Structural Trends and Democratic Variations in Middle East Constitutions

Structural Trends and Democratic Variations in Middle East Constitutions

 

Commonalities in Middle Eastern Constitutions

A defining feature of Middle Eastern constitutions is the designation of Islam as the state religion, with many incorporating Sharia as a primary or supplementary source of legislation. Saudi Arabia, for example, operates under a Basic Law that defines the state as a monarchy governed by Islamic law, while Iran’s constitution establishes Shia Islam as the foundation of governance. While these religious frameworks provide a sense of cultural identity and stability, they can also limit individual freedoms, particularly in areas such as gender equality and religious diversity. According to the 2023 Freedom House report, countries with strict religious laws, such as Saudi Arabia and Iran, score lower on civil liberties, with Saudi Arabia receiving a “Not Free” rating of just 7/100 in terms of overall freedom (freedomhouse.org).

Another common characteristic is the concentration of power in the executive branch. In many nations, presidents or monarchs wield significant authority over legislative and judicial branches. Egypt’s 2014 constitution grants the president extensive powers over national security, legislative functions, and the judiciary, often limiting opposition voices. This centralization can enable efficient decision-making but also restricts checks and balances. The 2022 Arab Barometer survey found that 68% of respondents in Egypt believe their government does not allow sufficient political opposition (arabbarometer.org).

Most Middle Eastern nations also adopt a unitary state structure, where the central government holds primary authority, granting limited autonomy to local governments. Jordan, for example, maintains a strong central government, preventing regional divisions but potentially stifling local governance. In contrast, Iraq has a federal structure that grants greater autonomy to regions such as Kurdistan, but this has also led to tensions over resource distribution and governance.

Finally, constitutions in the region emphasize national unity and territorial integrity, often discouraging actions that may lead to division or secession. Syria’s constitution, for instance, stresses the importance of national unity. While such provisions help maintain territorial cohesion, they may also be used to justify crackdowns on separatist movements, as seen in Turkey’s policies toward the Kurdish population.

Commonalities in Middle Eastern Constitutions

1. State Religion and Legal Framework

A defining feature of Middle Eastern constitutions is the recognition of Islam as the official state religion, often enshrined in the constitutional text. Many countries incorporate Sharia law as a primary or supplementary source of legislation, influencing legal rulings, civil codes, and personal status laws.

  • Islam as the State Religion: Most constitutions explicitly declare Islam as the official religion, ensuring that governance and legal systems align with Islamic principles. For example:
    • Saudi Arabia: The country does not have a formal written constitution but operates under the Basic Law of Governance (1992), which defines the Quran and the Sunnah as the state’s governing framework.
    • Iran: The 1979 Constitution establishes Shia Islam as the foundation of governance, granting supreme authority to the Supreme Leader, a religious figure.
    • Egypt: The 2014 Constitution affirms Islam as the state religion and designates the principles of Sharia as the primary source of legislation, a provision maintained since the 1971 Constitution.
  • Legal System and Influence of Sharia: The degree to which Sharia is applied varies across the region:
    • Strict Sharia Application: Countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran operate under religious courts where Sharia dictates criminal, civil, and family law.
    • Hybrid Systems: Nations such as Egypt, Jordan, and the UAE maintain legal frameworks that blend Sharia with civil law, particularly in matters of marriage, divorce, and inheritance.
    • Secular Leanings: Some states, such as Tunisia and Turkey (historically), have reduced or removed religious law from governance, prioritizing secular legal frameworks.

While Sharia-based governance provides a sense of cultural identity and stability, it can also impose restrictions on civil liberties, particularly regarding freedom of religion, gender equality, and minority rights.

 

2. Centralized Executive Authority

Another commonality is the concentration of power in the executive branch, with presidents, kings, or supreme leaders holding significant authority over legislative and judicial functions. This centralization allows for swift decision-making but often undermines democratic checks and balances.

