In the 100-member Constituent Assembly dominated by the Muslim Brotherhood and its allies that drafted the now suspended constitution in December, the former head of the Press Syndicate, Mamdouh Al-Wali stood helpless while appealing for changes in articles related to the press. All his requests were turned down by Speaker Hossam Al-Ghiriani, who simply told Al-Wali to “sit down”. The majority of the Press Syndicate board members at that time had agreed that all journalist members of the assembly should pull out after it became clear that the Brotherhood-dominated body would not give in to any of their long-standing demands to guarantee freedom of expression, ban the practice of closing down newspapers, cancel laws that allow the imprisonment of reporters, or the formation of truly independent bodies to oversee the state-owned media. Al-Wali, known for his close links to the Brotherhood, was the only journalist who refused to withdraw from the assembly. That has not been the case in the newly created 50-member committee appointed by interim President Adli Mansour after the popular revolt against former president Mohamed Morsi, a senior Muslim Brotherhood member, on 30 June. “We nearly got all what we wanted,” said Gamal Fahmi, a member of the Press Syndicate board, after the Freedom and Rights Committee approved the draft articles related to the media, both print and television, on Monday. The articles would then go to a vote by the full 50-member committee that is supposed to conclude its work in 60 days since its formation three weeks ago, or by 9 November. Article 48 in the new draft constitution states, without limitations or references to restrictions by law, that “freedom of thinking and opinion are guaranteed. Each human being has the right to express their opinion in the form of speech, writing, or any other forms of expression or publication.” It has been a long standing tradition in Egyptian constitutions, specifically since 1971, to include democratic principles, but then limit them with caveats such as “within the framework of the law” or “in a manner that does not harm national security”, and in the case of the Brotherhood's constitution, “without violating the general values of society”. That usually left the door wide open to set restrictions on the same guaranteed freedoms afterwards when the constitution was translated into laws. Draft Article 49 stated that “freedom of the press, print, paper publications, television, radio and electronic media is guaranteed; and Egyptians, individuals or institutions, have the right to own and publish newspapers, television channels, radio stations and electronic media. Newspapers should be published following a notification, as regulated by law and in a way that does not infringe on that right. The law should regulate the ownership and establishment of radio stations, television channels, electronic newspapers and others.” In 2006, under ousted President Hosni Mubarak, the Press Syndicate fought a hard battle to prohibit the closure of newspapers, even upon a court order, in case reporters or editors were charged with libel and slander. Journalists argued that punishment should be individual to the reporter or editor who committed the violation and not a collective punishment for all the journalists, administrators and workers in that publication. The Brotherhood's 2012 constitution reinstated the possibility of closing down newspapers “following a court order”. Now, draft Article 50 reinstated the victory journalists achieved in 2006, stating: “Imposing censorship on Egyptian newspapers and media is prohibited by any means, and they cannot be confiscated, suspended or closed down. Censorship might be imposed, as an exception, in times of war.” The most controversial issue that was subject to lengthy debate for years was the imprisonment of journalists in publication offences. This was also narrowed down to a great extent in the new draft constitution. Journalists have long argued that publication offences should not be punished by imprisonment, as the case is in most Third World countries, and that punishment should be limited to reasonable financial penalties. However, other legal experts argued that since the law allowed imprisonment for regular citizens indicted for libel and slander, journalists cannot be an exception. The same draft Article 50 stated that “publication crimes cannot be punished by imprisonment. However, in cases of crimes that involves individual honour, incitement of violence, or discrimination against citizens, the law should determine the penalty.” “It was impossible to ban the practice of imprisonment of journalists totally,” said Karem Mahmoud, a member of the Press Syndicate board. “Inciting violence or sectarian strife cannot be seen as part of freedom of expression. This is a crime,” Mahmoud told Al-Ahram Weekly. He added that most cases filed against journalists in the past were not related to honour, inciting violence or sectarian strife, and “were filed mostly by government officials whom the media criticised or accused of corruption.” Considering that the government in Egypt owns the majority of print publications, plus dozens of television and radio channels, making them fall under its heavy influence, journalists were keen to include clear language in the new constitution, stating that “the state guarantees the independence of press establishments and other media it owns of all authorities and political parties, in a way that guarantees that they reflect all opinions, political trends and social interests, and assures balance in addressing public opinion through them.” The articles approved by the Freedoms and Rights Committee, upon recommendation from the Press Syndicate, also called for the formation of three independent bodies to oversee government and private media in Egypt: the Supreme Authority for the Press and Media; the National Press Council; and the National Media Council. While the draft constitution repeatedly referred to those three councils as independent, it would be left to the law to determine who would appoint their members and their composition, leaving the door open for controversy and heated debates. “We made it clear in our discussions that those councils must be truly independent, and those who would pick up their members would be representing society and not the state or the parliament,” said Fahmi of the Press Syndicate. “We suffered for decades after allowing the parliament, regardless of which party dominated it, to appoint editors and board chairmen for newspapers. We need to get out of this circle and establish true democracy by allowing the newly created independent bodies to take such decisions,” Fahmi added.
