Idealism needed in drafting Egypt's new constitution

The ongoing protest in Cairo that began this past weekend reveals the projected power of the two potentially leading political players in Egypt, namely the Muslim Brotherhood and the country’s military, whose hold on power since February is being extended, allegedly on purpose.

Egypt’s military was hailed as heroic when it sided with the pro-democracy movement and ousted long-time president Hosni Mubarak from power.

But while the generals tried thousands of people, mainly civilians, in military courts, they also expanded the controversial emergency law that gives the interim authorities sweeping power. Initially, it was understood that the law would be employed as a mechanism to restore order following the “Arab Spring” protests. But instead the generals keep coming out with one excuse after another, seemingly to justify their position in power. Many people are worried that the Egyptians may be trading one autocratic regime for another.

To some people, thousands of Egyptians returning to the iconic Tahrir Square as a focal point to voice their frustration is a healthy sign. To others, Egypt still has a long way to go before normalcy reaches its soil.

The gathering that started last Friday was organised by people from the Islamist camp. They are opposed to the so-called “Al Salmi document”, a proposal for constitutional provisions that is named after the country’s deputy prime minister, Ali Al Salmi.

Protesters are upset about the proposed purview of the new Parliament that has yet to be elected. The election is scheduled for later this month. This begs the question as to why Al Salami can’t wait just a few more days.

Perhaps the stickiest point in the document is the provision granting the army special privileges in terms of its political role and budget. In short, it is a last-minute attempt to cement the Egyptian military in the country’s politics.

While it’s understandable for protesters to voice their concerns, one should not overlook the fact that the latest protests have been sat out by the country’s liberal camps for the simple reason that they do not want to be associated with the Islamists, who are predicted to win the upcoming election.

Perhaps what is lacking here is a dose of idealism. Should the drafting of the constitution be done by people who get the most votes at the upcoming parliamentary election? If so, would the aspirations and the rights of those who received fewer votes, or no votes at all, be reflected? Democracy is much more than ‘the majority rules’. Thailand is a good example of this very fact.

And so in the middle of a changing sea, Egypt finds itself in a tense debate on how a constitution should be drafted and who has the legitimate authority to do the drafting. Other Arab countries that are going through a similar political transition will no doubt face the same question.

The Islamists have come a long way in terms of quelling fears that they will not abuse their power if and when they are elected to office. The Muslim Brotherhood has stated that it will contest only 50 per cent of the seats in the parliament. But the fact that many others refused to take part in the bloody protest over this past weekend suggests that the Islamists still have a long way to go to convince their fellow countrymen and women that they have the nation’s interests at heart, not just their own ideals.

A dictator was overthrown nine months ago by idealistic youth seeking greater liberty, democracy and freedom. But all Egyptians, including the military, have to go the extra mile to overthrow any lingering dictatorial tendencies.