The amendments submitted on Saturday by the eight-member constitution panel to the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces has elicited mixed reactions.
While the suggested changes were welcomed by some political groups, others have said they further warp the Constitution.
Abul Ela Madi, founder of the Wassat party, said he accepts the proposals, but they should have included the abolition of the Shura Council, which he says is functionless and a burden on the state budget.
Ibrahim Darwish, a legal expert and professor, said he rejects both the phrasing and content of the amendments.
Regarding constitutional article 76, Darwish said it would have been enough to require a presidential hopeful to obtain 30,000 signatures from 15 governorates to run for the presidency, without the alternative of endorsement by 30 elected MPs.
Article 88 assigns supervision of the electoral process to judicial authorities whose impartiality is questionable, he added.
The judicial authorities mentioned include bodies such as the Administrative Prosecution–which investigates state employees–and the State Cases Authority, which defends the state in cases filed against it.
Darwish added that Minister of Justice Mamdouh Marie formulated the current law on judicial authorities, and it enables other authorities to interfere in the work of the judiciary.
Article 93 has assigned the Supreme Constitutional Court the duty of examining appeals against election results, said Darwish, which is unreasonable since the 17-member court cannot process the hundreds of appeals it receives. This should be the job of the Court of Cassation, he said.
Darwish furthermore said he objects to the new article 139, as the vice president should not be appointed but elected on the same ballot paper as the president.
