The 1964 Constitution of Afghanistan was the constitution of Afghanistan from 1964 to 1973, when it was annulled following a coup d'état though parts of the constitution were restored by future governments from 2002 to 2004 and from 2021 to 2022. It was drafted by a committee of foreign-educated Afghans, including Sardar Abdul Hakim Ziai and Sardar Abdul Rahim Ziai, appointed for the task by Mohammed Zahir Shah. The primary goals of the Constitution were to prepare the government and the people for gradual movement toward democracy and socioeconomic modernization. A Loya jirga (grand council of notables) had debated, modified and approved its innovations, which included a bill of rights for all Afghans, explicitly including women. After public review, the constitution was put into effect in October 1964. Although Afghanistan became a sovereign nation in 1747 under the rule of Ahmad Shah Durrani, the earliest Afghan constitution was written during the reign of Emir Abdur Rahman Khan in the 1890s followed by a 1923 version. The 1964 Constitution transformed Afghanistan into a modern democracy. From 2004 to 2021, the 2004 Constitution of Afghanistan was the basis of law in Afghanistan. After the 2021 Taliban takeover of Afghanistan, the new authorities declared the restoration of parts of the 1964 constitution that are "not in conflict with Islamic Sharia (law)" to govern the country in the interim. However, this decision was overturned by Supreme Leader Hibatullah Akhundzada in late 2022, who argued both constitutions are incompatible with Sharia. Provisions A new parliament was created, dominated by its lower house (the Wolesi Jirgah), which was to be elected through universal suffrage. It had the power to reject royal appointments to the cabinet and to dismiss it by a vote of no confidence. Laws passed by parliament were to have constitutional precedence over traditional Islamic law (the Sharia). Parliament was to meet regularly, not at royal pleasure as before. It could refuse budget increases, but could not reduce appropriations below the level of the previous year. Its members had control over the organization of parliament and enjoyed legal immunity for what they said in debate. Members had the right to form political parties, but their formation required legislation acceptable to the cabinet and, hence, the king. Bold as its innovations were compared with the functional autocracy it replaced, the constitution was filled with provisions intended to assure that the royal government would not lose