The Wall Street Journal REVIEW & OUTLOOK Breakthrough in Baghdad Iraqis agree to a remarkably liberal interim constitution. Tuesday, March 2, 2004 12:01 a.m. EST
A paradox of post-Saddam Iraq is that American elites keep asserting that it's a quagmire even as progress keeps being made in Baghdad. The latest example is the unanimous weekend agreement by the 25 members of Iraq's Governing Council on the draft of an interim constitution. Yes, there will be further violence, as the Baathist and jihadi enemies of Iraqi democracy make a desperate stand to break American will. But with the unanimous vote of the Governing Council--including Kurdish and fundamentalist Shiite leaders--there is now an Iraqi national consensus on the timing and shape of future self-rule. What's more, that consensus is a remarkably liberal one. We've heard a lot of nonsense over the past two years that Muslims aren't ready for self-government, and that the Bush Administration was imperial in trying to "impose" it. But Iraqis of all stripes didn't need a lot of prodding to draft what is far and away the most liberal constitution in the Arab world, including what a senior coalition official calls "an extraordinary bill of rights." Those include the rights to free speech and assembly, the free exercise of religion, habeas corpus and a fair and open trial. There will be gender equality and civilian control of the military. The interim government to be elected by next January will be parliamentary in nature, with a weak executive composed of a president and two deputies. The role of Islam and the extent of federalism were understandably the most contentious issues. In the end it was agreed that Islam would be "a source" of legislation among many, not the principal source some Council members had wanted. They were mollified by the addition of another clause saying legislation could not contravene the tenets of Islam. This is admittedly something of a fudge, and Iraqi liberals will have to be on guard lest judges interpret that provision overbroadly in the future, but the bill of rights should offer protection here. As for federalism, the Kurds won recognition that the future Iraq would be built around strong regional governments. They did not get the inclusion of oil-rich Kirkuk in their area for the time being, but they do get to keep their peshmerga militias for now. A big unresolved issue is the shape of the caretaker government that will serve between the June 30 sovereignty handover and the elections. Here U.S. regent L. Paul Bremer will be playing catch-up. It's been clear for well over a month that the Byzantine U.S. caucus proposal for selecting a transitional government lacked enough Iraqi support. But rather than figuring out how to hold elections as early as possible, Mr. Bremer and his staff continued to peddle overblown worries about the lack of voter rolls while hoping U.N. envoy Lakhdar Brahimi would salvage their plan. This was obviously a stalling tactic, which needlessly risked the goodwill of Shiite leader Ayatollah Sistani. Fortunately, the Ayatollah's forceful advocacy of democracy has been tempered by a spirit of compromise. We are told he has signaled his acceptance of the emerging election timetable, as well as of an unelected caretaker government so long as its powers are limited. The simplest solution is to continue with the current Governing Council, since changes would likely become a source of needless contention. We also wish Mr. Bremer and his team showed more concern regarding the mechanics that will govern the coming Iraqi vote. Perhaps the worst idea in this interim constitution is its 25% target for female representation in parliament. This arbitrary threshold isn't attained by many mature democracies--e.g., Congress. And a serious effort at meeting it would likely require a system of "proportional representation" like those found in Israel or in continental Europe. A proportional system--with voters choosing among lists of candidates fielded by powerful party bosses--would likely empower Islamist groups, as well as make it possible for the radical fringe (say neo-Baathists) to win seats. The better idea is an Anglo-American constituency-based system, which would take advantage of Iraq's already evolving institutions of local democracy. Here voters in each district would choose a single deputy on a first-past-the-post basis. This would force candidates to run on centrist platforms, and best ensure that Iraq's many secular, middle-class neighborhoods would have like-minded representatives. Electoral mechanics are one of those crucial details that will play an outsized role in determining whether President Bush's vision of a democratic Iraq becomes a permanent reality. Mr. Bremer would be smart not to leave this one to the U.N., but to seal a deal on a process that maximizes liberals' chances before June 30 arrives. Meantime, he and the Governing Council deserve congratulations on their progress toward Iraqi democracy.