  • Monarchies with Absolute or Dominant Rule:
    • Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States (UAE, Qatar, Oman, Bahrain, Kuwait): Monarchs wield extensive executive, legislative, and judicial authority, often ruling by decree.
    • Jordan and Morocco: Constitutional monarchies where the king maintains substantial executive powers, including the ability to dissolve parliament and appoint government officials.
  • Presidential Systems with Executive Domination:
    • Egypt: The 2014 Constitution grants the president control over national security, legislative functions, and judicial appointments. The military plays a dominant role in governance, further reinforcing executive power.
    • Syria: The president holds near-total authority over government affairs, military operations, and judiciary appointments.
    • Algeria: The presidency remains a powerful institution, with the executive controlling major political and economic decisions.
  • Theocratic Executive Rule:
    • Iran: The Supreme Leader holds the highest authority, overseeing the military, judiciary, and major policy decisions, often overruling the elected president and parliament.

In many of these systems, opposition voices are restricted, with laws limiting political dissent, media freedoms, and civil society engagement.

 

3. Unitary State Structure

Most Middle Eastern countries function as unitary states, where central governments hold primary authority, granting limited autonomy to local administrations. This structure helps maintain national unity but can also stifle regional governance and local decision-making.

  • Strong Centralized Governance:
    • Jordan and Egypt: Local governments exist but have minimal independent decision-making power, with central authorities controlling budgets, policies, and administrative structures.
    • Saudi Arabia: The kingdom is divided into provinces, but governance remains centralized under royal decrees.
  • Limited Decentralization Models:
    • Morocco: The 2011 constitutional reforms introduced some regional autonomy, but the central government retains oversight.
    • UAE: While each emirate has some autonomy, federal laws and royal decrees set overarching policies.
  • Federal System Exception:
    • Iraq: The 2005 Constitution established a federal system, granting the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) significant autonomy over local governance, security, and resources. This has led to tensions between Baghdad and Erbil over oil revenues and territorial control.

While unitary governance helps maintain national cohesion, it can suppress local representation and hinder the accommodation of diverse ethnic and sectarian groups.

 

4. Emphasis on National Unity and Territorial Integrity

Middle Eastern constitutions consistently stress the importance of national unity, sovereignty, and territorial integrity, often including provisions that discourage secession, separatism, or internal divisions.

  • National Unity as a Constitutional Priority:
    • Syria: The constitution emphasizes the “indivisibility” of the state, justifying strict measures against separatist movements, particularly regarding the Kurdish population.
    • Turkey: The government’s stance on Kurdish autonomy reflects constitutional provisions that prioritize national unity over regional self-governance.
  • Restrictions on Secession or Regional Autonomy:
    • Saudi Arabia and Iran: Both countries enforce strict policies against movements advocating for regional independence or increased minority rights.
    • Egypt: The constitution criminalizes calls for secession or threats to national cohesion.
  • Use of National Unity to Justify Political Control:
    • Many governments invoke national unity as a justification for suppressing dissent, restricting political activism, and controlling media narratives.
    • Crackdowns on protests, opposition parties, and ethnic minority movements are often framed as measures to maintain stability and security.

While these provisions help ensure territorial cohesion, they can also be used to silence opposition voices and suppress minority rights, as seen in policies toward Kurdish populations, Shia minorities, and political dissidents.

 

Differences in Middle Eastern Constitutions

One of the most significant differences among Middle Eastern constitutions is the divide between secular and theocratic governance. Turkey, historically a secular state, has seen increasing religious influence under recent governments, while Iran operates under a theocratic system where religious leaders hold supreme authority. The Iranian constitution explicitly subordinates democratic institutions to the Supreme Leader, limiting electoral freedom. According to a 2022 Pew Research survey, 79% of Iranians express dissatisfaction with their government’s restrictions on political and social freedoms (pewresearch.org).

Political pluralism also varies widely. Tunisia permits a multi-party system and has experienced relative democratic progress since the Arab Spring, whereas Saudi Arabia prohibits political parties entirely, consolidating power within the monarchy. Tunisia’s 2014 Constitution enshrines political pluralism and has been viewed positively by international observers, yet political instability has led to backsliding. The 2021 Arab Barometer found that 53% of Tunisians believe their democracy is at risk due to economic and governance challenges (arabbarometer.org).

The protection of human rights and civil liberties is another area of divergence. Tunisia’s constitution explicitly guarantees freedoms such as speech, assembly, and religion, while countries like Egypt impose significant restrictions on these rights. Freedom House rates Tunisia as “Partly Free” with a score of 64/100, while Egypt scores 18/100 due to its suppression of dissent and press freedoms. Such disparities illustrate the ongoing struggle for civil liberties in the region (freedomhouse.org).

