The following is part one of a commentary by Joseph Rizk on the current state of the Egyptian revolution.
The new prime minister of Egypt’s moment of glory was short lived. Essam Sharaf, the former transport minister, who took part in the protests and was nominated for the post by several coalition members, said, “My legitimacy is from you,” while protestors yelled “down with state security!” To protestors, he replied that he aims to redirect notorious state security from the former regime to an institution whose primary aim is the defense of its citizens. Later in the day, as peaceful protestors made their way to the state security offices, officials inside the building began to fire live rounds and Molotov cocktails at the crowds, injuring four protestors and setting fire to parts of the surrounding area. As the army moved in to take control of the situation, heaps of shredded papers were discovered. Two days later, the newly appointed Minister of Culture’s wife was arrested by the army at a protest in front of another state security branch. Prime Minister Sharaf is now faced with the double challenge of steering the revolution and restoring security, law, normalcy, and growth.
Revolutionary Transitional Path
While some pundits and a large number of citizens have contended that these goals are inimical to each other, I believe they are essentially mutually inclusive. First, let us assess the demands of the protestors. Since the protests were peaceful, leaderless, and no one dared to represent the entire movement, one of the first demands of the protesters was to form a Presidential Council to act as an agent and guardian of the revolution governing under a temporary constitution which guarantees basic freedoms. The Council would consist of three to five people with one member representing the armed forces, another representing a judge from the supreme constitutional court, and the other(s) would represent one or more individuals from the national political powers. In turn, the Council would steer the country toward a free and democratic society by means of 1) electing a founding committee to draft a new constitution (elections would cover issues such as a Parliamentary vs. Presidential system, among others) 2) releasing all prisoners of conscience 3) bringing all those responsible for human rights violations and corruption to justice 4) freezing the NDP and investigating its members 5) removing the state of emergency. In a month’s time, a referendum on the constitution could be held, while elections for the constitutional committee could be held in six months time. This period would allow political parties which have been oppressed for sixty years to form, develop programs, and communicate with the public, while parliamentary and/or presidential elections would be held in a year. Aside from the actions mentioned, the Council would have dealt with a large number of labor issues and social problems.
The Path Taken by the Military
Instead, the Supreme Council of Armed Forces has announced a highly suspect timetable and has shown itself to be both dictatorial and mercurial. Their resistance to the above transition plan was laid bare in an Al Masry Al Youm article covering their meeting with the Jan 25th Coalition. After effectively staging a quiet and peaceful coup, the army decided to keep Mubarak’s cabinet as a caretaker government. Next, the military’s top brass followed Mubarak’s footsteps in appointing a legal panel (some characteristic of Mubarak’s choice of more liberal panel members) to change six articles of the constitution, lowering the criteria for running for president and safeguarding the process of monitoring the elections. What the changes overlook are articles such as 112 which give the president unchecked legislative powers and limit the power of the judiciary. More worrisome is the announced plan to hold a referendum on March 19th to formalize the changes which will be followed by legislative elections in June and presidential elections in August. Since no new parties have been given the green light, the recently approved Wasat Party (a Brotherhood offshoot), the Muslim Brotherhood, and the highly organized and restructured NDP will dominate the legislature. Some analysts claim the NDP is currently funding new parties and independents to that end. This raises suspicions that the regime is in the backdoor playing the same game it has played for decades; us or them? The permission to allow Qaradawy and to release Khairat al Shater and Hassan Malek (high ranking Muslim Brotherhood officials unfairly sentenced in military courts) without releasing any others is in that line of order. Such a legislature would most likely elect a constitutional committee that designs a constitution that once again perpetuates the system; alternatively, support could be mobilized to keep the amended constitution.
Joseph Rizk is the founder of Lighthouse Consulting, a company that advises governments and the private sector in culture related industries and projects.
The new prime minister of Egypt’s moment of glory was short lived. Essam Sharaf, the former transport minister, who took part in the protests and was nominated for the post by several coalition members, said, “My legitimacy is from you,” while protestors yelled “down with state security!” To protestors, he replied that he aims to redirect notorious state security from the former regime to an institution whose primary aim is the defense of its citizens. Later in the day, as peaceful protestors made their way to the state security offices, officials inside the building began to fire live rounds and Molotov cocktails at the crowds, injuring four protestors and setting fire to parts of the surrounding area. As the army moved in to take control of the situation, heaps of shredded papers were discovered. Two days later, the newly appointed Minister of Culture’s wife was arrested by the army at a protest in front of another state security branch. Prime Minister Sharaf is now faced with the double challenge of steering the revolution and restoring security, law, normalcy, and growth.
Revolutionary Transitional Path
While some pundits and a large number of citizens have contended that these goals are inimical to each other, I believe they are essentially mutually inclusive. First, let us assess the demands of the protestors. Since the protests were peaceful, leaderless, and no one dared to represent the entire movement, one of the first demands of the protesters was to form a Presidential Council to act as an agent and guardian of the revolution governing under a temporary constitution which guarantees basic freedoms. The Council would consist of three to five people with one member representing the armed forces, another representing a judge from the supreme constitutional court, and the other(s) would represent one or more individuals from the national political powers. In turn, the Council would steer the country toward a free and democratic society by means of 1) electing a founding committee to draft a new constitution (elections would cover issues such as a Parliamentary vs. Presidential system, among others) 2) releasing all prisoners of conscience 3) bringing all those responsible for human rights violations and corruption to justice 4) freezing the NDP and investigating its members 5) removing the state of emergency. In a month’s time, a referendum on the constitution could be held, while elections for the constitutional committee could be held in six months time. This period would allow political parties which have been oppressed for sixty years to form, develop programs, and communicate with the public, while parliamentary and/or presidential elections would be held in a year. Aside from the actions mentioned, the Council would have dealt with a large number of labor issues and social problems.
The Path Taken by the Military
Instead, the Supreme Council of Armed Forces has announced a highly suspect timetable and has shown itself to be both dictatorial and mercurial. Their resistance to the above transition plan was laid bare in an Al Masry Al Youm article covering their meeting with the Jan 25th Coalition. After effectively staging a quiet and peaceful coup, the army decided to keep Mubarak’s cabinet as a caretaker government. Next, the military’s top brass followed Mubarak’s footsteps in appointing a legal panel (some characteristic of Mubarak’s choice of more liberal panel members) to change six articles of the constitution, lowering the criteria for running for president and safeguarding the process of monitoring the elections. What the changes overlook are articles such as 112 which give the president unchecked legislative powers and limit the power of the judiciary. More worrisome is the announced plan to hold a referendum on March 19th to formalize the changes which will be followed by legislative elections in June and presidential elections in August. Since no new parties have been given the green light, the recently approved Wasat Party (a Brotherhood offshoot), the Muslim Brotherhood, and the highly organized and restructured NDP will dominate the legislature. Some analysts claim the NDP is currently funding new parties and independents to that end. This raises suspicions that the regime is in the backdoor playing the same game it has played for decades; us or them? The permission to allow Qaradawy and to release Khairat al Shater and Hassan Malek (high ranking Muslim Brotherhood officials unfairly sentenced in military courts) without releasing any others is in that line of order. Such a legislature would most likely elect a constitutional committee that designs a constitution that once again perpetuates the system; alternatively, support could be mobilized to keep the amended constitution.
Joseph Rizk is the founder of Lighthouse Consulting, a company that advises governments and the private sector in culture related industries and projects.
on this article