The Totally Religious, Absolutely Democratic Iraqi Constitution

A decade ago, almost everyone across the political spectrum - from neoconservatives to Islamic fundamentalists - agreed that democracy and Islam were inherently incompatible. This consensus followed from definitions: democracy means the rule of the people, whereas Islam teaches the sovereignty of God. In October, though, Iraqis went to the polls and ratified a Constitution that committed itself with equal strength to both democracy and Islam. The document announced that Iraq would be a democracy with equality for all and declared that no law could contradict the principles of democracy. At the same time, it declared Islam the basic source of law and the official religion, and it decreed that no law could contradict "the provisions of the judgments of Islam." The country's leading Shiite clerics supported the Constitution and instructed their followers to vote for it. The neoconservatives in Washington took a deep breath and then hailed it as a milestone in Middle Eastern freedom.

Marrying Islam and democracy has required some reinterpretation of the two ideas. Islamically-oriented supporters of the Constitution have accepted the idea that Islam does not dictate every aspect of ordinary life or of government policy. The Islamic veto will come in only if particular laws are understood by the high constitutional court as violations of Islam's basic tenets.

This will put tremendous power in the court itself - which means that its composition is crucial. While the Constitution specifies that it will not be composed exclusively of clerics, it does mandate that experts in Shariah will serve alongside lawyers trained in secular civil law. How many of each must be determined by the legislature that will be elected Dec. 15.

Of course, tensions are likely, especially when it comes to marriage, divorce and inheritance. The Constitution promises every Iraqi the right to be governed by the family law of the religious denomination of his or her choice. How then to handle couples who belong to different denominations - or who want secular laws to govern their relationship? And if Shariah as interpreted by one religious group makes it difficult or impossible for women to initiate divorce, is this a violation of the Constitution's commitment to democratic equality? Opinions are sure to differ, and the courts will have to weigh in alongside the legislature.




http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/11/magazine/11ideas_section4-8.html

Women who have never worn them are now being forced into wearing those black bags. I see no democracy involved in this at all.

Back to the Dark Ages.

for the courts to decide if a law is with in koranic acceptability.