Tuesday, December 3, 2013

Read the Draft Constitution 2013 Now (Ar)

Here is the final draft of the Draft Constitution 2031 uploaded online by diplomat Ashraf Swelam today in Arabic.

There has not been a full English translation for the draft Constitution but some wire services highlighted the major points in Constitution. 
Reuters' Aswat Masrya made Factbox reports about the major points in the draft constitution in general and in specific the articles about police and army.
Here is special AP story about the major points in the draft Constitution.
I am currently studying it.

9 comments:

  1. keep on! and (may happen, i forgot to mention): Keep on!

    ReplyDelete
  2. If you oppose it, voting no is likely to be more effective than boycotting the vote. No matter how low the voter turnout is, the authorities will claim to be vindicated. They will treat the outcome in a similar fashion as to how Morsi treated the 2012 constitution.

    If, however, the vote is close, that will demonstrate that the large amount of opposition to many of the constitution's failings cannot be wished away. If it somehow is voted down (hypothetically), that will spell the inevitable end of the current government.

    It thus is likely to be strategically more effective to vote no if you do not like the constitution than to boycott the vote. It is likely to pass either way, but in one case the existence of considerable opposition will be harder to deny. Sadly, there is no way to vote down specific articles and no alternative is being presenting as the vote is about the entire document as a bloc.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yeah!
    I'm with the second comment of Anonymous. If you think that this isn't what we need in this stage then just say no. But if not then say yes.
    You just have to go and say what you want to really vote for.
    Thanks for the post.

    ReplyDelete
  4. If foreign agents exist, they are the newly minted Saudis that usurped control over Egypt. These dictators sacrificed their Egyptianness to become Saudis.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I read the provision about military trials . It's used only in cases of specific, direct agression on the military. Those planning to engage, or engaging in these actions are called ' Enemy combatants'. They are fair game! If you are a patriot vote YES ! A thousand time YES !

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Authorities cannot be trusted to apply the criteria in a rational manner. Unless they are thoroughly hemmed in, they will abuse their power to the maximum degree. If they see any opening or loophole for such trials, they will rush to break open the floodgates like has been the case in recent years. Better to just get rid of such abnormal judicial procedures.

      Delete
  6. Nothing wrong with bringing enemy combatants to a swift and harsh justice.The authorities you don't seem to trust are the very ones that saved us and the great Egyptian nation from the terrorism of the brotherhood scourge.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are several reasons to distrust them. They lied about who killed Mohammed Reda and are lying about the Alexandria women's actual actions. Even the appealed sentence is still barbaric. It is dangerous to assume that everyone brought to court is actually guilty or deserving of a military trial.

      If these trials are so great, many currently in power need to subject themselves to these courts and be held accountable for their own very real mass murders. Of course, this aristocracy believea the law doesn't apply to it.

      The authorities did not bring salvation. Instead the replaced one inept ruling clique with a new form of government terrorism. The rhetoric has changed but the system is mostly the same.

      Delete
  7. I'm not sure it really matters what the Constitution says. I mean, it bans torture, but does anybody out there take that seriously? Anybody? The junta will do what it wants.

    ReplyDelete

Thank You for your comment
Please keep it civilized here , I will not tolerate any insult in my blog or any racist or hateful comment
The Comments in this blog with exclusion of the blog's owner do not represent the views of the blog's owner