Thank you for spotting the glaring travesties. There are so many amendments, additions and exclusions; let me begin with the less conspicuous ones, where inquisitive, legal minds are required.
a) The term 'Sharci' has been removed and intentionally replaced with 'Xeer', the significance herein being:
- To dilute primacy, and traces of Islamic jurisprudence, ordinances, and their precedence.
- Sharci / shuruuc (pl) are derived from Shari'a 'Islamic jurisprudence' grounded in, and with its basis in Islam whereas Xeer is derived from customs and traditions, and Sharica. This becomes more evident when one notices the role of Culamaa has been excluded. Case in point Article 13, pS. 17&18, re: abortion where powers are afforded the medical profession, removing consultation with Culamaa - further explained in subtum.
For instance, Article 17, p. 18:
- Removed are sections (1) & (2):
- section (1) provides every citizen is free to practise own religion.
- section (2) provides no religion, barring Islam, could not preached.
b) Legal terms, which demand strict interpretations had been replaced with loose wordings open to interpretations, giving a great deal of latitude to abuse and misuse. Case in point Article 19, p.19, re:
Miranda warning - further explained in
subtum.
When legal minds with professional training and experience write contracts, which is what the Constitution is as 'social contract', technical terms with intent and purpose are used, whereas when ordinary people read, or try to interpret such laws, confusion almost always reins, with many concluding said law(s) being contradictory; one hears that often, and for a reason. Case in point, difference between Freedom of enquiry vs freedom of expression. The two concepts are confused, or intentionally transposed, in the proposed amendments. Article 18, pS 18&19,
- section (3) of said Article, sets limitations where ingenuity in its art form incl. poetic or literary forms, and research had been replaced and confined to 'one's knowledge and creativity'; the new section uses the words 'faaf reeb la'aan', which I think is intended to mean lack of censorship. here, 'Xoriyad aqooneed' does not mean the same as 'si xor ah u soo bandhigo aqoontiisa'; the former speaks to freedom of enquiry and research whereas the latter speaks to one being at liberty to express. A major difference.
- Further, in its simplest form, the new wording gives rise to loopholes to be exploited, where a citizen could be arrested for reciting a poem deemed inflammatory under Article (18), section (3).
----------------------------
I have got 10 pages of notes to confirm, validate at first. Gotta dash to my morning meetings.
Bloody shame.
Article 28, re:
Marriage:
- section (2) has been added, and it shall open flood gates, for it provides:
- Each person has
the right to get married, and form a family through consent and desire, in accordance with Islam, and Federal laws. Now, any laws, which the Federal government passes, which could sanction
civil partnership and gay marriage are permissible, and covered under this Article. This is what Sacdiya & Co have been advocating for.
Article 35, re:
Presumption of innocence:
- section (1) removed '
innocence' replacing it with '
not committed a crime';
- It further changed '
till a Court proves guilt verdict' replacing it with '
till a Court sentenced'. In legal terms, this bears significance; to further explain in
sabtum.
Article 20, re:
Freedom of congregation and demonstration:
- section (1) had been diluted where it is now contingent upon compliance with Federal laws, and by extension the infamous National Security regulations, pruned from from the military government, a death kneel, and return to the dark days.
- section (2) adds a word, which rules out citizens from lodging a complaint to State institution; here, the word '
u gudboyo - to lodge' has been changed to '
u gudbin karo - could lodge', which in legal terms means worlds apart. In legal proceedings, you could lodge (
privilege) does not mean you can lodge (
right); the former has the implication of your being advised not to lodge a complaint whereas the latter in its original form granted citizens right, and at will sans potential injury to complainant(s). Freedom of enquiry is at the heart of good governance, and democracy, or else it dies in darkness.
Article 22,
Political participation:
- section (1) has been diluted where citizens' ability to form, participation, and join political parties is now contingent upon Federal regulations; sub-sections (a) & (b) which provided said rights have been scrubbed. In its spirit, the new Article removes Election powers and governance from States, powers granted to States in the original Constitution; another power grab by the Fed. gov't.
Article 20,
Travel and mobility:
- section (2) has been removed as a right to carry a passport, and moved to section (3); in principle, when a section is being separated, it can exclude the right, as Courts could reference section (1), and ignore section (3), which relegates the right to carry a passport to a privilege. Only persons permitted by the government of the day to carry passport could, and a ciziten falls foul of the said government, h(sh)e no longer enjoys the privilege, which must be earned by way allegiance, and/or loyalty. See the danger.
- section (3) now makes
a requirement for a citizens to have a Federal ID in order to apply for a passport. This is a dangerous requirement, since
IDs are State issued, as granted in the original Constitution. Here, a burden is being placed upon the average citizen. Another power grab by the Fed. gov't.
Article 32,
Information Act:
- section (1) enforces the infamous
National Security doctrine where citizens can only see what civil servants consider public information, incl. a file on every citizen, esp. elites, dissidents considered political opposition.
- section (2), which provides ? has been scrubbed.
I'll have to find the original English text to fully comprehend its intent.
Article 30:
- section (5), which advocated for
research and development (R&D) has been scrubbed.
---------------------------------------
Chap. 3 re:
Land ownership:
- These are a set of Articles, which grant all land ownership and management powers to the Fed. gov't; this is a State matter barring Federally designated lands, which must be agreed upon between the Fed. gov't and FMSs.
Article 44, re: N
atural resources:
- section (1) originally provided natural resources are to be negotiated between the Fed. gov't and FMSs, albeit all powers rest with FMSs; this has been changed to read 'Natural resources are
national assets to be exploited ...'. transferring powers from FMSs to the Fed. gov't.
- section (2) is new, and creates Fed. Institutions incl.
- Minerals, water, and petroleum all under the Fed. gov't.