Judicial independence varies as well. Some countries, such as Lebanon, maintain relatively independent judicial systems, while others, like Egypt, have seen increased executive influence over the judiciary. In Saudi Arabia, courts operate under Islamic law with judges appointed by the king, limiting impartiality in legal proceedings. The 2023 World Justice Project Rule of Law Index ranks Saudi Arabia 118th out of 140 countries for judicial independence (worldjusticeproject.org)

 

1. Secularism vs. Theocracy

One of the most pronounced differences in Middle Eastern constitutions is the role of religion in governance. While some nations have established secular or quasi-secular systems, others function as theocratic states where religious authorities wield supreme power.

  • Secular and Semi-Secular Constitutions:
    • Turkey (before recent constitutional shifts): The Turkish Constitution, particularly under the influence of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk’s reforms, established a strict separation between religion and state. The legal system was based on European civil law rather than Sharia, and religious institutions were largely subordinate to state control. However, in recent years, constitutional amendments have eroded some of these secular principles.
    • Tunisia: The 2014 Constitution enshrined a civil state, maintaining Islam as the official religion while emphasizing democratic governance and human rights protections.
  • Theocratic Governance:
    • Iran: The 1979 Constitution established a theocratic framework, with the Supreme Leader holding ultimate authority over the government, military, and judiciary. The legal system is explicitly based on Shia Islamic jurisprudence, and religious figures play a central role in governance.
    • Saudi Arabia: The kingdom operates under the Basic Law of Governance (1992), which asserts that the Quran and Sunnah serve as the constitution. Governance is rooted in Wahhabi Islamic principles, with religious authorities influencing both legal and social policies.
  • Hybrid Models:
    • Some countries, like Egypt and Jordan, incorporate Sharia as a primary source of legislation while maintaining elements of secular governance, particularly in economic and administrative matters.

This divergence highlights tensions between religious conservatism and modernization, influencing laws related to personal freedoms, women’s rights, and the judiciary.

 

2. Political Pluralism

The degree of political freedom and party competition varies widely across Middle Eastern constitutions. Some nations permit multi-party democracy, while others restrict political opposition, ban political parties, or maintain single-party dominance.

  • Multiparty Democracies:
    • Tunisia: Following the Arab Spring, Tunisia’s 2014 Constitution established a pluralistic democratic system, allowing for competitive elections, a strong parliamentary role, and protections for political opposition.
    • Lebanon: The Lebanese Constitution recognizes multiple political parties, but the system operates on a sectarian power-sharing model, where government positions are allocated based on religious affiliation.
  • Restricted or Controlled Political Systems:
    • Egypt: While Egypt technically allows multiple political parties, its political landscape is heavily controlled, with opposition movements facing repression, and electoral processes often favoring the ruling establishment.
    • Algeria: Although Algeria has a multiparty system, opposition parties face severe restrictions, and the military remains a dominant force in governance.
  • Single-Party or No-Party Systems:
    • Saudi Arabia: Political parties are prohibited, and governance is based on royal decrees rather than electoral competition. The monarchy maintains absolute control over political decision-making.
    • Iran: While Iran has a structured electoral system, candidates for key positions (such as the presidency and parliament) must be vetted by the Guardian Council, which ensures alignment with Islamic revolutionary principles.

Political pluralism in the region is often constrained by state security laws, media censorship, and legal barriers that limit opposition activities, making genuine political competition difficult in many cases.

 

3. Human Rights Protections

The protection of civil liberties and human rights varies considerably, with some constitutions explicitly guaranteeing freedom of speech, assembly, and religion, while others impose significant restrictions, often justified by religious, security, or cultural norms.

  • Constitutions with Strong Human Rights Protections:
    • Tunisia (2014 Constitution): One of the most progressive in the region, the Tunisian Constitution guarantees freedom of expression, gender equality, and the right to political participation. It also establishes an independent judiciary to safeguard civil liberties.
    • Lebanon: While political freedoms exist, they are often constrained by sectarianism and periodic governmental instability.
  • Constitutions with Limited or Conditional Rights:
    • Egypt: The 2014 Constitution includes protections for free speech and assembly, but laws restricting protests and media freedoms undermine these guarantees in practice.
    • Jordan: While citizens have some legal protections, laws regulating public gatherings and press freedoms place limits on political expression.
  • Severely Restricted Human Rights Frameworks:
    • Saudi Arabia and Iran: Both nations enforce strict religious and social codes, with laws criminalizing blasphemy, apostasy, and political dissent. Women’s rights and freedom of expression are heavily regulated, with state security courts often used to suppress activists.
    • Syria: During the ongoing conflict, human rights abuses have intensified, with constitutional guarantees largely overridden by state security measures and emergency laws.

