Protecting Freedom of Information in Egypt: What is Old is New Again

 

Please read the rest of this article in Al Masry Al Youm.  WMB

Freedom of Information and freedom of expression are under fierce and sustained attack in Egypt, North Africa and the Middle East. Innovative solutions are required to protect our right of assembly, our right to dialogue, our freedom of the press, our right to form political parties, and our right to communicate with our global neighbors.  Yet sometimes the answers are right in front of us.

Much has been written about how "Army and the people are one hand" in Egypt. Overall, the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces has exercised a competent and relatively benign approach to governing Egypt. Yet, lest we lapse into complacency, there are some warning signs, particularly in the area of free expression and freedom of information.

First, the right of the Egyptian people to organize themselves into political groupings of their choice is under attack. Parliamentary elections are scheduled for September. This gives political parties only five months to form and prepare for elections. This short time line arguably heavily favors already established groups.  New parties will need the approval of at least 5000 voters from ten of Egypt's 29 provinces. I attended a lecture at the American University in Cairo at Tahrir Square on Tuesday night, in which the Nevine Mossad, Amr El Shobaky, Samer Soliman, and Ibrahim El Issawy said that this provision also requires publication in two major newspapers. The costs for this kind of publication could run to one million Egyptian pounds, which will likely disadvantage new parties.

Continue reading in Al Masry Al Youm

Winter for Egyptian Democracy

Article first published as Winter for Egyptian Democracy on Blogcritics.

It is winter in Egypt. The days are overcast, and surprisingly cold. Whereas the United States is celebrating the arrival of the cherry blossoms, here we just have sand and more sand, punctuated by palm trees and formal shrubs such as arbor vitae, which all look like they need a bit more water. Overall, the news from Egypt is not that heartening, from the standpoint of ensuring democracy. The New York Times reports seem upbeat. I am an optimist, however, the coverage in Cairo gives me pause, and the mood is calm, but concerned.

Parliamentary elections are scheduled for September. This gives political parties five months to form and prepare for elections. This short time line arguably heavily favors already established groups like the Muslim Brotherhood and the National Democratic Party. New parties will need the approval of at least 5000 voters from ten of Egypt's 29 provinces. I attended a lecture at the American University in Cairo on Tuesday night, in which the analysts said that this provision also requires publication in two major newspapers. The costs for this could run to one million Egyptian pounds, which would also disadvantage new parties.

A controversial law on political parties is also being bandied about that would disallow political parties with religious backgrounds. The Supreme Council of Armed Forces (SCAF) enacted a political party formation law which would ban parties based on religion. One potential problem with such a law is how one determines whether a party is based on religion. What criteria will be used for this determination? In my view, this law is potentially repressive. The presidential election has also been postponed.

After some highly questionable amendments to the repressive 1971 Constitution were rushed through in the past week without adequate time for national dialogue, Al Jazeera reports that an entirely new constitution will be drawn up after the election, but exactly when it will be put in place is unclear. The fact that a vote was held on the constitution was momentous, as was the high turnout, and the largely peaceful conduct of the vote. The amendments were written by a secretive group appointed by the military with no discernible criteria, and then were rushed through in four weeks. The vote  was held without adequate time or education for national dialogue in a country with a thirty percent illiteracy rate. I am concerned.

Read more: http://blogcritics.org/politics/article/winter-for-egyptian-democracy/#ixzz1IA6j3z00

Blog Interview about the Constitutional Referendum with Abdel-Rahman Hussein, author of Sibilant Egypt Blog

Dear Readers: 


Today, we are very privileged to have the opportunity to speak to Abdel-Rahman Hussein. Mr. Hussein is a Cairo-based journalist who's written for Daily News Egypt, Al-Masry Al-Youm, Al Jazeera and the Huffington Post. He is author of the Sibilant Egypt blog.

Dear Mr. Hussein,

I just want to thank you for agreeing to speak with me about your election experiences. First of all, how does it feel to participate in possibly the first major real election in Egypt's history?

