Source: The New York Times
Tunisia’s ruling Islamist party, Ennahda, said on Monday that the country’s post-revolution constitution would not mention Islamic law as a source of legislation, signaling a forceful break with ultraconservatives who have been demanding an Islamic state.

Instead, a drafting committee will preserve language in Tunisia’s current constitution that refers to Islam as the state’s religion and Arabic as its language, according to Said Ferjani, a member of the political bureau of Ennahda, the Islamist party that leads Tunisia’s government.

He and other Ennahda leaders framed the decision as a bid to unify the country’s disparate political factions during a delicate political transition. “There is a huge consensus within Ennahda. We have to show leadership,” Mr. Ferjani said. “We want everyone to get involved.”

The move by Ennahda contrasted sharply with the actions of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, which has angered leftists, liberals and other groups in recent days with its handling of that country’s constitution. Lawmakers associated with the brotherhood’s political wing and an ultraconservative Salafi party voted on Saturday to fill a panel that will write the constitution with Islamists, causing a walkout by members of several other parties.

The debates in Tunisia and Egypt seemed to mark a critical phase in the evolving political life of both countries, as Islamist parties, forced to grapple with fundamental questions about the very nature of the state, started to reveal their intentions, after decades of often-theoretical debate about how such parties would govern.

At the same time, the contrasting responses reflected distinct movements shaped by differing histories and emerging political realities. Ennahda rules in a coalition with other parties, while the political arm of the Muslim Brotherhood, along with Al Nour, the Salafi party, dominate the Egyptian Parliament. Both serve under a government backed by Egypt’s military rulers.

In rejecting a mention of Islamic law, Ennahda appeared to be making good on promises to preserve Tunisia’s secular nature, forged under decades of authoritarian rule. And it distanced itself from the ultraconservatives known as Salafis, whose calls to build the features of a religious state have been marked by huge demonstrations in recent days and attacks on alcohol use or films that the conservatives deem to be blasphemous.

Secular activists, already wary of Ennahda’s intentions, have in the past accused the group of turning a blind eye to the Salafis’s growing assertiveness. An Ennahda party leader, Ziad Doulatli, appeared to answer that criticism on Monday when he told The Associated Press that the decision to leave Islamic law out of the constitution was “aimed at strengthening the national consensus and helping the democratic transition to succeed by uniting a large majority of the political forces to confront the country’s challenges.”

He added, “The Tunisian experience can serve as a model for other countries going through similar transformations.”

It remains to be seen whether Ennahda abides by other promises it has made — not to ban alcohol, for example — as it tries to strike a balance between the demands of the Salafis and the concerns of its secular partners in government.

Politicians in Egypt last week focused on signals from the Muslim Brotherhood that it might break some of its pledges, after statements by Brotherhood officials that they were considering running a candidate for president, a reversal of an earlier promise to back someone outside the party for that office.

The decision not to field a candidate was often said to reflect the Brotherhood’s pragmatism and its fear of a backlash if the group quickly dominated politics. Officials have given varying reasons for a possible reversal, saying at first that they were unable to settle on a suitable outside candidate. On Monday, the chairman of the Brotherhood, Mohammed Badie, said the group was guarding against the possible candidacy of former government figures.

In the last two days, the debate over the constitutional panel threatened to grow into a crisis, as more than two dozen members of the panel, including several well-known lawmakers, announced they would not participate.

In a statement, a member of the Egyptian Parliament, Amr Hamzawy, cited the exclusion of women, youth, Coptic Christians and experts from the committee, suggesting the Islamists had chosen “loyalty” over “competence.”

Another lawmaker, Emad Gad, who belongs to the left-leaning Social Democratic Party, said that Islamists were focused on “trying to write a religious constitution.”

“They are controlling everything,” he said. “We can do nothing.”

Brotherhood leaders struck back at the criticisms on Monday. Mohammed el-Beltagy, a member of Parliament with the Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party, said the selection of the government reflected a “keenness on ensuring pluralism.”

“Certainly I wish there was a broader space of consensus that would turn the formation of the committee into a celebration in which all segments of the society participate,” he said. “But I believe that the exaggeration in portraying the issue as monopoly by a group or a party is completely incorrect.”

Even so, Mr. Beltagy suggested that mistakes by the Islamists had contributed to some of the resentment. “Throughout the past year, the Islamic movement — and it’s widely spread — should have worked on uniting everyone,” he said. Instead, he said, the Islamists had chosen, at times, to act unilaterally, which isolated them and “created distance,” he said.

 

• Tunisia