What is the ruling on those who objected to the addition of the phrase "provided it does not violate the law of Allah" to the oath in the Egyptian People's Assembly, and is their objection considered disbelief (kufr)?

The questioner cautioned against excessive delving into matters of disbelief (kufr) and apostasy (ridda), indicating that his objection to the inclusion of the phrase "The principles of Islamic Sharia (definition) are the main source of legislation" in the constitution is not an act of disbelief, but rather falls within the realm of right and wrong, or lawful and unlawful. He clarified that this addition holds significance as a clear message, and that while the constitutional text may not be fully enacted, the Supreme Constitutional Court has interpreted it according to the universal principles of Sharia and its established, unalterable fundamentals that admit no reinterpretation or change, limiting it to definitive Sharia rulings.