The degree of human rights protection often correlates with the level of political openness, with more democratic states offering stronger protections and authoritarian regimes imposing severe limitations.

 

4. Judicial Independence

The autonomy of the judiciary differs significantly across Middle Eastern countries. Some nations establish independent judicial branches, while others subject courts to executive or religious control, limiting their ability to act as a check on power.

  • Relatively Independent Judicial Systems:
    • Tunisia: The 2014 Constitution includes strong judicial independence provisions, ensuring that courts operate free from government interference.
    • Lebanon: Judges have significant legal autonomy, though political influences sometimes impact judicial decisions.
  • Judiciaries Under Executive Influence:
    • Egypt: While the constitution outlines judicial independence, in practice, courts face political pressure, and the government has used legal mechanisms to silence dissent and prosecute opposition figures.
    • Algeria: The judiciary is formally independent but often aligns with the executive branch in politically sensitive cases.
  • Religious and Political Control Over Judiciary:
    • Iran: Courts operate under Islamic jurisprudence, with religious judges and the Supreme Leader wielding ultimate authority over judicial decisions.
    • Saudi Arabia: The legal system follows Sharia law, and judges are appointed based on religious qualifications. The king holds the power to influence judicial rulings and issue royal pardons.

In many Middle Eastern countries, judicial independence is undermined by executive interference, security laws, and religious oversight, preventing courts from serving as effective checks on government power.

 

Analysis & Conclusion

The constitutions of Middle Eastern nations reflect diverse governance models, legal traditions, and approaches to civil liberties. The key differences lie in the role of religion in governance, the extent of political pluralism, human rights protections, and judicial independence. While some countries, like Tunisia and Lebanon, have made strides toward democratic governance, others, such as Saudi Arabia and Iran, maintain strict authoritarian or theocratic frameworks. These differences shape the region’s political stability, economic development, and social dynamics, making constitutional reforms a crucial issue for the future of governance in the Middle East.

 

Evaluation of Democratic Strength

Among Middle Eastern nations, Tunisia’s 2014 constitution is often cited as the strongest in terms of democratic principles. It enshrines a secular state with a commitment to human rights, gender equality, and political pluralism. However, economic instability and political unrest have posed challenges to its full implementation. A 2022 survey by the Arab Barometer found that while 60% of Tunisians initially supported their new constitution, recent governance failures have led to declining confidence in democratic institutions.

 

Conversely, Saudi Arabia has one of the weakest constitutional frameworks in terms of democratic governance. Operating under a Basic Law rather than a formal constitution, the country lacks political pluralism, independent judicial oversight, and guarantees for civil liberties. Public sentiment on governance is difficult to measure due to restrictions on political expression, but external assessments such as the Democracy Index consistently rank Saudi Arabia among the least free nations, scoring it 2.08 out of 10 in 2022 (economist.com).

 

Strongest Constitution: Tunisia

  • Tunisia’s 2014 Constitution enshrines a democratic, secular state with a strong commitment to human rights and separation of powers. It includes protections for free speech, gender equality, and political pluralism.

Weakest Constitution: Saudi Arabia

  • Saudi Arabia does not have a formal written constitution but rather operates under a Basic Law that defines the state as a monarchy governed by Islamic law. The lack of political pluralism, limited civil liberties, and theocratic rule make it one of the least democratic governance structures.

 

Public Opinion on Constitutions and Governance:

Public sentiment toward governance in the Middle East reflects widespread dissatisfaction with corruption, lack of transparency, and restricted freedoms. The 2019-2020 Arab Opinion Index found that 91% of respondents across the Arab world believe corruption is widespread in their home countries, while only 32% believe the rule of law is applied equally among citizens (arabcenterdc.org).

