Wed, 11/07/2012 - 23:08
After days of heated
deliberations in political and religious circles, the architects of
Egypt’s next constitution reached an agreement on Tuesday on the
phrasing of the document’s most contentious article — the one that
defines the role of Islamic law in the political order.
The Constituent Assembly’s
subsidiary committee, tasked with drafting the first chapter of the
constitution, agreed unanimously to adopt the phrasing of the previous
constitution, which states that “the principles of Islamic Sharia are
the primary source of legislation.”
This resolution came after Salafis in
the assembly attempted to modify the clause and remove the term
“principles” on the grounds that it excludes many Islamic commandments.
Despite their failure to introduce that
modification, Salafis see a victory in adding a clause granting
Al-Azhar, rather than the Supreme Constitutional Court, the right to
decide what falls within the parameters of Sharia's principles.
Younis Makhyoun, a leader of the
Salafi-oriented Nour party, says his group suggested this clause as a
midway compromise to please all parties. “We found that this could be
the solution. Even if it does not fully satisfy us, at least it can
achieve some of what we want,” Makhyoun said on Tuesday.
This Salafi addition could be seen as
an attempt to overturn the canonized interpretation of “principles of
Islamic Sharia” handed down by the SCC in 1996.
“The court interpreted ‘principles of
Sharia’ as the incontestable and well-evidenced commandments of Islam,”
said Makhyoun. “According to this interpretation, a lot of Sharia
commandments fall beyond the scope of [the constitution].”
Muslim Jurists divide Islamic
commandments into two categories: the Ahkam Qat’eyya, which are
incontestable and a matter of consensus among all established scholars,
and Ahkam Dhaneyya, which bear different interpretations.
“All of the Qur’an is Ahkam Qat’eyya
but most of the prophet’s Sunna is not,” he said. The term principles
would lead to the exclusion of most of the prophet’s sayings and deeds,
the Sunna, from the constitution, argued Makhyoun.
Long-term gains
In the short term, granting Al-Azhar
the authority to rule over the boundaries of Sharia may not necessarily
benefit Salafis. Although ultra-orthodox thought has already penetrated
the world’s oldest Sunni institution in recent decades, Al-Azhar is
currently controlled by Grand Sheikh Ahmed al-Tayyeb, a liberal,
Western-educated grand imam known for his animosity to ultra-orthodoxy.
But Salafis are betting on changes within the institution in the future, after Tayyeb leaves the post.
“We are laying out a constitution for
generations to come. We are speaking of Al-Azhar as an institution not
as a person. Al-Azhar is not Tayyeb,” Makhyoun said.
Since Mubarak's ouster, Tayyeb had
sought to preempt Islamists’ attempts to impose their relatively
hardline interpretations of the role of religion in politics. Last year,
he sponsored a ground-breaking document, dubbed the “Azhar
Declaration,” which proclaims that the institution fully supports
notions of democracy, freedom of religion and thought, and other liberal
values.
At the same time, Tayyeb strove to
consolidate his power and tighten his grip on the institution. He
appointed a committee to draft a bill to ensure the independence of the
institution from the state. A few days before the Islamist-dominated
Parliament convened earlier this year, the Supreme Council of the Armed
Forces unilaterally passed the bill, which was seen by many as an
attempt to weaken the chances of a Salafi or a Muslim Brotherhood
takeover of the influential institution.
The law, which gave Tayyeb the right to
stay in office indefinitely, elicited a stir from his detractors within
the institution and Islamists in Parliament.
“We will revise this law if we are back
in Parliament. The law has several flaws,” said Makhyoun, a member of
the contested Parliament. “It is illogical that the incumbent grand imam
stays in office until his death.”
Fighting solo
The Salafi movement has had no allies
in its fight to rephrase Article 2. The largest Islamist group in
Parliament and on the Constituent Assembly, the more moderate Muslim
Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party, showed no interest in changing
the old phrasing.
“We believe that the old article causes
no problem. It is a balanced one and preserves the rights of all,”
Sobhi Saleh, an FJP leader and a Constituent Assembly member, told Egypt
Independent.
Salafis also sought to gain Al-Azhar’s
support in the battle. Last week, Salafi leaders had met with the grand
sheikh, hoping to convince him to endorse their views on Article 2. As
expected, Tayyeb refused to toe the Salafi line.
“We expected Al-Azhar to take to the
front lines on that and we would follow it,” Makhyoun said two days
before the Constituent Assembly discussed the matter. “We expected
Al-Azhar, the bearer of the flag of Islam, to demand [the
implementation] of Sharia.”
While Salafis were fighting for what
they call “a crucial matter,” Kamal Habib, an expert on Islamist groups,
argued that the fuss about Article 2 was more political than
ideological.
“[Salafis] are talking again about Sharia for electoral rather than genuine reasons,” argued Habib.