It felt surreal. This whole thing - since Jan25 - has been surreal and hasn't really sunk in. It's been a long time coming, that's for sure. It was a referendum though, not yet an election and as such was more clear-cut. Yes or No. It was also a bit anti-climactic in the sense that the outcome was accurately predicted beforehand.

I have cast many ballots in my life, but I understand that for many Egyptians, this was the first ballot they have ever cast. How did it feel to vote? Did you feel like your vote meant something?

Well I voted against the 2007 constitutional amendments knowing it would be futile, but I did it anyway. This time the turnout was much bigger, which was heartening. Though I voted for the losing outcome it did mean something in the sense that there is now a clearer representation of Egyptians. For possibly the first time we have a fairly accurate assessment of how many voted for or against a particular motion.

Do you believe that this election was truly free and fair?

There were, as ever, reports of irregularities yet it wasn't on the scale we've seen in previous elections. I think at the ballot box the result was relatively fair. As for what happened before people entered the ballot boxes, that's another story. The scare-mongering, the irrational reasoning for the yes vote was a disappointment. Yet anywhere else it would just be termed aggressive campaigning. I have no qualms with those who voted yes out of political conviction, but to vote yes as a pro-Islamic, anti-Coptic gesture or for purposes of the restoration of "stability" was sad for me. But I'll be told that “that's democracy isn't it?” Still within that framework, I believe there must be room to counter against bigotry, xenophobia (Article 75) and fear-mongering.

Following up on the last point, what specific violations did you see regarding elections? Were there enough polling places? Was anyone bribed? What do you think of the Muslim Brotherhood giving out food to encourage people to vote yes?

The Muslim Brotherhood campaigned aggressively - and successfully - in the days leading up to the referendum. There were reports of bribery, but irrespective of that they managed to get their message across. However, that shouldn't necessarily be seen as an indicator of equal success in the upcoming parliamentary and presidential elections.

In your opinion, was there enough time leading up to the referendum to actually learn what the amendments mean?

No there wasn't. And there wasn't enough time for debate. However, more time doesn't mean that the outcome would have been different. In any case Egypt needs a new constitution, and it will get one.

To your knowledge, who was on the committee that drafted the amendments? Do you think their selection was fair?

The selection was safe, not too controversial (with the exception of the one Muslim Brotherhood member). And I see the logic in only amending the articles that were put up. To rewrite a new constitution would have meant an interminable delay, as there is disagreement on - among other things - article 2 for example. However, maybe that's what should have been done. In a way, the ideals of the revolution have been usurped, but that's how things go when a grass-roots movement turns into a political process.

Finally, in your view, what does a yes vote mean for Egypt? What is the way forward, what is the situation we are in now?

What a “Yes” vote means will only be apparent once the parliamentary elections have taken place and we see what candidates won out. It could be good or bad (depending on your personal political alignment). I would say that the power now lies more not with the people who braved the previous regime and risked their lives to overthrow it, but rather with the "silent majority" that the regime was bleating about before it was consigned to the dustbin of history. In any case, what's imperative now is that regardless of the overriding political direction, there needs to be guarantees pertaining to the protection of minority rights, women's rights and civil liberties. As has been seen on the streets of Cairo recently, dissenting voices have been silenced by force, whether at the hands of the army or regular citizens. For me, safeguards against that sort of thing need to be enshrined in any future constitution.

Many thanks for your time, and your valuable insights. It has been a real pleasure “blogging” with you!

--Warigia

Amending the Egyptian Constitution Part 2

10:20 a.m

Hi all, the vote is today. VERY EXCITING!!! This is really important. So many African countries are revising their constitutions. Kenya just revised its constitution and it passed on August 4, 2010. There is a lot to learn from Kenya. Sudan is newly independent and they will be working on their constitution soon. Lets learn from each others as Africans.

