A comprehensive effort should be launched to educate the public about democracy and its shared values with Islamic teachings. There is no doubt that the democratic transformation in Egypt will lead to a more stable regime and strong partnership with the world based on mutual respect and interests. It is not necessary to adopt a particular western version of democracy in Egypt as long as the system includes the core values of democracy, such as the separation of the three branches of the government and empowering people through transparent and honest elections. Freedom of speech, religion, and press, and human rights are also essential parts of any democratic system. There are many variations in the relationship between the state and religion in the modern world, in which four types of the constitutions define these relationships. Ultimately, the new constitution in Egypt would have to account for one of these four relationships:
1. A constitution of a holistic loose religion with the pattern of secularism based on “freedom against religion”, a Soviet formula. The elite of the society believe that religion in itself is a risk and indicator of an undeveloped society. This formula of the constitution is vanishing because it contradicts the right of individuals to have their private and public religious freedom without interference from the state. Individuals governed by such a constitution cannot practice their right of faith and religion and the state is not protecting that right. For example, North Korea’s constitution does not have any religious article and cannot be used as a model for the relationship between the religion and state in Egypt.
2. A constitution that distinguishes the holistic religion of the majority and prohibits other minority religions. This formula of the constitution is directly related to the conservative interpretation of fundamental groups belong to the religion of the majority, i.e. not necessarily the religion doctrine but mostly an issue of personal belief. An example of this type of constitution is the 1990 Constitution of Nepal, which dictated that Hindu is the only religion in the country and refused to acknowledge the right of other religions such Christianity, Islam, and Buddhism to practice their faith. This constitution was modified with the coup in 2007. Similar to that was the Taliban way of governing, despite the absence of a written constitution. The real danger of such a formula for the constitution is the claim of a certain group to have the right to legislate for the entire society based on their limited restrictive interpretation of the religion. Consequently, this style of the constitution would deny the right of other religion minorities or even other groups form the same religion to have their private or public practice of their faith. Hence, religion would turn into an instrument of repression that control the politics and legislate to the entire community.
3. A liberal constitution as a prelude to a neutral religious respect for all religions openly. Behind this style of the constitution is a secular philosophy that assumes “freedom of religion” not “freedom from religion”. This is the true model of a liberal constitution as in the case of the United Stated, Canada, Australia and Japan, where the state shall respect the private and public spheres of individuals. States with such a liberal constitution would not favor any religion at the expense of others and would not force any individual or group to hide their religious symbols or adopt a different faith. Under a liberal constitution, a state drafts and enforces legislation that protect human rights, and the state does not have the role of merging religions in society by forcing them to abandon their symbols of believes.
4. A liberal constitution that decides the special status of the majority religion with two conditions:
a. The religion of the majority itself has the ability to absorb the fundamental rights of the followers of other religions. This condition was achieved in Islam by virtue of its texts and its ability to coexist with other faiths in an atmosphere of justice and outreach as stated clearly in several verses of the Quran. This fact became evident in the demands of some Egyptian Coptic to apply the Islamic laws that permit the self-management of Church Affairs without any interference from the state.
b. The presence of law provisions that include “Constitutional-Supra” article that guarantee equal rights of different religion followers.
There are several examples of this style of constitution as in Denmark, Iceland, Norway, and Finland. These countries have constitutions that decide explicitly that Christian Lutheran is the official religion, as in the case of Anglican Christianity in Great Britain. Christian Orthodoxy exists in Greece and Cyprus, and the official Catholic religion in Argentina, Bolivia, Costa Rica, and El Salvador. Almost all Muslim countries refer to Islam in their constitution, except Turkey (after its constitutional amendment in 1928), Lebanon, Albania, and a number of former communist countries in central Asia.
The first and second formulas for the constitution listed above have very little potential to be implemented in Egypt. These two styles of constitution do not represent, nor should they, any hope or future for political force in Egypt, because:
a. They do not agree with the true liberal spirit.
b. They are assuming religion purity in the society, which is impossible to find in any country.
c. The formal commitment from most of the world’s government to human rights charters, which emphasize the freedom of religion and the right to practice religion.
The difficulty with the third constitution style, as mentioned by the great American philosopher, John Rawls, is that it requires previous social consensus on the constitution. It is not expected that the constitution itself would create social consensus without the need to suppress, and hence the constitution itself becomes a cause of social conflict. Therefore, without social consensus, the constitution would deviate from its original role, which is preventing social conflicts and good management of potential conflicts. Given that fact, Egyptians do not have this social agreement on the drafting of a religion-neutral religious constitution. Therefore, the fourth alternative for the constitution, which has examples of many contemporary liberal constitutions, would have stronger potential to be the chosen example for the new Egyptian constitution.
In conclusion, restoring the moral values of the society would expedite the changes toward democratic systems and help combat corruption and religion extremists. Muslim scholars should highlight that the moral values existing in democratic systems fit within Islamic teachings, in order to build strong bridges between the east and west. Youth should be encouraged to participate in political life either by joining one of the political parties or volunteering in the election campaign of the presidential or parliament candidates. Understanding the principals of democratic systems would clarify the confusion and differentiate between the various political parties in Egypt. Finally, democracy and autocracy are growing cultures and Egyptians should adjust their expectation that it will take time to transform their political system toward democracy. Rapid changes could result in unexpected results.
