited number of draft laws will be introduced.
