Without writing a constitution now that guarantees civic freedoms and advances the spirit of the Egyptian uprising, parliamentary elections will quash the legitimacy of the revolution, writes Azmi Ashour* It is only natural that this transitional period in the Egyptian revolution should be characterised by confusion and lack of unity over priorities and aims with respect to many issues. One of the most pressing issues is the need to draft a new constitution, which, according to the logic of revolutions, should have taken priority over holding parliamentary elections. It is little wonder, therefore, that this question has stirred considerable controversy and, over time, no small amount of anxiety and growing adamance among the coalition of the revolutionary youth, its forces and movements. The sense of frustration and urgency was epitomised in the second "Friday of Anger", held on 27 May in response to the political interplay and indicators that give the impression of a drive to re-entrench many of the features of the pre-revolutionary period through the dictatorship of those who would come to power if elections are held before the promulgation of a new constitution. Suspicions of a drive to undermine the revolution were first raised by the rush to hold a referendum in March over the amendment of several articles of the constitution. The amendment idea was originally proposed by the ex-president in the course of the concessions he offered while the revolution was still in full force. In fact, it was Mubarak who created the constitutional amendments committee, even if its membership was changed after his departure. From the outset, then, the referendum process appeared illegitimate, associated as it was with the fallen regime and given the murkiness surrounding the options available to voters who were restricted to a yes or no vote on the amendments, rather than on the constitution itself. The choice was deceptive. Regardless of which way they voted, they implicitly had to accept the old constitution. A "No" vote simply implied that they rejected the amendments and agreed to the old constitution as it stood. Likewise, a "Yes" vote implied that they agreed to the modification of a few articles, but otherwise approved of the old constitution. In both cases, the old constitution prevailed regardless of how voters actually felt about it. But it was not just the form of the referendum that confused and misled voters. Other factors intervened to steer them in a particular direction, the most salient being that certain political forces suddenly found that their own interests would be best served by a "Yes" vote and then exploited religious sentiments to sway voters in that direction. Leading this campaign was the powerful and politically canny Muslim Brotherhood, which most likely feels that the old constitution, with the vast powers it confers on the president, is best suited to this organisation's creed and hierarchical structure, which is headed by a supreme guide. Also, this organisation was thrown off guard by the suddenness and forcefulness of the revolution, in which it initially played no part. Alarmed by the efficacy the secularist middle class displayed in the revolution, by its ability to identify with and respond to the demands of the youth in ways that were consistent with modern civilisation and culture, and that shunned traditional approaches and religious exploitation favoured by Islamists, the Muslim Brotherhood had to move quickly in order to position itself to reap the fruits by means of the weapon it uses so well, and by dominating representational assemblies and councils. Prompted by such misgivings, this middle class gathered again in Tahrir Square in the same spirit that characterised the 18 days that preceded the ouster of Mubarak. As was the case then, there was unity of purpose, the aim this time being a new constitution. The revival of the spirit of the Egyptian revolution for this end on the second "Friday of Anger" is fully justifiable. Above all, a legislative authority, in and of itself, does not embody the concept of the nation. Parliament is only one of the institutions that were conceived to exist alongside one another towards the realisation of sound governance. Its members are elected democratically for the purpose of enacting legislation, but within the framework of a constitution that binds all citizens in a state and that is not solely representative of the majority that happens to win the parliamentary elections and place a president in power. The constitution must express the spirit of the entire Egyptian state, with its history, culture and current renaissance, and its principles must be formulated in light of the experiences of the past, circumstances of the present and aspirations for the future. A constitutional committee selected by an elected assembly dominated by a majority representative of a single political force with an ideological or religious agenda is a formula for usurping the will of the Egyptian people and the two-centuries old history of the evolution of their civil state. At the very least, in view of the current political interplay in Egypt, a constitution emerging from such a committee would be regarded by many as unconstitutional and likely give rise to a situation in which the constitution is changed with every new electoral round. That, of course, is if democratic processes are kept alive and no individual or group claims legitimacy for themselves on religious grounds, envelops the constitution in a religious fold and demands its alteration on the grounds of what they regard as heresies. Clearly, then, priority should be given to drawing up a constitution in a consensual manner and in accordance with considerations based on the evolution of the Egyptian political experience over the past two hundred years and aspirations for the future. The constitution must strive to be a unifying framework that embraces all Egyptians, Muslim and Christian alike, and it must seek to be a vessel capable of assimilating the full spectrum of political opinion, from the progressive and liberal left to the conservative, in all their diverse shades. Accordingly, it must close off any avenues that would give a particular religious or ideological camp a mandate over the rest of society. Our constitution must fully reflect the principle of the equality of all citizens under its umbrella and the laws generated within its framework. Such a goal is not out of reach. The Egyptian state has a lengthy constitutional heritage and a storehouse of constitutional ideas that can be drawn on to ensure that the principles of the new constitution we produce are commensurate with the lofty aspirations and civilised spirit of the Egyptian revolution. The efforts of Egyptian jurists and constitutional experts, from the law that established the Assembly of Deputies in 1866 through the 1923 Constitution, which, for its time, marked a qualitative leap forward in terms of the liberal democratic values and principles of equal citizenship and political plurality that it enshrined, offer inspirational landmarks that have left their imprint on all aspects of Egyptian life, from the realms of political thought and culture to artistic and architectural production. Indeed, the Muslim Brotherhood, which was founded in 1928, owes its very existence to the liberal principles and spirit that were inherent in the 1923 constitution. At present, therefore, the foremost challenge of the 25 January Revolution is to succeed in its drive for the creation of a new constitution before any elections are held. If legislative elections are held first and in the framework of the amendments to the old constitution, they will deliver the first debilitating blow to the legitimacy of the 25 January Revolution, which is based to a considerable extent on its success in overthrowing the former regime. The principles and aspirations of the revolution will only be fulfilled through the creation of a constitutional, institutional and political framework for a civil Egyptian state that precludes the culture of sectarianism and quota systems, for if elements of this culture worm their way into the constitution Egyptian national unity will crumble. * The writer is a political analyst.
