By Salama A Salama Many would agree that constitutional reform is the cornerstone of political reform. President Hosni Mubarak has promised to push the necessary amendments through by next year, and many political parties have been offering their view on the matter. The People's Assembly has already quizzed its members on which articles need to be changed. But it is the right of the public at large to be included in the current debate. The public has the right to learn more about current views and opinions. This is not a job to be left exclusively to the People's Assembly and the National Democratic Party (NDP). We need someone to collect all the relevant proposals. We need a committee, including legal experts as well as politicians, to look into various possible amendments and draft the proposals. The NDP has been keeping us in the dark about its position on proposed amendments. We don't know whether the NDP wants amendments to be of a limited scope or a broad spectrum. And the NDP has been trying of late to lower public expectations on the matter. Recently, people close to the NDP have been slamming the National Council for Human Rights (NCHR) for offering its own proposals. The NCHR, we're told, has exceeded its powers and interfered in matters lying outside its jurisdiction. The NDP, apparently, is loath to change ill-fated Article 76. The NDP doesn't want to free the press or limit the duration and powers of the presidency. The NCHR is an advisory body and as such it has been advising the government on matters related to the rights of the citizenry. The NCHR is not associated with any banned political group or unlicensed party. So it is unfair to criticise it when it thinks out loud about the right way to change the constitution. The opinions voiced by the NCHR were even-handed, objective and politically appropriate. Those who criticised the NCHR did so because they didn't want to listen. In fact, the NCHR was trying to find a compromise solution between the rights of all citizens and the NDP's conservative propensities. The NDP is still afraid of change, however overdue. Opposition parties, and even some members of the NDP, have pointed out that certain clauses of the constitution are outdated, including the statement that Islamic Sharia is the source of legislation, the workers' and peasants' quota, and guarantees of free education. Let's remember that no article in the constitution is too sacred to change. Our society has moved on, and it's unfair to shackle the nation with the burdens of the past. In this country, some people don't even dare suggest that we have a modern constitution, one that keeps us abreast of changes in our society and in the world. Let's at least agree that we need modern and comprehensive amendments. We need to fling open some windows so that future generations may breathe. We cannot let people who cannot think beyond their narrow interests tell us what to do. We need to let everyone offer ideas on constitutional amendments. Already, many political parties have been discussing the matter. The Wafd, Tagammu, Nasserists and Muslim Brotherhood have tabled fine proposals. Judges, civil rights groups and the NCHR have done the same. Now we need to compile those views and sift through them until we come up with a formula that is as acceptable to the majority. We need to do the right thing, though often that isn't the easy thing.