Salafis seek to persuade voters who
backed them in the last parliamentary poll hoping they would implement
Sharia that they did all they could to deliver their promise, added
Habib, dismissing the Nour Party’s statements on Sharia as inconsistent.
“Before the last parliamentary
elections, Salafis were addressing their constituencies saying that
Sharia was their main concern,” said Habib. “After they won, Islamic
Sharia was not part of their discourse as MPs. They began talking about
real political issues. Then, they supported [liberal Islamist Abdel
Moneim] Abouel Fotouh in the first round [of the president poll],
despite the fact that Sharia was not part of his platform.”
Grassroots reaction
The Nour Party’s failure to introduce
immediate and tangible changes to the role of Islam in politics raises
questions about the future of a movement whose driving force to step out
of proselytizing and into the political sphere was to Islamize the
constitution and, with it, the state.
For decades, Salafis remained aloof
from competitive politics and dismissed elections and democracy as forms
of Western heresy. After Hosni Mubarak’s ouster last year, this
attitude changed. Ultra-orthodox Islamists believed that their
engagement in politics would contribute to adopting an Islamic
constitution.
Several Salafi groups formed their own
parties and engaged in parliamentary elections, including the
Alexandria-based Salafi Dawah, the nation’s largest and most organized
Salafi group. In only a few months, the nascent Dawah’s Nour Party won
nearly one-fifth of parliamentary seats in last fall’s poll. A pledge to
implement God’s law was the pillar of the party’s campaigning.
But Salafis say their loss in the fight over Article 2 won’t fundamentally change their political activities.
“Withdrawing from politics is not
conceivable,” said Makhyoun. “If you cannot achieve your goal in full,
you can achieve some of it, but you do not withdraw from the field.”
At the least, the Nour lawmakers can ensure that no legislation passed by Parliament violates divine laws, Makhyoun said.
The Salafi rank-and-file won’t hold the
Nour leadership responsible for the failure to impose God’s law through
the constitution, Nour Party members say.
Islam Abdel Bary, a 32-year-old member
of the Nour Party and the Salafi Dawah, downplays the impact of
yesterday’s resolution on the party’s members.
“The message reaching the base is that
it is not [the leaders’] fault,” said the Alexandria-based mechanical
engineer. “They insisted on the matter, but at a certain point they
could not do more.”
Abdel Bary explained that the party’s
grassroots are more concerned at the moment with the ongoing power
struggle between the president and the SCAF and the future of the
contested Constituent Assembly than Article 2.
“People like me, at the bottom of the party, have no confidence that this Constituent Assembly will remain,” he said.
The future of the Constituent Assembly
hinges on a verdict that may be handed down by the Administrative Court
next Tuesday. The court is examining appeals contesting the legality of
the assembly on grounds that it fails to represent different segments of
society and violates the interim constitution.
Earlier this month, the Salafi battle
over Article 2 alarmed non-Islamists. The Coptic Church reacted with a
statement last week declaring that it might reconsider its presence in
the Constituent Assembly.
The church’s threat to pull out was
reminiscent of the stir elicited by the first Constituent Assembly
elected by Parliament in March and raised fears that the incumbent
assembly might face the same fate as the previous one.
Previously, the church, Al-Azhar,
judicial bodies and secular parties withdrew from the Islamist-dominated
assembly. Shortly thereafter, secular political leaders filed a suit
before the Administrative Court contesting the legality of the assembly
and arguing it failed to represent the whole society. Eventually, they
won they won the case, and the court ordered the dissolution of the
assembly.
“This time is marked by congestion and
requires flexibility [on the part of the Nour Party]. And we do not want
to cause problems,” added Makhyoun.
But some fear that if Salafis don’t get
to implement the laws that they want in the constitution, they may take
matters into their own hands. On 25 June, three religiously
conservative men stabbed to death a young man standing with his fiancée
in Suez, reportedly as part of a self-styled morality police. The
incident raised fears about emboldened Salafis pushing their
conservative values on others.
Ahmed Zaghloul, an expert on the Salafi
movement, however, ruled out that the Salafi Dawah and its political
wing’s failure to introduce a tangible constitutional overhaul to the
role of Islam in Egyptian politics would prompt them to adopt violence.
“The Salafi Dawah is against violence,”
he said, adding that Salafi sheikhs would never jeopardize the gains
they made so far by making bold moves that might result in their
complete eradication.
“They would eventually announce that
the idea of Islamic Sharia shall be postponed, citing unsuitable
circumstances,” added Zaghloul.
However, the Salafi movement is
anything but monolithic or centralized. Over the last year, different
Salafi strands have emerged with no clear leadership or structures, some
of which demonstrated revolutionary attitudes.
Egypt might witness isolated violent
acts by some Salafi youth who were pinning hopes on the immediate
implementation of Islamic Sharia, Zaghloul predicted.
Palestinians demostrated in June over Sarsak's imprisonment
