For the second time in two years, the Egyptian people took to the streets, in even bigger numbers than those seen on 25 January 2011, to make its voice heard. Answering the call issued by a vanguard of young people, known as Tamarod, the nation demanded — and backed its demands with more than 22 million signatures — the removal of the president and the holding of early presidential elections. The Muslim Brotherhood insists on calling this a military coup in the hope of distracting the international community from the truth. Messages to this effect were sent by an assistant of the former president to various European countries as well as the US. And now the Americans are acting under the impression that this is a military coup. The question is whether what happened in Egypt was a military coup or a continuation of a popular revolution is not hard to answer. In fact, under the Egyptian constitution, the army had a duty to do what it did — for the constitution calls upon the military to protect the people, the state and national security. The people's revolution in Egypt, which spread like wild fire across every part of the country, was a result of the Muslim Brotherhood's monopolisation of power. It was also due to the Muslim Brotherhood's failure to achieve any development or resolve any of the problems facing the nation. Of the 100-day plan that the president announced upon his election, nothing was achieved. Meanwhile, Egypt's regional standing deteriorated and the country was becoming increasingly helpless in the face of multiple threats to its national security. This failure is what Tamarod encapsulated in its petition for change, which became a vote of no confidence on Mohamed Morsi's presidency. It was this vote of no confidence that prompted the army to intervene in support of the nation's will. Also, the army's action followed numerous and consistent threats of violence by the president's supporters. Again, let's not forget that the army's action is in line with Article 194 of the constitution, which states that the Armed Forces are owned by the people and have a duty protect the country, safeguard security and defend national soil. The president ignored the will of the people and spurned all initiative to meet their demands, choosing instead to amplify the Muslim Brotherhood's control of state institutions. He kept up such policies even when it became clear that he was pushing the country to the brink and that the nation was resisting the control of his Brotherhood appointees over various government services. Egypt's public safety was at stake. The irresponsible actions of the Muslim Brotherhood and its supporters and their threats to use violence against the opposition had to be stopped. Even the state's institutions, including the judiciary, the Supreme Constitutional Court and the police, were not safe from the Brotherhood's ire. Those who wonder whether Egypt went through a military coup or not should take a look at recent events across Egypt's various governorates, including those of the south. They should also keep an eye on who is running the interim period, and on the current roadmap that the nation aspires to achieve. The roadmap Egypt intends to pursue aims at promoting national reconciliation, adopting a new constitution and holding parliamentary and presidential elections. The nation is once again rejecting the control of any single faction over the state. Egypt aspires to become a land of lawfulness and democracy, a land in which human rights are respected, equality is guaranteed for all citizens and social justice is upheld. This is not a power struggle. This is not a military coup. It is a people's revolution. The writer is secretary-general of the Egyptian Organisation for Human Rights.