10:25 a.m.
As I mentioned, I attended a crash course on training for the constitution held by a colleague, Professor Mervat Abou Ouf, at the American University in Cairo on March 16, 2011. She gave a very lucid presentation, and she is my new hero. Here is her link.

http://www.aucegypt.edu/fac/profiles/pages/mervatabouauf.aspx

According to Professor Mervat Abou Ouf, the parliament is currently dissolved, and the constitution is on pause.

The proposed amendments make several changes to the Egyptian Constitution of 1971. Here are her comments on just a few of the amendments.

75: First, it amends part 75, to say that the Egyptian President should be born to two Egyptian parents, and cannot marry a non-Egyptian. One issue with this is that so many people left the country and lived abroad while Mubarak was in power, that it really discriminates against those returning in exile. This rule does not require that one be born in Egypt! Interestingly, in theory, one could be born in France, speak French but no Arabic. Then, one could marry a French Egyptian. In theory, you could never have lived in Egypt, yet still be eligible to be President. In addition, there is some argument about the Arabic, as it suggests that you cannot marry a non-Egyptian wife. I can neither confirm nor deny this, because I cannot speak Arabic, but it certainly  indicates women cannot run for president, if it is in fact true.

76: This provision seems desirable. It makes it easier to run for President. Under the old Constitution, only Mubarak's son Gamal really could have qualified for the presidency, because the qualifications were so restrictive. Now, this provision provides three ways to run for president, You may be nominated by members of Parliament in two chambers, you may be nominated by 30,000 citizens in 15 governorates, or you may be nominated by a party holding at least one seat in the Parliament.

Say No to Everything
One reaction to the proposed referendum is that it is unreasonable to make people vote on the Constititutional amendments as a unified batch. It is an all or nothing strategy. Holding the vote at this time is risky, and controversial due to the high illiteracy rate in Egypt, and the speed with which the amendments are being pushed through. One really must ask if citizens have had enough time to reflect on these amendments. In addition, the team which wrote the constitutional amendments was appointed by the military or the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces as they are known here. This is hardly a democratic process. It would be better if people had the choice to vote on each provision separately. In today's vote, there are only two options. Yes, and No. It would be much better if the Egyptian people had a third choice, such as the choice to vote that they want a completely new constitution.

Egyptians Vote on Constitutional Changes
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2011/03/18/world/middleeast/AP-ML-Egypt.html?hp

According to the New York Times, this is the first major test of the country's transition to democracy since the overthrow of Mubarak. Arguably, in my view, this is the first remotely free election ever held in Egypt, and  that is to say, ever. . . .

11:48 a.m.
What happens if people vote No on the referendum?
The upside to voting No is that it does not revive the 1971 Constitution. The downside to voting no is that there is basically military rule with no President, no Parliament, and no Constitution. I personally was very happy with my interactions with the military yesterday in Tahrir Square. That being said, Egypt is currently under a military dictatorship, and that is not a comfortable feeling for those who love democracy. There is no guarantee that the currently friendly military could not turn on a dime and become a violent dictatorial regime. In the event of a No vote the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces could, possibly, put a decree in place saying they are in power for X number of months. It is not clear what will happen from a legal and a constitutional perspective if the people vote No.

What happens if People Vote Yes in the Referendum?
According to Professor Abou Ouf, the people who support a yes vote are the military, the people seeking safety and regularity, the Muslim Brotherhood, and the National Democratic Party (supporters of the former Mubarak Government). In addition, some other extremists, in her view, may support a yes vote. Concerns include the fact, mentioned above, that there has not been enough time to review the changes. In addition, the articles are not finalized, and people are not very clear even regarding the Arabic construction of some of the points, which could change the legal meaning of the document. In addition, and disturbingly, voting for the amendments would seem to reinstate the 1971 constitution. In a strange set of circumstances, the amendments do not account for the fact that this constitution which requires a Parliament and a President, would be in place in the absence of those two figures, but a military government would be in place instead. This means that the Constitution would actually be violated while it was in force.

