I was gonna hold off on this until after the referendum on adoption. At this point, what I’m hearing on the radio is that it passed but there have been some irregularities. Like an over 90% turn-out in areas where the ?insurgents? are most active. Hmm, I’d imagine the supporters wish they had gone with a Diebold special electing rigging machine, so there would be no paper trail once you recycle the electrons.
Most Iraqi constitution analysis out there rely on the translation from the Associated Press. I’m not entirely sure we can trust the free press on something as important as a translation of the mother documents of a democratically elected Republic. The AP doesn’t even seem to be able to get a simple headline correct, and then they fail in their correction to clearly exonerated the innocent party.
The ideal translator would be fluent in both English and Arabic, and have some experience in constitutional law. I gotta assume that if the AP got a translation in broken English by a half literate UN pawn, they might just have their editors clean it up and go with it. They are still in the ?we define reality? mode, even after RatherGate.
AP translation in bold, my comments below:
1st ? Islam is the official religion of the state and is a basic source of legislation:
(a) No law can be passed that contradicts the undisputed rules of Islam.
(b) No law can be passed that contradicts the principles of democracy.
(c) No law can be passed that contradicts the rights and basic freedoms outlined in this constitution.
My only comment here is what if Islam and democracy are at odds? But before you even go there, what exactly are the ?undisputed rules of Islam?? Doesn’t the Muslim faith start breaking up right after ?There is but one God, Allah, and Mohammad is his prophet.??
?Article (5): The law is sovereign, the people are the source of authority and its legitimacy, which they exercise through direct, secret ballot and its constitutional institutions.?
Wow, this is good. Really good. It states that all power of the Iraqi government derive from the people, not that rights derive from the state. Compare our Declaration of Independence:
?…That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed…?
Absolutely something I want in a declaration of limited government.
2nd ? The state will be committing to fighting terrorism in all its forms and will work to prevent its territory from being a base or corridor or an arena for its (terrorism’s) activities.
Article (8): Iraq shall abide by the principles of good neighborliness and by not intervening in the internal affairs of the other countries, and it shall seek to peacefully resolve conflicts and shall establish its relations on the basis of shared interests and similar treatment and shall respect its international obligations.
So, umm, we are to believe that the Iraqi people had this little blurb inserted into their constitution all by themselves? No help from the US or UN? Is “respect its international obligations” UN speak for “pay your dues”?
(b) Forming military militias outside the framework of the armed forces is banned.
So, I did a search, and the worrisome prohibition of private firearms ownership seems to have been struck from this version. Good. However there is nothing specifically preventing the central government from outlawing the rights of these supposedly free people from owning the one thing that all tyrants fear.
I have no problem with the people of Iraqi forming militia groups for their common defense, it’s only when they get together to spread terror, that I worry. The problem is how do you enumerate that right?
(Probably more to follow, unless they scrap adoption and this becomes moot.)