Findings from Freedom in the World 2023 indicate that while some nations, such as Israel, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, saw modest improvements in political rights or civil liberties in 2022, others, including Iran and the West Bank, experienced declines. Public opinion surveys in Iran show increasing frustration with government restrictions, with 85% of respondents in a 2022 GAMAAN survey expressing a desire for political change (gamaan.org).

 

In summary, Middle Eastern constitutions vary significantly in their structure, governance, and protections of civil liberties. While some nations, like Tunisia, have made strides toward democratic governance, others, such as Saudi Arabia and Iran, continue to operate under restrictive frameworks. Public sentiment reveals a strong desire for greater political freedoms, judicial independence, and reduced corruption, underscoring the challenges and aspirations of constitutional governance in the region.

 

Public sentiment towards constitutions and governance in the Middle East varies:

  • Tunisia: Following the 2011 uprisings, Tunisia’s new constitution was met with optimism, reflecting a commitment to democratic principles. However, challenges remain in its implementation.
  • Saudi Arabia: Saudi Arabia does not have a formal written constitution but operates under a Basic Law. Public opinion on governance structures is less documented due to restrictions on political expression.

 

According to the 2019-2020 Arab Opinion Index, 91% of respondents across the Arab world believe that corruption is widespread in their home countries. Additionally, only 32% believe that the rule of law is applied equally among citizens, indicating significant public concern regarding governance and legal frameworks. (arabcenterdc.org)

 

Furthermore, findings from Freedom in the World 2023 show that Israel, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates saw improvements in political rights or civil liberties in 2022, while Iran and the West Bank experienced declines. (freedomhouse.org)

 

These insights highlight the diverse constitutional frameworks and public perceptions across the Middle East, underscoring the importance of context-specific approaches to promoting democracy and individual rights in the region.

 

The constitutions of Middle Eastern nations illustrate a complex interplay of religious influence, executive power, and centralized governance, often aimed at ensuring territorial cohesion and national unity. While these provisions can provide political stability and preserve national integrity, they also create significant challenges in terms of democratic representation, civil liberties, and regional autonomy. For instance, constitutional provisions that centralize authority often suppress the rights of ethnic and religious minorities, as seen in policies toward Kurdish populations, Shia minorities, and political dissidents across the region. These populations frequently find their voices silenced and their rights diminished in the name of maintaining state unity.

 

The constitutional landscapes in countries such as Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Iran highlight a divergence in governance models ranging from theocratic systems to more secular or authoritarian frameworks. These different approaches to governance have substantial implications for human rights, with some countries guaranteeing basic freedoms while others impose severe restrictions on free speech, political participation, and religious expression.

 

As the region continues to evolve, the future of Middle Eastern governance will likely hinge on finding a balance between maintaining territorial cohesion and embracing more inclusive and democratic structures. Constitutional reforms could focus on enhancing political pluralism, ensuring judicial independence, and better protecting minority rights, providing a more equitable framework for all citizens. Ultimately, the challenge will be to reconcile national unity with the demands for greater political freedoms and civil liberties in a diverse and often divided region.

 

Suggested Constitution Based On This Document:  

Preamble

We, the people, united in our diversity and committed to justice, liberty, and the rule of law, establish this Constitution to promote democracy, protect fundamental human rights, and ensure the prosperity and well-being of all citizens. We dedicate ourselves to a future where individual freedoms are respected, religious tolerance is upheld, and every citizen, regardless of background, is given the opportunity to thrive within a peaceful and just society.

 

Article 1: Sovereignty and State Structure

  • The state is a sovereign, independent, and indivisible entity.
  • Sovereignty resides in the people, who exercise it through elected representatives and referenda. All governmental authority is derived from the consent of the governed.
  • The state shall preserve its territorial integrity, ensuring equal rights and representation for all regions and ethnic groups within its borders.

Article 2: Official Language and Religion

  • The official language of the state is [Language].
  • [Religion] is the state religion; however, the state guarantees freedom of religion and belief for all citizens, ensuring that no person is discriminated against based on their religious beliefs or practices.
  • The state shall not impose religious laws upon citizens, nor shall religious institutions interfere in the governance of the state.

Article 3: Fundamental Rights and Liberties

  • All citizens are equal before the law and are entitled to equal protection without discrimination based on religion, race, gender, or ethnicity.
  • Freedom of speech, press, assembly, association, and religion are inviolable rights and shall not be subject to censorship or unjust restrictions.
  • The right to a fair trial, protection from arbitrary detention, and prohibition of torture and inhumane treatment are guaranteed.
  • The state shall ensure the protection of the right to privacy and digital security for all citizens.

