On Constitutions - Iraq's

Update August 28 - Constitutional Drafting Committee signs Iraqi Constitution without Sunni support - CP

Update August 25 - Sunni minority still giving Constitution committee difficulty - CP
Saleh al-Mutlaq the Sunni negotiator appears to be acting in bad faith. He needs to clarify and qualify his statement: "There is a terrifying and dark future awaiting Iraq". He also appears to lack vision and an understanding of why it is important to have a Constitution. As he says: "It is important to present services for the Iraqis now, as well as to maintain security, and it is not important to write a piece of paper that all Iraqis disagree on."

Constitutions are not just pieces of paper. They are what binds a country together. The Sunni's keep rejecting federalism but they don't realize that having a Sunni autonomous region will allow them to keep their Sunni identity. They are in the minority and shouldn't expect that the whole country is going to bend to all of their demands. They are not showing an abilility to negotiate but are trying to impose fear on fellow Sunnis by making generalized statements without backing it up with sound reasoning. This only proves to show that this fellow does not have the insight to be a negotiatior. The Sunnis have also chosen not to elect their representatives, setting the stage for more dictatorship in the future.

Update August 20 - Dutch Activist Ayaan Hirsi Ali on Iraq and Canadian Constitution & Resolution with Sharia Law - From the Wall Street Journal Op-Ed Page. Ms. Hirsi was in Toronto on August 13 2005 to speak against the implementation of Sharia arbitration in Ontario - CTV

Update August 17 - Sunni's rejects Constitution Committee - CBC. My note: Typical of Sunni Islamists, they want to dictate to others what they should believe. Forcing Islam on others who don't believe in it will only serve to disunite Iraqis. The oil revenues should be dealth with first. Canada has a relatively reasonable model, although Albertans aren't in agreement with the federal government recieving a portion of their oil revenue to give to poorer provinces, it seems to work for the time being for Canada. We are still working on these issues. As for Islam, use Egypt's model, as a source not the main focus. It's the Sunni's Islamic Party that is causing the problems and probably the source in the bombings. They are showing bad faith and an inability to negotiate and will most likely be the source of violence no matter what Constitution wording is drafted. That's the way it is with Sunni Islamists - it's either their Islam or nothing, showing an incapability to accept the differences of others.

Update August 15 - Here's an excellent article by Dexter Filkins in the New York Times - it includes al Qaeda's "edict" (?) to encourage Sunni "faithful" to sabotage the Constitutional process. Something tells me that if a Constitution is agreed to at any point, al Qaeda's ideologues will use it as an excuse to attack Iraqi's no matter what. With this type of Islam, any reason is an excuse to fight.

Why don't the Iraqi legislators look at Canada's Constitution as a reference to federalism? (at least no province has taken up arms since the early 70's even if some of us want separation - Canadians aren't going to violent about it)

Update August 14 2005 - Associated Press - Kurds & Shiites will press draft Constitution w/o Sunni approval
Update August 13 2005 - Associated Press - Sunnie's against federalism

Update August 1 2005: From the New York Times. This is a very good article, which the American media should continue to follow up on. If the Iraqi Constitution is not given the time it needs to be written with all groups and religions concerned, as stated in the article, there is a great threat to civil war. (Remember the American administration said that the Iraqi's would great them with kisses and roses when they 'liberated' them? Did they? So why is the administration underestimating the possibility of future violence now?)

Why wouldn't the American government acknowledge that any future violence in the region caused by delayed framing of the most important document that a new democratic Iraqi state needs, is going to be blamed on them and the American people could face more security risks because of it? The American media should provide this information to their readers and viewers.

From Yesterday:

Over the years, I have been trying to explain Islamic law to individuals who do not understand it. I have tried to describe the Quran tantamount to a piece of ‘legislation’ or an Act enacted by our Parliaments and the Hadith similar to the ‘regulations’ that go along with a piece of legislation. Anyone who is a lawyer or knows a little about law will understand this.

I have even described the Quran as a Constitution, which is usually the highest law in a nation. I am pleased that this article from the Associated Press describes the Quran in the same manner with respect to Saudi Arabia.

Most people have no idea why it’s important to have a Constitution, a Charter or legislation and regulations. Each country adopts a Constitution that is reflective of the values of their inhabitants, which is mostly adopted from established legal traditions that developed from hundreds of years of previous cultural identities and language. (I’m going to elaborate on this in another post, I just wanted to get this article up)

The above link regarding Iraq’s Constitution that will be passed by their Parliament, the representatives of elected officials that make up the country, gives a basic understanding of how a higher law is written. In Iraq’s case, the “main source” of an established legal tradition in the region will be Islamic law (Sharia). This is in contrast to Egypt’s Constitution that uses Islamic law as “a source” as explained.

This is why it’s going to take a long time to adopt a Constitution with the appropriate wording. This is why it is important to write a Constitution that is as perfect as it can be, as any wording or lack of accommodation to minority groups and language rights is always difficult.

Just think of the problem that Canada had with the amendment to the 1867 Constitution adopting the 1982 Charter or the Meech Lake Accord. Even the 60’s in the United States the civil rights movement focused on Constitutional challenge. In the case of Iraq, any future amendments may meet with violence.

The problem that the Iraqi Parliament faces besides the wording is the interpretation of Islamic law. Will it be a Sunni or Shiite interpretation or both? What about the Iraqi Copts? Will these Christians face oppression if the Iraqi Parliament only recognizes Islamic law? What about Iraq’s Jewish community? What about women’s rights or rights of the Kurds or any other indigenous persons? The Constitution will obviously be written in Arabic, but what about the Kurdish language and the translation of Arabic into it?

While there are passages in the Quran that accommodate religious pluralism, writing a Constitution must accommodate to what extent Islamic law will be imposed on minorities of a nation that do not hold with the Islamic legal tradition.