It is around constitutional reform that all opposition forces in Egypt coalesce in consensus, writes Mona Makram Ebeid* Egyptian political life has for a long time been monopolised by an over-dominant ruling party. This monopoly over the political arena has been recently challenged by the emergence of nascent protest movements whose viewpoints have converged on an ambitious constitutionalist agenda, notably a demand for the amendment of the undemocratic portions of the 1971 constitution. The military regime that took over since 1952 left behind a society devoid of any socially based political power centres, with the resulting concentration of power in the presidency -- the only real political institution. Successive Egyptian regimes have tended to concentrate power in the executive while manipulating the judiciary and the legislature to legitimise their policies, thereby restricting if not eliminating the autonomy of both. Faced with growing criticism at home and abroad, the current government has responded with some political reform measures in the last few years in an apparent attempt to liberalise the political system within carefully controlled guidelines that will preserve the control of the National Democratic Party for the foreseeable future. The constitutional amendment of Article 76, calling for popular election of the president, was the most potentially significant change in the political system. However, the stringent parameters established for candidate eligibility totally precluded true competition for Egypt's highest office. In view of the virulent criticism of this article, the president, in a surprising move a couple of months ago, has revisited the amended law to encourage more participation from legalised political parties, though not movements, thus excluding the Muslim Brotherhood which has been denied registration as a party. During his election campaign, the president pledged to introduce substantial constitutional and political reforms that touched on most of the major demands in opposition platforms. He committed himself to replacing the quarter-century old state of emergency with a more specific antiterrorism law, amending the constitution to limit the powers of the presidency, putting more oversight capacity in the hands of the judiciary and legislature, delegating more authority to his cabinet and initiating a new round of national dialogue and reform. However, experience has shown that the chief lawmakers -- the Peoples' Assembly -- are also the chief lawbreakers! Priority action that reform activists are presently demanding from parliament, which will begin its new session in November, includes: ï The amendment of Article 77 of the constitution, which allows the president an unlimited number of six-year terms, to limit presidential terms to four years and to establish a limit of two consecutive terms. Some opposition groups, notably the Muslim Brotherhood, have called for a parliamentary system with a much weaker presidency detached from executive authority. ï Strengthening the legislature that generally does not draft legislation. While the constitution gives the power to draft laws to both parliament and the president, in practice the executive branch generates nearly all legislation with the parliament's role almost exclusively reactive. Further, Article 86 of the constitution gives the Peoples' Assembly authority over the "general budget of the state" while Article 115 specifies that the Assembly have no right to modify the budget without government approval. ï Changing procedures for forming political parties. Until now the formation of political parties is regulated by the Political Parties Committee, which allows the ruling party to preserve its prerogative to nip potential competitors in the bud (the Wasat and Karama parties have been denied licensing). The law also maintains bans on parties with a basis in religion (effectively barring the Muslim Brotherhood) and those deemed not to "represent an addition to political life." More liberal licensing of political parties is necessary to remove the ruling party's stranglehold and allow new parties to emerge more naturally. Egypt may choose to maintain the ban on overtly religious parties but needs to find a formula for Islamist participation within the system. ï Passing a new law for the judiciary. The Judges' Club remains in a state of confrontation with the government over its demand for consideration of a proposed law that would give the judiciary full fiscal autonomy as well as full judicial independence. ï Reducing and simplifying regulations for non-governmental organisations. The 2002 NGO Law 82 needs thorough revision to lift excessively intrusive licensing and regulatory powers of the Minister of Social Solidarity. ï Revising the current electoral law. A proportional representation system could make elections in Egypt fairer, to the extent that it would allow better representation of the society, (women, non Muslims, professionals, etc...) as it would promote competition among political groups rather than among individual candidates. It would allow new blood to enter politics and create new dynamics. ï Lifting the state of emergency. The presidents' promise to end the state of emergency has wide ranging implications for political, civil and human rights. According to Article 148 of the constitution, the president has the right to declare a state of emergency for a "limited period" and only when national security is imperilled by war, the threat of war, or natural disasters. The Emergency Law of 1958 hampers freedom of expression and association in multiple ways. Authorities may carry out wiretaps and searches without warrants, censor the media, detain suspects without charge for prolonged periods, refer civilians to military or state security courts for trial, and prohibit public gatherings such as demonstrations or rallies. Such regulations create a climate of fear and uncertainty. Lifting the state of emergency and abolishing the 1958 law altogether would be an important step towards effective civil liberties and free political life. The danger, however, is that the new law on counterterrorism will incorporate many aspects of emergency law into the regular penal code. Constitutional legitimacy and ordinary laws must be reinstated because reform and a state of emergency are mutually exclusive. ï Many laws that hamper civil liberties need significant revision. As an example, the 1993 Syndicates Law needs amendment to remove provisions requiring unrealistically high quorums for elections. ï The 1995 Press Law allowing imprisonment of journalists convicted of libel should be abolished. It is noteworthy that the president had issued a bill -- not yet a law -- prohibiting the incarceration of journalists. ï Punishment for the torture of political dissidents needs to be greatly strengthened and existing laws against torture need to be enforced in a decisive manner. ï The establishment of a National Council for Human Rights in 2003 was an important step regarding political, civil, and human rights. However, not being an independent institution but a semi-governmental one has severely hampered it from taking on the government directly. Indeed, it acts more like an advisory body to the government. Its annual report called for ending the state of emergency and documented many complaints of torture in prison and police stations. As a result, it was virulently and unjustifiably attacked in the government press. One important effect of its creation, however, is that it has legitimised political activism by civil society groups. It is hoped that they will become more effective advocates of political reform than they have been until now. Although calls for reform and respecting human rights, be they civil, political or social, have strengthened in recent years, they continue to be ignored by the authorities. Regardless, civil society activists and reformers in opposition parties as well as in the ruling party must continue to press the issue and influence how quickly the president follows up on his promises to encourage meaningful political reform and avert radical or violent change. * The writer is a former member of parliament and distinguished lecturer in political science at The American University in Cairo.