Article 4: Separation of Powers

  • The government is divided into three branches: legislative, executive, and judicial.
  • Each branch operates independently and is prohibited from exceeding its constitutionally assigned powers, ensuring a system of checks and balances. Each branch shall respect the authority and independence of the other branches.
  • No branch of government shall hold absolute or unchecked power, ensuring that no individual or group can dominate the others.

Article 5: The Legislature

  • Legislative authority is vested in a [unicameral/bicameral] parliament elected by the people through free, fair, and regular elections.
  • All citizens have the right to vote and stand for election, in accordance with the law, with universal suffrage being guaranteed.
  • The legislature shall have the authority to pass laws, review government actions, and hold the executive accountable through oversight mechanisms.

Article 6: The Executive

  • Executive authority is vested in the [President/Prime Minister], who is [elected by the people/appointed by the parliament] for a term defined by law.
  • The executive is accountable to the parliament and operates within the bounds of this Constitution. The President/Prime Minister shall represent the unity of the state and promote national interests, while respecting the rights of all citizens.
  • The executive shall not use state resources for personal gain or to undermine the democratic process.

Article 7: The Judiciary

  • An independent judiciary is established to uphold the rule of law, interpret the Constitution, and protect individual rights.
  • Judges are appointed based on merit, expertise, and impartiality. They shall be free from political or religious influence and serve for fixed terms to ensure their independence.
  • The judiciary shall have the power to review laws, executive actions, and ensure their conformity with this Constitution.

Article 8: Political Pluralism

  • The formation of political parties is permitted, provided they adhere to democratic principles, uphold human rights, and promote national unity.
  • Political parties must operate transparently and not advocate for violence or the subversion of democratic values. Restrictions on political parties must not undermine the fundamental rights of citizens to engage in political activity.
  • The state shall provide legal protections for political dissent and opposition movements, ensuring a vibrant political environment.

Article 9: Defense and Security

  • The state shall maintain armed forces for national defense, under civilian control, and shall not use military force to limit the rights and freedoms of the people.
  • The use of force by the military shall be strictly regulated, and the military shall act only in defense of the state and its citizens.
  • The government shall ensure that law enforcement agencies respect human rights, and shall hold those who violate these rights accountable.

Article 10: Amendment Process

  • Amendments to this Constitution may be proposed by a two-thirds majority in parliament or through a popular initiative supported by at least one-quarter of the electorate.
  • Proposed amendments must be ratified by a national referendum to take effect, ensuring broad public support for any changes to the Constitution.
  • Any amendment to the Constitution must adhere to the principles of democracy, human rights, and the rule of law.

Article 11: Supremacy of the Constitution

  • This Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any laws or actions contrary to its provisions are null and void.
  • All other laws, treaties, and agreements must be in alignment with the principles of this Constitution, particularly with regard to the protection of human rights and democratic governance.

Article 12: Transitional Provisions

  • Existing laws remain in effect until they are amended or repealed to conform with this Constitution.
  • A transitional government shall be established to oversee the implementation of this Constitution and facilitate the transition to democratic governance, ensuring the protection of all citizens during the transitional period.

 

Constitutional Conclusion

This proposed foundational document seeks to establish a framework for a democratic Middle East, one that is committed to human rights, equality, and the rule of law. By embedding fundamental freedoms such as the right to free expression, religion, and political participation, this Constitution envisions a society where citizens are empowered to shape their future without fear of repression.

 

While the document emphasizes national unity and territorial integrity, it also acknowledges the importance of political pluralism and regional autonomy. This balance is essential to address the region’s diverse cultural, ethnic, and religious groups, particularly when safeguarding the rights of Kurdish populations, Shia minorities, and political dissidents who have historically been marginalized. The Constitution strives to ensure that such groups have both a voice in governance and protection under the law.

 

The proposed Constitution offers a model for political stability and civic freedoms while emphasizing a commitment to inclusivity and the protection of minority rights. Future reforms and the practical implementation of this document will be crucial in navigating the challenges posed by diverse societal structures, and in ensuring that the promises of democracy and justice are fully realized for all citizens in the Middle East.