Post-revolutionary constitutions: a success story?

ANKARA 

People across North Africa and Middle East who engaged in the 2011 'Arab Spring' protests were demanding political and constitutional change. However, so far only the uprisings in Tunisiaand Egypt have resulted in any changes to the state apparatus.

The 127-member Tunisian parliament approved a new constitution in January. Egypt also adopted a new constitution in January - the second in the last two years, however it was only passed with a slim 38 percent parliamentary approval.

In this article we will analyze the difference between the two constitutions.

Tunisia is the first post-revolutionary Arab country to develop rules for politics that are consensually agreed, according to Anthony Dworkin, Senior Policy Fellow at the European Council for Foreign Relations (ECFR). However, the Egyptian people are still dis-empowered because the state apparatus is unreformed, adds Dworkin.

Dworkin, who specializes in human rights, democracy, and justice at ECFR, said that the Tunisian constitution represents progress both in its substance and the way it was adopted.

''In substance, it has a number of strong provisions on human rights, separation of powers and equality of men and women,” Dworkin said.

The Ennahda, a moderate Islamist party in Tunisia, won the first democratic elections following the removal of Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali in 2011, after 24 years in power, during the 'Arab Spring'.  

Ennahda faced fierce opposition from secular groups in the country, who accused them of having relationships with militant groups.

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon described the constitution as a 'historic milestone'; Tunisia's first since the government was taken away from autocratic President, Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali three years previously.

 “There are some areas that are fudged or potentially contradictory – particularly in relation to the state and religion, where some poorly thought out provisions were adopted during the final days of drafting," Dworkin said. 

However, despite this and contrary to the fear of the seculars, Dworkin adds: "it is a democratic and fairly liberal document."

"More importantly, is the fact that the constitution could be adapted by an overwhelming majority of assembly members, showing it has the support of the broad mass of Tunisian political society."

"This means that Tunisia is the first post-revolutionary Arab country to develop a set of ground rules for politics that are consensually agreed.”

Following the 'Arab Spring', the Egyptian people witnessed both the election and removal of their first democratically-elected President Mohamed Morsi, from the Muslim Brotherhood, who was removed from power following a military coup on July 3, 2013.

Following the election of the Muslim Brotherhood's President Morsi, liberal and secular groups that were at the heart of the uprising were left wondering whether Egypt has taken a step towards becoming a repressive Islamist state. 

Following the the fall of Mubarak  - under both President Morsi and under the military-backed interim-government led by Adly Mansour- the two proposed constitutions have fallen short of democracy and liberal views present in the 2014 Tunisian constitution.

Unlike Tunisia, Egypt has experienced two constitutions in three years since the beginning of Arab Spring; the turn out to vote for the 2014 constitution - proposed by Mansour - was only about 38 percent.

"The new constitution in Egypt is different in a number of ways from Mubarak’s constitution – and actually in some ways not that different from the constitution passed under President Morsi. However all three constitutions have a similar vision of the Egyptian state with a powerful centralized state with a strong security apparatus," said Dworkin.

Dworkin adds: “Egypt’s constitution retains the ability of the army to prosecute civilians in military courts, and in general allows the army, judiciary and police to develop self-regulating branches of the state.” 

Many would argue that the backing of a military head of state, over an elected parliament - that in some ways recalls Mubarak’s extensive executive powers - hardly nurtures a participatory and inclusive democracy, which were key national policy demands following the revolution.

Dworkin said: “It is not a constitution for reform of the state, nor does it have any significant provisions for democratic control of local government. Without reforms even the rights in the constitution cannot be effectively upheld. The people of Egypt remain dis-empowered in relation to a strong, centralized, and unreformed state apparatus.”

The path to democracy is still long and strewn with obstacles, Dworkin said, "The new constitution in Egypt was written by an assembly, appointed by a regime whose seizure of power was not accepted by a large part of the population – so it starts without being accepted by a big section of Egyptian people.”

In this respect, Tunisia's constitution stands up as a progressive example. “It showed that all leading political groups were willing to accept each other’s presence in the political arena – meaning that the fight over the constitution did not become a winner takes all game. This made it easier for both sides to make compromises in the text of the constitution. It is a document in which all mainstream branches of political society feel they have a stake."