This site is no longer active. Please click here for details.

The members of Egypt's constitution committee meet at the Shura Council in Cairo

Egypt is deep into the messy process of drafting its new constitution. In the past few weeks, two different drafts were released within days of each other. Not surprisingly, there are several areas of major contention. At the heart of the matter are profoundly different views between religious conservatives and secular liberals on such touchstone issues as freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and women’s rights.

These differences come to a head in specific articles, beginning right up front with Article Two which states that “Islam is the state religion, Arabic is the official language, and the principles of Islamic sharia are the main source of legislation.” This language is virtually identical to that in the 1971 Constitution. Yet, some Salafists are calling for Islamic law to have an even more explicit role in the constitution. Others, including the Grand Sheikh of Al-Azhar and representatives from the Christian community, want to keep Article Two as it has been. No doubt Article Two will remain a divisive issue.

Interestingly, the most recent draft of the constitution added an article about Al-Azhar, the university and leading center of Islamic thought in Egypt. The new article affirms Al-Azhar as an “independent Islamic body” and that Al-Azhar’s Grand Imam “shall be independent and cannot be removed from office.” It also states that “the opinion of Al-Azhar’s Council of Grand Scholars shall be taken in matters related to Islamic sharia.” For months there has been growing concern that Al-Azhar has become a battleground for influence and control in Egypt. Apparently, the new reference to Al-Azhar in the draft constitution was a sop to the Salafists, but secularists are crying foul. Journalist Roula Khalaf calls it “…the most egregious clause the Salafis have pushed for (and which deserves the strongest opposition)” and warns that it would give Al-Azhar “the sole right to interpret sharia, a move that would in essence create a higher, unelected religious authority.”

Women’s rights are likewise controversial. Article Sixty-Eight of the draft constitution (sometimes called Article Thirty-Six, a reference to an earlier version) refers to women’s rights, saying, “the state shall take all measures to establish the equality of women and men in the areas of political, cultural, economic, and social life, as well as all other areas, insofar as this does not conflict with the rulings of Islamic sharia.” Various sources note a difference in language between “principles of Islamic Law” referred to in Article Two of the draft constitution versus “rulings” in this clause, a much less flexible term.

Other Muslim-majority countries that have adopted new constitutions in recent years have also struggled with how to reconcile appeals to Islamic law with demands for human rights guarantees. Iraqis argued for months in 2005 over the role of Islam in their new constitution. They ended up with potentially conflicting clauses – one stating that Iraqis are equal before the law “without discrimination because of sex” and another saying that no law can be passed that contradicts the “established rulings” of Islam.

Women shout slogans during a protest against the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic parties, and in support of women rights in the constitution, Cairo, October 4, 2012 (Reuters).

Egypt still has a long road ahead with respect to its new constitution. Now, the country’s Supreme Constitutional Court is expected to determine whether Egypt’s Constitutional Assembly is even legal, ruling on a lawsuit raised by liberals to address the outsized representation of Islamists on the Constitutional Assembly. (This is just one of over 40 legal challenges that liberals have tried to use to dissolve the panel).

One positive development is that Egyptian citizens are very much engaged in the debates over constitutional language, not only on the streets, but also through social media. There is even an innovative government-run website that allows people to log in through Facebook to comment on the articles. Already, there are 14,000 comments alone on Article Two with a full range of perspectives on what role Islam should have in the new constitution.

This post was originally published on

The views expressed in this Insight are the author’s own and are not endorsed by Middle East Voices or Voice of America. If you’d like to share your opinion on this post, you may use our democratic commenting system below. If you are a Middle East expert or analyst associated with an established academic institution, think tank or non-governmental organization, we invite you to contribute your perspectives on events and issues about or relevant to the region. Please email us through our Contact page with a short proposal for an Insight post or send us a link to an existing post already published on your institutional blog.

Isobel Coleman

Isobel Coleman is senior fellow and director of the Civil Society, Markets, and Democracy Initiative as well as director of the Women and Foreign Policy Program at the Council on Foreign Relations. On Twitter, she can be followed at Isobel_Coleman.

Add comment