Egypt: a flawed constitutional reform process

Egypt: a flawed constitutional reform process

RESTRICTED USE - ASK OLIVER BEFORE USEA new ICJ report shows that the constitutional reform process in Egypt has failed to meet international principles of inclusive participation and transparency, thereby undermining the transition to democracy.

“The Egyptian authorities, including the Constituent Assembly, have failed so far to meet the aspirations of the Egyptian people to adopt a Constitution that establishes the rule of law, recognizes and protects universally accepted human rights without restriction, guarantees the independence of the judiciary in all circumstances, and ensures the effectiveness of democratic institutions,” said Wilder Tayler, ICJ Secretary General.

The ICJ is calling upon the Egyptian authorities to address the challenges currently facing the constitutional reform process, as a matter of urgency; ensure that this process is in full compliance with international standards of inclusive participation and transparency; and guarantee that the new Constitution fully conforms with the rule of law and international law, including human rights standards.

The ICJ report Egypt’s new Constitution: a flawed process; uncertain outcomes details how, in overseeing the process leading to the adoption of a new Constitution, the Supreme Council of Armed Forces (SCAF) failed to ensure the rights of Egyptians to take part in public affairs and to meaningfully participate in the drafting and adoption of a new Constitution.

“Instead of paving the way for a clear and participatory reform process, the SCAF consistently opted for opaque, rushed and non-consensual policies that aimed to shield the armed forces from any form of accountability and that have severely undermined both the legitimacy of the process itself and its outcomes,” Tayler added.

Even though the administration of President Morsi replaced the SCAF on 30 June 2012, the constitution-making process continues to be carried out under the legal framework enacted by the SCAF.

The report also describes how several judicial decisions, in particular the dissolution of the first Constituent Assembly, by a decision from the High Administrative Court, and the dissolution of the People’s Assembly, following a decision by the Supreme Constitutional Court, have contributed to the confusion and uncertainty regarding the drafting of a new constitution.

As a result of this confused process, the draft of the new Constitution, published by the Constituent Assembly on 14 October 2012, has failed to provide for effective guarantees to reinforce the protection of human rights and the supremacy of the rule of law, including by ensuring that the powers of the State are not exercised arbitrarily.

“The draft Constitution does not sufficiently incorporate the rule of law and international law, including human rights standards. This is particularly evident as regards the accountability of the armed forces and their subordination to a legally constituted civilian authority, the content and scope of constitutional human rights, and the compliance of the whole judicial system, including the Office of the Public Prosecutor and the Constitutional Court, with international standards of independence, impartiality and accountability,” said Said Benarbia, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser for the MENA programme.

The report sets out urgent institutional and legal reforms that, together with sufficient political will, may help ensure a clean break with the practices and policies of Mubarak’s regime and the transition to a genuine democracy in Egypt.

Contact:

Saïd Benarbia, Middle East & North Africa Senior Legal Adviser, ICJ, t +41 22 979 3817; e-mail: said.benarbia(at)icj.org

Alice Goodenough, Middle East & North Africa Legal Adviser, ICJ, t +41 22 979 3811; e-mail: alice.goodenough(at)icj.org

Egypt-Flawed constitutional reform process-report-2012

Photo by Reuters

Jurists set principles on the media and the judiciary

Jurists set principles on the media and the judiciary

The ICJ’s Centre for the Independence of Judges and Lawyers have concluded a three-day seminar on the relationship between the media and the judiciary in Madrid.

The seminar is part of an on-going study on the independence of the judiciary and the legal profession.

Lawyers, judges and journalists from Spain and different regions of the world gathered in Madrid to focus on the relationship between the media and the judiciary. The object has been to draft principles destined to facilitate a relationship that would enhance both the necessity of a free press and the independence of the judiciary. The debate also concentrated on the right of the accused, especially minors, to privacy and the presumption of innocence.

Many different angles were taken into consideration. They included the impact of publicity on judicial proceedings, the emergence of increasingly global and transnational modes of communication and their impact on judicial procedures, the relation between ethics and judicial independence, the restraints which may be necessary for the proper administration of justice, media criticism of judges and judicial decisions as well as in-depth perspectives of these issues in countries such as Brazil, the United Kingdom, France, Ghana, Jordan, India and Australia.

These principles fill a gap which is increasingly highlighted by the progress made in contemporary modes of dissemination of information. The principles are attached herewith.

madrid principles on media and judicial independence-publication-1994-eng (full text in English, PDF)

Translate »