It is not the presidential but parliamentary elections that could act as the engine for reform, predicts Hassan Nafaa* Egypt's presidential elections campaign got underway last Wednesday. Should one of the ancients come back from the dead, as in the Quranic parable of the Men in the Cave, I am sure he would be baffled. For all of Egypt's known history the country has been run either by demigods, foreign powers, hereditary monarch or presidents whose rule has been supported by force or else perpetuated through rigged referendums. The idea that Egyptians will now elect their rulers through secret ballot is novel. This must mark the end of time, or so the man who has just come back to life might think. He should not worry. A glance at the list of candidates shows that the whole thing is a charade. Whatever changes have been introduced thus far barely signify as scratches on the surface. Our current president is our next president, and will remain so until further notice. Some hail the elections as a turning point. The wheels of change are in motion, they say, and no one can turn them back. Partial change, we are told, is better than no change. This is an understandable view. But what we must remember is that the decision to hold elections did not emerge in a vacuum. It came as a result of the battle between corrupt and despotic forces intent on defending the status quo and those optimistic for change. This battle is still on and no one can predict the results. We know only that things are likely to get worse before they get better. The elections are significant only insofar as they affect the outcome of the ongoing battle for change. On the face of it the elections represent a victory for the forces opposed to change. But this is only one battle in what will be a long war. Those who are seeking real change now need to weigh their options in the light of current developments. I am sure I am not alone in being disappointed by the list of candidates approved by the Presidential Elections Committee. A country of 70 million people, a country that had a fully fledged liberal system just 60 years ago, a country that has had 25 years of multi-party experience could surly do better, you'd think. The list of candidates is a disgrace. It is one more sign that Egypt's political life remains shackled. Why couldn't Egypt come up with a more credible list of candidates? With all due respect to the candidates challenging Hosni Mubarak for the presidency the whole thing is laughable. The candidacy of Wafd leader Noaman Gomaa leavened the charade but it did not eliminate it. Gomaa's presence gives the elections some vitality, but hardly enough. Most Egyptians believe the elections are a referendum in different guise. The list of candidates highlights the crisis that has infected the political system, both government and opposition. The list is the direct outcome of the National Democratic Party's (NDP) fiddling with Article 76, and the way the official opposition reacted to that fiddling. The NDP showed itself willing to fight change tooth and nail, and without keeping much of an eye on the legality of its actions. The reaction of the official opposition parties showed them to be hobbled beyond redemption and unfit to lead. The manner in which Article 76 was amended reveals that the NDP is not only opposed to political reform but is determined to use whatever means at its disposal to prevent it. In amending Article 76 and introducing clauses that have no parallel in any constitution in any other country the NDP clearly showed that it will not allow free presidential elections, now or anytime soon. The NDP insisted on submitting the amended article in advance to the Constitutional Court in a move that, according to legal expert Ahmed Kamal Abul-Magd, "radically changes Constitutional Court procedure". "Should the government continue to consult the Constitutional Court in advance about the constitutionality of draft laws submitted by the government or parliament," warns Abul-Magd, "it could well lead to the closure of the Constitutional Court." The NDP is determined to pursue its political goals regardless of the cost. It is willing to meddle with the constitution and undermine the Constitutional Court whose job is to assess the constitutionality of laws after they are passed, not before, and to judge whether their implementation is done in a constitutional manner or not. Many had hoped the official opposition parties and the emerging forces of civil society would rally together. The Wafd's decision to contest the elections dashed that hope. Whatever the Wafd's reasons for breaking ranks and regardless of any short-term gains it may make the real beneficiaries of the party's decision to contest the elections are those opposed to change. Mubarak is running against nine candidates, seven of them unknown. The other two, Noaman Gomaa and Ayman Nour, are competing for the opposition vote, though they represent only their own parties. There is no "opposition candidate" as such. Both Nour and Gomaa have drawbacks as candidates. Because of the circumstances surrounding his candidacy Gomaa is viewed unfavourably by many in the opposition and civil society. He is seen as someone who stabbed the opposition in the back, acted opportunistically and cannot be trusted. Nour is a newcomer, and the way the US reacted to his incarceration hardly helped his cause. So far he has failed to get his political message across and seems driven by personal considerations. He appears unable to draw a line between courage and recklessness and many find his rhetoric pompous. I believe that many voters will not go to the polls. Since Mubarak is going to win anyway, why should they? Had the elections been more serious the turnout would be higher and many of those staying at home may well have voted for Mubarak. As for those who will vote the majority will opt for Mubarak, either because of links with the state apparatus and the NDP, because of the pro-Mubarak stance of the official media, or simply because they believe Mubarak is the best of the available candidates. Those who will not vote for Mubarak will vote for either Nour or Gomaa, if only in protest. It is my guess that Nour will win most of this protest vote though it remains possible that a large number of voters will leave their ballots blank or otherwise spoil them. I doubt if civil society groups are expecting any surprises. The presidential elections are not going to make much difference. But the parliamentary elections, due in November, remain vital. Civil society groups must get ready for this challenge. They need to close ranks and forge alliances capable of bringing about change. The country needs more reforms, including an equitable social contract and a new constitution. The rest can wait. * The writer is a professor of political science at Cairo University.
