The opposition called for a boycott of the referendum. Gamal Essam El-Din tries to find out why A fierce opposition campaign against the final draft of the amendment of constitutional Article 76 did not succeed in thwarting yesterday's referendum. The opposition's public call for boycotting the referendum -- combined with the staging of protest rallies in Cairo and other major cities, and filing lawsuits against the referendum with Cairo's Administrative Court -- was not as effective as some of its proponents might have hoped. The campaign, originally led by Egypt's three largest opposition parties -- the liberal-oriented Wafd, the leftist Tagammu and the pan-Arabist Nasserist Party -- later found support amongst Ayman Nour's Al-Ghad (Tomorrow) Party as well. The outlawed Muslim Brotherhood group and the Egyptian Movement for Change, also known as Kifaya (Enough), also rallied against the referendum and called for its boycott. The new Article 76, rubber-stamped by the ruling NDP-dominated People's Assembly on 10 May, makes it all but impossible for independent candidates to run in the forthcoming presidential elections, and restricts official parties' chances of fielding a candidate in 2011. The opposition's boycott was also prompted by disappointment over four months of national dialogue meetings with the ruling National Democratic Party (NDP). Wafd Chairman Noman Gomaa said the dialogue had turned into a farce, with the opposition seeing it as a way of accelerating political reform, and the NDP mainly using it as a bulwark against US pressure for greater democracy. On Monday, Cairo's Administrative Court rejected a lawsuit filed by Tagammu Party Chairman Rifaat El-Said against the referendum. El-Said argued that the referendum should ask voters whether or not they agree with the amendment as drafted by the People's Assembly, rather than just their opinion on the general idea of Article 76 being amended. When the government's lawyer said the text of the amendment would be printed on the referendum ballot card itself, the court dropped the case. El-Said -- who has the right to appeal to the Supreme Constitutional Court, said he would not do so. "My objective was just to call the public's attention to the restrictions imposed by the amendment," he said. The opposition's boycott call drew mixed reactions. While NDP officials said it showed a negative attitude, independent political observers like Wahid Abdel-Meguid of Al-Ahram's Strategic and Political Studies Centre said opposition parties should think about fielding their own presidential candidates instead of calling for a boycott of the process itself. That opportunity presents itself this time around, when there are no conditions limiting opposition participation in the race. In 2011, parties will need to obtain the support of five per cent of elected MPs in the People's Assembly and Shura Council. According to Abdel-Meguid, the opposition was thoroughly "taken aback by the NDP-inspired final amendment, which explains their very aggressive reaction, with calls to boycott both the referendum and the national dialogue meetings." Nonetheless, "the boycott will only further alienate the opposition," Abdel-Meguid said. "Actively participating in the elections instead would provide them with a good chance to reach the public, a vehicle to promote their political reform platforms." Cairo University constitutional law professor Atef El-Banna said boycotting the referendum was the opposition's best option. "This call," El-Banna told Al-Ahram Weekly, "was primarily prompted by the amendment's tough conditions, which have made President Mubarak's re-election a foregone conclusion." The boycott was positive, El- Banna said, because it was a collective reaction on the part of differing political forces, rather than just one party's individual option. "Contrary to expectations, this position will contribute to alienating the NDP, and not vice versa," El-Banna said. Unofficial forces like the Muslim Brotherhood and Kifaya, meanwhile, have been actively protesting against the referendum as well. The Brotherhood has been staging demonstrations, but not without ramifications. The latest was Saturday's arrest of the group's secretary-general, Mahmoud Ezzat. In response, Muslim Brotherhood MPs asked for Interior Minister Habib El-Adli to be summoned to the People's Assembly to deliver a statement about the arrest of around 900 of the group's members. Although El-Adli did not appear, his assistant for prison affairs, Ahmed Diaaeddin, said that Brotherhood activists were rounded up upon orders from the prosecutor- general. "Security forces," said Diaaeddin, "will always be prepared to thwart all attempts engineered by outlawed forces to spread chaos on the street." As for Kifaya, its call for civil disobedience has not translated into real action so far. On Wednesday the group attempted to organise public protests against the referendum in 21 governorates. Over the past few months, the government's response to Kifaya has varied: occasionally, they are left to protest in peace; sometimes, protesters are arrested for a few hours and then released. The NDP has also, more recently, attempted to stage its own counter-demonstrations by recruiting people to scream out " Mesh Kifaya " (Not Enough) during Kifaya demonstrations.
