Ghad Party Chairman Ayman Nour tells Shaden Shehab that he is not just an election prop As a journalist, lawyer, and member of parliament, 41-year-old Ayman Nour has always been a headline grabber. Before founding the Ghad Party last October, Nour was a leading member of the liberal Wafd Party. After a major dispute with Wafd Chairman Noaman Gomaa, Nour left the Wafd in 2001. Now both he and Gomaa are running against President Hosni Mubarak in next month's presidential poll. Currently on trial for forgery, Nour's most recent political manoeuvrings have attracted much global attention, including from the White House. Nour says the case against him -- which is scheduled to resume on 25 September, several weeks after the elections -- was fabricated by the state to ruin his career. Political analysts of all stripes are saying the presidential elections will be a charade. You have criticised President Hosni Mubarak along the same lines. Why, then, are you running when most people would argue the winner is already known? The Ghad Party does not take part in a battle unless our goal is winning. We reject the idea of taking part just to be represented. We are in this battle because we know that Egyptians want change. It's our way of showing respect for those who don't want to vote for Mubarak. There needs to be a serious candidate who they can cast their vote for. We do have our reservations and fears regarding the election process, especially considering all the discouraging signals and various violations that we have seen, but that does not mean we see it as a charade. We see it as a serious battle, and want to win. Victory is not impossible. Even if there are violations... Even with all the problems, we are capable of winning. Not just winning, but scoring an overwhelming victory. If the problems go too far, like if they throw the ballot boxes into the sea or something like that, then we are not talking about elections in the first place. At this point I am assuming there will be [real elections] on 7 September. What makes you so sure? Judicial supervision offers some kind of guarantee, especially with each judge directly controlling a centralised poll area that will include several auxiliary stations. That's a great guarantee. I believe the next three weeks will provide important indicators of what will happen on 7 September. If we are able to hold meetings without interventions and obstacles, if we are able to obtain proper voter lists at the right time (which should have been done by now), if each voter signs their name after voting, like we've requested and is stipulated by the 1956 political participation law, then there will be real elections. We cannot jump to conclusions right now. The possibility of a charade is large, but we won't quit just because we're suspicious. We have to take part to prove it, one way or another. Let me be frank -- if the Ghad Party, and especially the Ghad Party, does not take part in this battle, the existing regime will be able to win without any rigging, because the others apparently do not have serious intentions [of winning]. The Wafd Party, for instance, is not running to win, but to split the votes of those who don't want Hosni Mubarak between myself and Noaman Gomaa. If you become president, what's the first thing you'll do, especially considering the drastic political and economic situation you say Egypt is in? It's not as difficult as we think. It might seem difficult because the Egyptian system is very complex. First of all, exceptional laws, emergency laws, and laws restricting freedom will be abolished immediately because we don't need them. As will unnecessary bodies like the state security prosecutor. I will serve for a two-year transitional period, during which a new constitution will be drafted. [This transitional phase] will include a national coalition government from people across the political spectrum. Afterwards, new presidential elections will be staged, without crippling regulations and obstacles. The situation in Egypt is very bad but not impossible [to reform]. Many of our chronic problems can be dealt with via clear decisions. President Mubarak has vowed to implement a package of political reforms that you and the opposition have been calling for. Don't you think that has weakened your position? If he hasn't managed to do what he is promising now for the last 24 years, he wont be able to do so in the next six years either... He was the one not implementing what he is promising now. I will only believe him if he apologises, and says, 'I was wrong for not doing all that over the last 24 years.' The current president is responsible for the emergency law and the detention of around 100,000 Egyptians; including some who have been in prison for more than 13 years. Mubarak's supporters would say those measures were necessary for the country's stability. Detentions and violations of freedom and human rights must not be the price of stability. Many of the [terrible] things that have taken place since 1981 occurred with the emergency law in effect; nothing worse would have happened if it hadn't been in effect. The promise to reform only comes from [true] reformers; before promising to reform, you have to first admit who caused the mistakes of the last 24 years. Are you trying to get the Muslim Brotherhood's backing? When you met them this week, was there any sort of deal being discussed? We do not strike deals. We have a clear vision. I am running to become president of the Republic of Egypt. The Brotherhood are Egyptians, the Copts are Egyptians. I want to approach all Egyptians -- whether they are representing themselves or a syndicate, or a group. Today [Monday], I have a meeting with the communists. My duty is to request support. It is not about making deals; it is the normal exercise of politics. But by asking for their support you naturally have to offer something in return? And they themselves do not deny their desire to rule... It's a voter's right to ask a candidate what he will do for them. If, just for the sake of argument, they do rule for a couple of years, what would be so wrong with that? There is nothing wrong with their running for president; if they did, they would either win or lose. It's the public that will decide; why should the present regime deny the public that right? It's important that they come up with a platform that respects the rights and religions of others -- that's what I told them: that if you do come to power some day, don't close the door on other [political] forces so that rotation of power is via ballot boxes. Don't you think your trial has actually helped you -- by turning you into a hero for some? There is no doubt that it did have a media impact, making people sympathise because it's obvious that the case is fabricated. But I had supporters even before the trial; as a result of the many times I have defended the public's interest in parliament for the past decade. At the same time, the case has done me great harm. I am running for president and it is a psychological burden. It casts a shadow, and that's exactly what the government wanted. How does your platform differ from Noaman Gomaa's? You are both liberal, and you yourself were a Wafdist? How will the average citizen differentiate? Egyptians can tell the difference between what's real and fake. Things are already sorted out -- there are people who are supporting Hosni Mubarak and will vote for him, and people who are against Mubarak who will most probably vote for me rather than the rest of the candidates. It's clear that the public sees us as the real alternative to the NDP. If you are so sure that people who are against Mubarak will vote for you, why hasn't a movement like Kifaya supported you? We will meet them very soon. I am sure that if they don't boycott the elections, they will support me. Up till now they are leaning towards boycotting, but if they don't, then they will support me. By the way, I am not against people who boycott -- we have to respect their vision and reasons -- although I don't think that the elections should be boycotted. Are you going to accept the LE500,000 government subsidy for candidates ? We did not refuse it. We do refuse government financing of political parties, though, because it is not stipulated by any law, and is more like a bribe. But the LE500,000 for candidates is mandated by the constitution and the presidency elections law. A bigger problem you might have is convincing people to vote in the first place. How are you dealing with that? You're right -- 50 years of rigging and oppression have made people lose faith. But if there is a second round, then the entire picture will be completely different. People then will realise that this is a real race. They will start to feel that their votes do count, and at that point, you will see how everybody will vote against the NDP's candidate.
