Panel Summary: UN-Backed Constitution-Making Process for Peace in Afghanistan
On October 16, 2024, the Center for Dialogue and Progress – Geneva (CDP-G) organized a peace panel during the Geneva Peace Week. Hosted at the conference hall of the Geneva Center for Security Policy this year, it is the second year that CDP-G organizes a peace panel. While last year’s peace panel focused on the role of minorities during peace negotiations and processes, this year the topic of the event was “Social contract and trust building: can another UN-supervised constitutional process bring peace to Afghanistan?”.
The Peace Panel, opened by interim Director Mr. Timory, focused on the role and value of a UN-backed constitution-making process in Afghanistan. Moderated by Ambassador Marc George, a senior advisor on diplomatic affairs at GCSP and a member of the board of CDP-G, the discussion featured distinguished speakers including Sima Samar, former Chairperson of the Independent Human Rights Commission, Prof. William Maley, Emeritus Professor of Diplomacy at the Australian National University, Ghizaal Haress, former member of Afghanistan’s Independent Oversight Commission on Implementation of the Constitution, Haroon Mutasem, former Deputy Ombudsperson of Afghanistan, Amb. Mirwais Samadi, ambassador of Afghanistan in Athens and Zulfia Abawe, professor at the the South Wales University, who examined past efforts, shortcomings, and the future direction of Afghanistan’s constitutional process.
Ambassador Mirwais Samadi gave an overview of the political and social environment in Afghanistan and emphasized that instability is caused by a lack of continuity in the Afghan constitutional process, pointing out that past constitutions were ideologically driven, politicized, and violated by Afghan rulers themselves. He highlighted the negative impact of foreign interventions on these processes. He added that in spite of the 2004 constitution establishing democratic principles, it failed to bring about stability or security, as seen in the Doha peace process which sidelined the legitimate government. Amb. Samadi stressed that the Taliban does not respect the rule of law or human rights, and urged the formation of a political front committed to constitutional governance. He emphasized the UN’s crucial role in helping Afghans restore a legitimate, law-abiding state.
Dr. Sima Samar reflected on the post-2001 UN-facilitated peace process, noting that it was rushed and lacked a long-term vision for peace in Afghanistan. She mentioned the weak role of the UN and more prominent role of the involved states, including the United States government. She argued that human rights must be the foundation of any future constitutional process, warning that without this, the process would fail. She criticized the lack of grassroots consultation in the drafting process before finalization of the 2004 Constitution, particularly the manipulated membership of the constitutional Loya Jirga, which promoted over-centralization. Dr. Samar also pointed out the sidelining of human rights in the 2020 peace talks and urged international actors not to normalize rights violations. She called for supporting anti-corruption initiatives and standing with Afghan women as critical agents of resistance.
Dr. Haroon Mutasem identified key shortcomings in Afghanistan’s past constitutional efforts, particularly the urban-rural divide that has shaped societal tensions. He argued that the highly centralized government structure did not account for Afghanistan’s diverse cultural identities. The lack of accountability for past violations, particularly with respect to transitional justice, also undermined the constitutional process.
Professor William Maley asserted that while the Afghan constitution remains relevant, there needs to be a comprehensive discussion on the structure of a future constitutional framework. According to him, the previous UN-backed process was rushed, and future efforts should be more deliberate, laying the foundation for a peaceful and stable Afghan state. Although he acknowledged that the Taliban might not participate, he stressed that the process must begin now.
Ms. Ghizaal Haress highlighted the complexity of constitution-making, underscoring that any new process must reflect the values and diverse identities of Afghanistan’s population while establishing clear principles of governance. She noted that the Taliban rejected constitutional efforts in the 1990s, and the one constitution they proposed, based on Hanafi jurisprudence, was not inclusive. She expressed concerns that any future Taliban-driven constitution would likely serve to legitimize authoritarian rule rather than create a representative system of governance.
Dr. Zulfia Abawe concluded by stressing the importance of indigenous, community-driven processes rather than “copycat” Western models. She emphasized that the constitutional process must reflect the customary values of Afghan society and provide genuine ownership to the Afghan people through broad-based consultations.
In summary, the panelist underscored the importance of inclusivity, human rights, and grassroots involvement in future constitutional processes, while highlighting the UN’s pivotal role in supporting Afghanistan’s journey towards a stable, representative, and law-abiding state.
The panel discussions were followed by a series of questions from the participants in the room and those who joined online.