[Reviewer’s Note: Article II of the Egyptian Constitution of 1971 reads, “Islam is the official religion of the state, Arabic its official language and the principles of Islamic sharī’ah are the main source of legislation”. Salafists sought removing the word ‘principles’ or replacing it with the word ‘rulings’]

The hullabaloo over Article II, which has become a bone of contention among political groups, surfaced anew on Thursday (July 19) after the Azhar asked for the abolition of a paragraph on it being the ultimate reference of interpretation of the principles of the sharī’ah.

The salafī al-Nūr (Light) Party reacted by announcing that discussion on Article II will re-open during the next constituent assembly meeting, adding it will renew its calls to remove the word “principles” from the constitution to read, “the Islamic sharī’ah is the main source of legislation”.

Dr. Yūnis Makhyūn, a member of higher office of al-Nūr and the constituent assembly, criticized Grand Shaykh of the Azhar Dr. Ahmad al-Tayīb over “his reversal on protecting the Islamic sharī’ah”.

“The Azhar’s retreat was the outcome of pressures by liberals and others. However, the salafists will never allow an article violating the sharī’ah of Allāh to be passed. We’re also going to demand changing the law regulating the Azhar to elect a Muslim figure that would seek the implementation of the sharī’ah,” said Makhyūn in statements to al-Misrī al-Yawm.

Dr. Ahmad Abū Barakah, a legal advisor for the Freedom and Justice Party (FJP), the political arm of the Muslim Brotherhood, said the abolition of the paragraph making the Azhar a reference for the implementation of principles of the sharī’a was a correct decision.

“There should be no more than only one reference for the interpretation of the articles of the constitution. It is a standard practice in constitutions all over the world that only the judiciary has the prerogative to interpret the constitution and it is the one that is responsible for the enforcement of the rule of law,” he said.

Salafists and Brotherhood members refused granting the army powers in the new constitution more than those stated in the 1971 Constitution. [Hamdī Dabash, Dālyā ‘Uthmān and ‘Usāmah al-Mahdī, al-Misrī al-Yawm, July 21, p. 1] Read original text in Arabic