| A Bunch of Nonsense or a
“Draft Constitution” for Iraq?
By: Mirza Nammo
Canada
Oct 5, 2005
It might sound absurd to discuss and
comment on constitution for a country that rights and privileges are still
directly proportional to the size and the number of guns any group possess
in that country. A place where arbitrary decision-making and use of
violence to implement those decisions are the first instinctive choice
curved in the psyche of its people. Nonetheless, to end that uncivilized
and dangerous phenomenon a constitution will be the first and a very
important step for Iraqis to take, so they can establish a strong
foundation that would enable them to rebuild their lives peacefully and
rise into modern times. However, the mean of that transition “the
constitution” must be designed in such way that it would deliver the
people of Iraq to a right destination not back to the middle ages or to a
civil war.
Now Iraqis are told a draft constitution
is ready for them to vote on in a referendum in the middle of October, and
already a publicly funded propaganda campaign is intensely underway in all
the modes of media to convince people of Iraq to say yes to make the
document legal.
Upon reviewing the document I believe a
bunch of nonsense will be a better and a more descriptive title for it
than a “draft constitution”. The document has so many contradicting
statements and bad choices one can’t help it but to be concerned about the
mental well being of the committee of experts, politicians, and so called
intellectuals who were in charge of this important task, and after several
month of hard work only this absurdity was the fruit of their labor.
You don’t need a magnifying glass to look
for the fine print to find the nonsense and the bad choices in the
document from the very beginning any normal reader is given a big sign
that the rest of the document is waste of the paper that it is printed on.
For example: The first article states that Iraq will be a federal state,
but the rest of the document describes a very centralized power that
controls everything from Baghdad, and Baghdad being the centre of that
power is even embedded in the document. And, article (2) statement “A”
“B” and “C” not only contradict each other, but makes the rest of the
document obsolete and unnecessary because according to those three
statement no law ever can be passed in Iraq that does not violate one of
them because if a law is in compliance with the “rules of Islam”, it will
violate the “principles of democracy” likewise, if a law respects human
rights and democracy, it will violate the principles of Islam, so a circle
is created for every law to be debated and rejected indefinitely.
The problem even starts before the
contradiction between Islam and democracy and human rights because the
terms “rules of Islam” itself is subject to numerous interpretations, and
who ever is familiar with the subject will know that aside from two facts
that all Muslims agree up on which are: first all Muslims believe in one
creator “god”, and two, they all agree that Mohammed is his messenger,
there is no other principle that is not subject to different
interpretation of different doctrines of Islamic sects.
The obstacle of “Islamic principles” is
not limited to the rights of women, non-believers, and other religious
groups, but also a simple thing like a financial institution could be shut
down if it charges or takes any interest on money transactions because
according to Islam taking or receiving interest on money is a sin.
Those who are eager to hold on to power
by any slogan and mean will argue that they will not interpret Islam in a
way that it would turn Iraq into another Afghanistan, or Iranian style of
government. In my opinion that selective use of Islam is just as dangerous
as the total use because that makes the constitution an unnecessary
document and lays the foundation of deception and bigotry to build an
undemocratic and backward regime in Iraq in which the law will be applied
based on convenience not principle.
Although, no one likes the truth, but the
reason for the contradictions and the difficulties that was facing the
compilers of a constitution for Iraq under that unfavorable circumstances
is very obvious and it is a historic redundancy.
Since its conception modern Iraq faced
violence and unrest because the diverse people of that country were never
given a chance to truly express their desire for the type of government
that they want. They were forced by outsiders to live together and accept
something that was doomed from the start, but it provided ample political
and economical opportunities for colonial and imperial powers to have in
that region That was at the end of WWI when modern Iraq was created by
putting three Ottoman provinces together.
Since the defeat of the Iraqi regime in
2003, America is attempting to rebuild Iraq on the same rotten
foundations, but with more up to date laws that would protect their
interest in that country and the region, and that means more violence and
unrest for Iraq in the future.
Even if Iraq is prevented from breaking
up and creating a more cohesive states in its place, there is no need for
the kind of backwardness that is shoved down the throat of Iraqis by
foreigners and their thugs in Iraq. It is possible to keep Iraq as one
country and yet give its diverse people in deferent regions a complete
control of their own destiny.
We have expressed our methodology for
this type of government for Iraq in the past, and that is by dividing the
country into regions based on the desire of its people which region they
want to belong to, and each region to be completely in charge of all its
political, economical, and defense system. A small and symbolic federal
government has to be created with equal contribution from each region to
coordinate common defense, foreign relations, and internal cooperation
between the regions just as EU doing for its member states. And this will
eliminate the need for such a broad and contradicting federal constitution
because each region will going to have its own constitution, so if Shiites
in the south want an Islamic state and the Kurds in the north want a
secular state they both can created without resorting to deception and
violence, or lengthy and unnecessary negotiation with each other to find a
common denominator which may not exist.
Beside dictatorship this will be the only
plausible way to keep Iraq together as one country, and at the same time
grant its people freedom to choose. The situation is extremely dangerous
in Iraq, and this puts a greater burden on the shoulders of its leaders to
have wisdom and think rationally, so they could be able to help the Iraqis
to build a better future.
The proposed constitution is a recipe for
disaster and all Iraqis stand to lose if it is ratified, thus we strongly
urge all Iraqis to say “NO” to it, and at the same time urge the
leaders not to give in to foreign pressure and come up with ideas that
take the interest of Iraqis into consideration. |