September 23, 2005
Warning: Loooong post.
The
final version (Version 3.0) of the Iraqi draft constitution was finally
submitted to the UN about ten days ago. It was published in English in
the New York Times on the 15th of September.
I blogged about
some of the articles in the first two chapters last week, so I’ll jump
right to Chapter Three: The Federal Authorities. The first notable
difference between the final version of the constitution published in
the New York Times and the Arabic version published in Al-Sabah is in
article (47) under chapter three which sets down the general conditions
for the 'Council of Representatives’. In the Arabic version, there 6
conditions, while in the English one there are only five.
The
condition that isn’t in the English version is the one mentioning that
women should make up 25% of the members of the Council of
Representatives.
Article (47):
4- Voting laws aspire to achieve women’s representation on the Council of Representatives of a ratio of not less than a quarter.
Previously,
when rights groups complained that the draft did not go far enough in
ensuring that women's rights were preserved and protected from an
Iranian style theocracy, supporters of the draft would point to the
above clause and say "see, women's rights ARE protected".
Upon reading the Arabic version of the constitution, that is not necessarily true - the key word in this phrasing is "aspire".
This translates accordingly: it isn't mandatory to have 25% women on
the council-it is an aspiration, like many of the noble aspirations set
down on paper by our esteemed Puppet government.
Almost two
years ago, the Governing Council (then headed by SCIRI puppet
extraordinaire Abdul Aziz Al-Hakim) came out with Decree 137 to abolish
the Personal Status Law. Women’s rights groups rose up and demanded
that Paul Bremer turn the decision around- which he did. We were made
grateful that our secular laws were not abolished by the pro-occupation
puppets!
With this draft constitution, Decree 137 has virtually
been brought back to life and aspiring to have 25% of the Council of
Representatives female isn’t going to compensate for that- especially
when the overwhelming majority of the above-mentioned women are from
parties like Da’awa and SCIRI.
I’m wondering- where is the outrage of pro-occupation, pro-war women’s rights advocates? Why the deafening silence, ladies?
According
to Article (58) in the same section, the Council of Representatives
will be responsible for the selection (through vote) of the president. Why shouldn’t presidential elections be through direct vote?
On
the issue of the President of the Republic, there is an interesting
article in the Executive Authority section of the same chapter. Article
(65) lists the conditions for the President of the Republic (which are
the same for the Prime Minister):
Article (65):
The candidate for the president's post must:
1st -- be Iraqi by birth from Iraqi parents. 2nd -- be legally competent and have reached the age of 40. 3rd
-- have a good reputation and political experience and be known for his
integrity, rectitude, justice and devotion to the homeland. 4th -- not have been convicted of a crime that violates honor.
"Be Iraqi by birth from Iraqi parents"
is significant in that it emphasizes that BOTH parents must be Iraqi
(this is more pronounced in the Arabic version of the constitution with
the use of grammar 'abouwayn iraqiayn’). While this seems very natural
it is noteworthy because it means that secular American darling Iyad
Allawi is out of the picture as candidate for the presidency and the
prime ministry. It is very well-known in Iraq that Allawi’s mother is
Lebanese from a prominent Lebanese family (and related to Chalabi’s
wife).
Saudi Arabia is speaking up lately against Iranian
influence in Iraq. Many suspect it is because Saudi favorites like
Ghazi Ajeel Al-Yawir and Allawi have been sidelined and Iran-influenced
politicians like Jaafari and Hakim are now in power.
"Not have been convicted of a crime that violates honor"
is also interesting. Does that mean it’s ok to have been convicted of
other types of crimes? Like Chalabi, for example- embezzlement- is that
ok? Just what crimes violate honor and what crimes keep honor intact
Federalism...
Chapter
5: Authorities of the Regions is troubling. I have no problem with the
concept of federalism. We’ve been accustomed to an autonomous Kurdistan
for decades. The current laws about federalism and regional policies in
the draft constitution might better be titled the "Roadmap to Divide
Iraq".
Article (115) is especially worrying. It states:
Article (115):
Every
province or more has the right to establish a region based on a request
for a referendum to be submitted in one of the following ways:
1st
-- A request from one-third of the members in each of the provincial
councils in the provinces that wish to establish a region. 2nd -- A request from one-tenth of the voters in each of the provinces that wish to establish a region.
This
means that any two provinces can decide they’d like to become a
'region’ with laws and regulations differing from surrounding regions.
Article (116) fortifies this right with: Article (116): The
region writes a constitution for itself, defines the structure of the
region's powers and its authorities as well as the mechanism of using
these powers in a way that does not run contrary to the constitution.)
So
basically, each region will get their own constitution which must not
run contrary to the draft constitution. Also, according to the language
article (4), clause 5:
Article (4): 5th -- Any region
or province can take a local language as an additional official
language if a majority of the population approves in a universal
referendum. The abovementioned region may take on its own 'local’ language.
Article (117) has a clause that authorizes "regional authorities" to:
Article (117): 5th
-- The regional government shall be in charge of all that's required
for administering the region, especially establishing and regulating
internal security forces for the region such as police, security and
guards for the region.)
So here’s a riddle: what do you
call a region with its own constitution, its own government, its own
regional guard and possibly its own language? It’s quite simple- you
call it a country.
Article (137) of the Transitional Guidelines in Chapter 6 says:
Article (137):
The
Transitional Administration Law for the Iraqi State and its appendix
are voided upon creation of the new government, except for what appears
in paragraph (a) of Article 53 and Article 58 of the Transitional
Administration Law.)
The above article refers to the
Transitional Administration Law set out by Paul Bremer during the very
early days of the occupation. This is one of the only clauses that
shall remain:
Article 53 [Kurdistan Regional Government]
(A)
The Kurdistan Regional Government is recognized as the official
government of the territories that were administered by the that
government on 19 March 2003 in the governorates of Dohuk, Arbil,
Sulaimaniya, Kirkuk, Diyala and Neneveh. The term "Kurdistan Regional
Government" shall refer to the Kurdistan National Assembly, the
Kurdistan Council of Ministers, and the regional judicial authority in
the Kurdistan region.
This is outrageous because the
areas administered by 'that government’ on the 19th of March, 2003 are
highly disputed. Kirkuk, Diyala and Nenevah (Mosul) are certainly not
parts of the autonomous Kurdish region, no matter what the Kurdistan
Regional Government decided on the 19th of March, 2003- the very
beginning of the war.
And Kurdistan is really the least of
Iraq’s worries. There is talk of possibly setting up an autonomous
region in the south that will be run by pro-Iran extremists Da’awa and
SCIRI. Should provinces like Karbala and Najaf decide to form a region
in the south, America can congratulate itself on the creation of an
extended Iran. Already, these provinces are running on their own rules
and regulations, with their own militias.
Federalism is ok when
a country is stable. It’s fantastic when countries or troubled regions
are attempting to unite. In present-day Iraq it promises to be
catastrophic. It will literally divide the country and increase
instability. This is especially true with the kind of federalism they
want to practice in Iraq.
Federalism based on geography is
acceptable, but federalism based on ethnicity and sect? Why not simply
declare civil war and get it over with?
Draft Constitution - Part I...
http://www.uruknet.info/?p=15841
|