This paper is directed to investigating and understanding the contextuality and reason behind the 1971, 2012, and 2013 constitutions formulated for the Arab Republic of Egypt. The following research will illustrate similarities, differences, and points of disagreement, while thoroughly investigating possible hypotheses to understanding why the articles were amended, altered, or removed entirely within all three constitutions. The paper is divided into three parts; part one will elaborate on the events that preceded the establishment of a constitution by the Egyptian Government. Part two will investigate the articles within the 1971 and the 2012 constitutions and compare them to the articles of the 2013 constitution. Part three will elaborate and compare each constitution, 1971 and 2012, with the 2013 constitution. Lastly, this paper will conclude by giving a brief summary of what has been discussed in the paper and provide some recommendations to what should be amended in the latest constitution, 2013 and the institutions to make the constitution stronger and more durable.
Table of Contents
I. INTRODUCTION
II. EVENTS PRECEDING THE 1971, 2012, AND 2013 CONSTITUTIONS
III. A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
a) 1971 and 2012 versus 2013
b) 1971 versus 2013
c) 2012 versus 2013
IV. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Research Objectives and Key Themes
The primary objective of this research is to investigate the contextual reasons behind the formulation of Egypt’s 1971, 2012, and 2013 constitutions, analyzing how political events and regime changes influenced specific amendments and the overall intent of these documents.
- Comparative analysis of constitutional amendments across three distinct eras.
- The influence of military regimes versus civilian leadership on constitutional content.
- Evaluation of checks and balances within the Egyptian legislative and executive branches.
- The role of the military judiciary and the protection of civilian rights.
- Shifting definitions of state identity, including secularism and the role of Sharia.
Excerpt from the Book
III. A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
In this part, a comparison between the 1971 constitution and the constitution of 2013 will be drawn. This part aims at figuring out why certain articles, which addressed the same issue, were phrased differently and what the new and old phrasings connoted. Both constitutions were set under a military regime. Although the Egyptian Government claimed that the president were independent from the ideologies of the military the facts speak against this notion.
Articles 153 and 201, which discussed the role and appointment of the defense minister stated the same thing in both the 1971 and the 2013 constitutions. Article 153 stated “The President of the Republic shall appoint and dismiss civil and military employees and political representatives and accredit political representatives of foreign States and bodies in accordance with the Law” Article 201 stated, “The Minister of Defense is the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces, and shall be appointed from among its officers.” Article 201 however has been subjugated to additions in the 2013 constitution to include “(…) The Minister of Defense is appointed upon approval of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF).” The addition made to article 201 reiterates the involvement of the military in all domestic affairs of the country, regardless of the public statements made by the military to ensure to the Egyptian population that a separation between the judiciary of Egypt and the military is ensured.
Summary of Chapters
I. INTRODUCTION: This chapter establishes the theoretical framework regarding the purpose of a constitution and introduces the research focus on the contextuality of Egyptian constitutional law.
II. EVENTS PRECEDING THE 1971, 2012, AND 2013 CONSTITUTIONS: This section provides a historical overview of the political transitions involving Presidents Anwar El Sadat, Mohamed Morsi, and Abdel Fattah El Sisi.
III. A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS: This chapter performs a detailed examination of specific articles across the three constitutions, highlighting amendments related to executive power, the military, and the role of religion.
IV. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The final chapter summarizes the findings and offers recommendations for strengthening future constitutional drafts to better serve the civilian population.
Keywords
Egypt, Constitutions, Military, Constitutional Amendments, Egyptian Government, Arab Republic of Egypt, 1971 Constitution, 2012 Constitution, 2013 Constitution, Anwar El Sadat, Mohamed Morsi, Abdel Fattah El Sisi, Sharia, Human Rights, Political Power.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this research paper?
The paper examines the historical and political context of the 1971, 2012, and 2013 Egyptian constitutions to understand the motivations behind their specific formulations and amendments.
What are the central thematic areas covered in the analysis?
The themes include the impact of military regimes, the centralization of presidential power, the role of Sharia law, and the institutional integration of the military.
What is the primary research goal?
The primary goal is to critically evaluate whether these constitutions were amended to protect the public interest or to consolidate power for those currently in government.
Which scientific method is utilized in this study?
The author employs a comparative legal and political analysis, investigating specific articles across the three constitutions to identify changes, deletions, and additions.
What topics are discussed in the main body of the text?
The main body focuses on the historical succession of leaders, comparative analysis of electoral quotas, the independence of the military judiciary, and the role of the Shoura Council.
Which keywords characterize this work?
Key terms include Egypt, Constitutions, Military, Constitutional Amendments, Egyptian Government, and Political Power.
How does the 2013 constitution change the role of the military compared to 1971?
The 2013 constitution grants the military significantly more power and immunity, particularly through the control of the military judiciary and the requirement for SCAF approval regarding the Minister of Defense.
What was the outcome of the Shoura Council analysis?
The study notes that the 2013 constitution abolished the upper house (Shoura Council), which reduced institutional checks and balances and concentrated more power in the hands of the executive.
How did the treatment of Sharia change between 2012 and 2013?
The 2013 document replaced the word "law" with "principles" regarding Sharia, aiming to shift toward a more secular interpretation and to protect the rights of non-Islamic religious minorities.
What does the author recommend for future constitutional efforts?
The author recommends that future constitutions should define the rights and obligations of civilians more clearly to prevent ambiguity that could be exploited by security apparatuses.
- Quote paper
- PhD in International Development Reham El Morally (Author), 2019, Is the Egyptian Constitution for Us or for Them? A Comparative Analysis of Egypt’s 1971, 2012, and 2013 Constitutions, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/492834