Presidential vs. Parliamentary System
The issue of whether Egypt should have a parliamentary or presidential system, or a mixed system is not addressed at all by the amendments, but should be considered before Egyptians pass a new constitution.  There is a vast political science literature on this, and it is an important matter. Thanks to Steve Levitsky of Harvard University for teaching me this idea in his class on Comparative Politics.
http://scholar.harvard.edu/levitsky/home

Drawbacks for New Political Parties
In theory, there are twenty four political parties in Egypt. Nonetheless, they are very weak. As a result, the main party is the National Democratic Party, Mubarak's old party. In addition, the loyal opposition has been the Muslim Brotherhood. They are very well organized. Some say they are fielding as many as three new parties in the new election. What will happen to less organized parties who are not of the ancien regime, but also do not believe in the Muslim Brotherhood.

1:14 p.m. According to a student,  violence is breaking out at polling stations in Giza. People are voting in more than one committee and penetrating rooms with falsified paper. Asyout and Sharkeya are becoming more violent.

Other Concerns:
A Yes vote could be problematic for several reasons. It is unclear if the President, (whenever Egypt gets one) could run again after two terms. In addition, there will be numerous elections this year. There may be as many as seven (7) elections in less than one year. It is very hard to keep track of everything that is going on right now, and citizens are likely to suffer from election fatigue. It is unlikely that the old government is not going to relinquish power without a struggle.


References
El baradei, supporters, attacked at polling station.
http://www.almasryalyoum.com/en/node/365228
The Found art of voting
http://www.almasryalyoum.com/en/node/365137
Thug Life, Pro Mubarak Bullies Break their silence
http://www.almasryalyoum.com/en/node/365137
Frustrated Zamalek Residents leave three hour queue
http://www.almasryalyoum.com/en/node/365137
Phone interview with RM, NDP supporter and youth voter, March 19, 2011.
Phone interview with MF, businessman and no voter, March 20, 2011. 
Egyptians Turn Out in large Numbers to Vote on Constitutional Referendum
http://www.rferl.org/content/egypt_referendum_/2343176.html

Amending the Egyptian Constitution Part 1

2:25 p.m.

There will be a referendum on amending the Egyptian constitution tomorrow. My gut instinct is to vote no. I went to a crash training course on this. I am feeling a little scared, but I think I will try to go to Tahrir Square to see what is going on there.

2:27 p.m.

I went to a lecture by Professor Mervat Abou Ouf on the amendments this week. My understanding is that there are eleven proposed amendments to the constitution. article 75, article 76, article 77, article 88, article 93, artucle 139, article 148, article 179, and article 189 (and two others).[Author's note, this was incorrect, there are nine amendments. I misunderstood. WMB] Dr. Mervat pointed out that there have only been four weeks to review the amendments. That alone is reason to vote against them. We discussed the amendments in class. I am going to write down her critiques tomorrow morning.

11:17 p.m.

I made it to Tahrir Square. I am so glad I made it. It was one of the peak experiences of my stay in Egypt. The energy on the square was incredibly positive. Many families were there with their children. The children were adorable and several children and adults had Egyptian colors and the Arabic symbol for no painted on their face. It seemed that all the protesters there supported the No vote. I saw no protesters organizing for a Yes vote. Somehow I ended up having my photo taken with soldiers, and getting an egyptian flag, and the Arabic character for "No" painted on my face.

I went with my Egyptian colleague Mark Mikhael. Check out his great column on Coptic Christians and Muslims, and how we are all Egyptians here: (http://www.almasryalyoum.com/en/node/348932). Many thanks to him for helping me navigate the square and protecting me from the thugs who tried to steal my camera at the end of the night!

The soldiers seemed so calm and authoritative. Everyone wanted me to take their picture. I think they thought I was a reporter. Did I mention that at the end of the protest, everyone, including me, got down on their hands and knees and picked up trash so that the square was nice and clean again? Absolutely amazing. If that is not revolutionary, I do not know what is.

11:54 p.m.

For Al Jazeera's comprehensive review of the amendments, click here. . . .
http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/spotlight/anger-in-egypt/2011/03/20113156309594476.html