While both the President and Prime Minister of Iraq visited the White House and the United Nations, respectively, the Iraqi Constitution Committee submitted a new draft of the Iraqi Constitution to the United Nations on September 14, 2005 for printing and distribution to Iraqis. The new draft omitted Article (44) from the first draft (published on August 24th). Article 44 forces the Iraqi Government to adhere to international human rights agreements and treaties. By removing the Article, future Iraqi Government(s) can be selective in implementing human rights, freedoms and democratic practices. Such selectivity would be dangerous in a country like Iraq, which suffers from social unrest and a lack of security and political stability.

The draft Constitution contains two sections labeled: Rights (Articles 14-34) and Freedoms (Articles 35-44). These articles include most of the rights adopted by the international community and declared in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948). Nevertheless, after 1990 the international community adopted many new agreements, treaties, and plans of action to assist developing nations reach international standards. Therefore, declaring and implementing the articles concerning rights and freedoms according to international standards is a key to the future of a just, fair, and free Iraq.

The deleted Article (44) from the first draft stated: “All individuals have the right to enjoy the rights stated in international human rights agreements and treaties endorsed by Iraq that don't run contrary to the principles and rules of this constitution.” In the new draft Constitution, Article (44) – which was Article 45 in the first draft – states: ”Restricting or limiting any of the freedoms and liberties stated in this Constitution may only happen by, or according to, law and as long as this restriction or limitation does not undermine the essence of the right or freedom”. By removing references to the international standards of human rights and freedoms, the Iraqi citizens, lawmakers, and government no longer will have a benchmark of principles to use as a check on governmental action towards these issues

Iraqi Kurds and Shi’ites have controlled the political landscape of Iraq since the Iraqi War of 2003. One would expect that both groups would be keen to keep all references to the international agreements and treaties in the Constitution because they have been the main victims of the various Iraqi regimes who ruled Iraq from 1922 until recently. It is not a secret that neither group has a history of, or experience in, promoting human rights and freedom. To promote them, the government would have to take a positive, proactive attitude towards taking the necessary actions to make sure that human rights and freedom are protected and encouraged in the society.

The main Kurdish political parties, the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan and the Democratic Party of Kurdistan, have fallen short of matching international standards despite ruling Kurdistan for 13 years. Shi’ite groups won the majority of seats in Parliament in the January 30th, 2005 elections, with 140 out of 275 available seats. The Shi’ite groups, dominated by the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI) and the Islamic Da’awa Party; both have an Islamic ideology and agenda. Knowing that Articles 1 and 2 emphasize the importance of Islam as the identity of the Iraqis and its role in their lives, it is expected that future Iraqi governments, if they remain controlled by the same Shi’ite groups, will become even more selective in choosing which rights and freedoms to protect and promote.

The United States Administration has worked closely with the previous and present Iraqi Governments and praised them for their achievements in holding elections, forming a government, and drafting a Constitution. Nevertheless, the Administration did not raise any objections when Article 44 was omitted. According to Dr. Mahmoud Othman, a Kurdish member of the Constitution Committee, “The Americans say they don’t intervene, but they have intervened deep. They gave us a detailed proposal, almost a full version of a constitution. They try to compromise the different opinions of all the political blocs. The US officials are more interested in the Iraqi constitution than the Iraqis themselves...” The US non-action in the deletion of Article 44 definitely serves to validate such opinions and views. Furthermore, it might be interpreted by pan-Arabs and pan-Islamists as a clear sign of US intention to occupy Iraq, rather than providing freedom and human rights.

US-based Non-Government Organizations (NGOs) have been working hard to promote human rights and democracy in Iraq long before the US-led invasion. These US-NGOs supported the establishment of and trained Iraqi NGOs to strengthen civil society and infrastructure in Iraq. Iraqi NGOs are at the core of civil society, and are best positioned to be watchdogs, advocates, and educators during the transformation period of Iraq into a democracy. Thousands of these Iraqi NGOs promoted, encouraged, and facilitated Iraqi citizen participation in the January elections. A similar role is to be expected from them in Constitution awareness and education. Therefore, it is left to the NGOs and free and independent media in Iraq to move quickly, prior to the scheduled referendum (October 15, 2005) on the Constitution, to restore and reaffirm Iraq’s commitment to the international agreements and treaties on human rights and freedoms.