September 2, 2005 2:31 PM

Theocracy Lite

Parliament member Mariam al-Rayis, looks over as she raises her hand during a vote at the National Assembly session in Baghdad's

Parliament member Mariam al-Rayis, looks over as she raises her hand during a vote at the National Assembly session in Baghdad's "Green Zone", Monday, Aug. 29, 2005, a day after Iraq's new draft constitution was finalized. The parliament convened to discuss new electoral laws among other issues. (AP Photo/Karim Sahib, Pool) (AP)

This column was written by Katha Pollitt.
So now we know what "noble cause" Cindy Sheehan's son died for in Iraq: Sharia. It's a good thing W stands for women, or I'd be worried. The new Constitution, drafted under heavy pressure from the administration, sets aside the secular personal law under which Iraqis have lived for nearly half a century in favor of theocracy lite. "Islam is the official religion of the state and is a basic source of legislation," Article 2 begins--the spin is that this language is a victory because Islam is not the source. "(a) No law can be passed that contradicts the undisputed rules of Islam." On the other hand, "(b) No law can be passed that contradicts the principles of democracy" and "(c) No law can be passed that contradicts the rights and basic freedoms outlined in this constitution"--as in, for example, Article 14: "Iraqis are equal before the law without discrimination because of sex," religion, ethnicity and so on.

There's enough right here to keep a conclave of political theorists busy for years. Equal before which law? How can women be equal before Islamic law, according to which they are unequal? How can a non-Muslim be equal in a Muslim state? Who decides which Islamic rules are undisputed and which are, well, disputable? As with our own multiple versions of Christianity, doesn't that depend on which imam is holding the Koran? And what happens when (a) (Islam) conflicts with (b) (democracy) or either (a) or (b)--or both--conflict with (c) (human rights)? Don't laugh, it could happen. Fortunately, the Constitution has come up with just the thing to settle those knotty questions--a Supreme Federal Court "made up of a number of judges and experts in Sharia (Islamic Law) and law." As prowar pundits are quick to remind us, it's a lot like our own Constitution--except for the official religion part, and that's not for lack of effort by Justice Scalia.

Bush has professed himself delighted with the document. "This Constitution is one that honors women's rights and freedom of religion," he announced in Arizona, where he was taking a vacation from his vacation. The freedom-of-religion bit alludes to a slightly bewildering provision that seems to hold out the possibility of separate courts for each religion. Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati, the head of Iran's ultra-Shiite Guardian Council, isn't too worried by this ecumenical gesture: "Fortunately, after years of effort and expectations in Iraq, an Islamic state has come to power and the Constitution has been established on the basis of Islamic precepts."

The Nation
Add A Comment +
Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS This Morning now on iPad & iPhone! GET THE FREE APP
CBS News on Facebook