While not fully satisfied with the changes in how the upcoming presidential elections will be supervised, judges appear to be softening their earlier stance on boycotting the poll. Mona El-Nahhas investigates Vigorous attempts are being made to ensure that next month's presidential elections are held under complete judicial supervision. During an emergency general assembly held in May, a large group of judges threatened not to supervise the presidential and parliamentary elections unless they were given full control over every stage of the elections process. They set 2 September as the date for their upcoming assembly, during which the judges will make a final decision on whether or not they are going to supervise the elections. At this point, it looks like they will. One reason has to do with the formation of the Presidential Elections Commission, which was established last month by the new presidential elections law regulating the entire electoral process. Playing the role of mediator between judges and the state, the commission -- which includes several judges amongst its members -- has managed to sway judges towards agreeing to supervise. One of the factors that helped change judges' minds is the new regulation mandating greater judicial control over auxiliary polling stations. This will be accomplished by placing several auxiliary stations in one location. The judge on hand will directly control that centralised poll area. In previous [parliamentary] elections, the auxiliary stations were usually located far from the eyes of supervising judges. The judges monitoring the polls will also be asked to sign the backs of citizens' electoral cards to ensure their validity and accuracy. Judges will also be free to walk outside the poll stations and listen to voters' complaints. They will be empowered to shut down stations that feature violations. While praising the new regulations as a positive step towards reform, judges are not completely satisfied. "We asked the commission to stage elections over several days so that the judges' jobs will be much easier," Cairo Judges Club Secretary-General Hisham Geneina told Al-Ahram Weekly. "To have your eyes fixed upon a single ballot, instead of a huge centralised poll area, would guarantee more accuracy." Geneina said he couldn't fathom why "they insisted on elections taking place over just one day. The date chosen by the committee could have very easily been amended, since it was not a sacred date," he said. Judges have also asked the commission to reduce the number of auxiliary stations. The 2000 parliamentary elections featured no more than 15,000 auxiliary stations, said Cassation Court judge Ahmed Mekki. "I think the vast number of auxiliary stations is unjustified. Its sole aim is to make it impossible for judges to have control over them." In previous elections, judges only manned the main poll stations, which constitute just five per cent of the total number. The absence of active judicial supervision over auxiliary stations -- of which there were an estimated 54,000 in last May's referendum on amending article 76 of the constitution to allow for multi-candidate presidential elections -- was due to the fact that there are no more than 8,000 working judges in Egypt in total. That lack of complete judicial supervision in previous polls meant numerous violations were usually reported at the auxiliary stations, which are run by government employees. The violations included multiple voting by the ruling National Democratic Party (NDP), voting in the name of the dead, and preventing opposition supporters from getting to poll stations to cast their votes. The result was forged turnout figures and rigged elections. Although the judges still think the changes are not enough, "we have no choice but to supervise elections. It's our duty imposed by the law and the constitution," Geneina said. According to Mekki, there is no heroism in boycotting elections and "leaving them to forge the results. It's better to take part and expose rigging, if there is any, in front of the public and the entire world." He said judges are "still worried, and are absolutely certain there will be some violations. Yet, we have to be there to register them, as we did following last May's referendum." Last month, the Cairo Judges Club issued a report, entitled Egypt's conscience, in which judges who partially supervised the referendum revealed that the government and police forged results and turnout figures. Photographs and videos taken by judges showed government employees who headed some polling stations filling out ballots themselves -- checking "yes" and excluding ballots of voters who checked "no" -- in empty polling stations. The report challenged the official turnout figure saying the actual turnout at most polling stations was no more than three per cent. Asked how judges aimed to ensure that the referendum scenario would not recur on elections day, Mekki said, "I think things will be different this time, because of the increasing foreign pressure calling on the regime to conduct fair elections." In this connection, Mekki expected that the Interior Ministry's role in the poll would be limited to securing poll stations. The regulations stipulated by the committee were not the only factor that catalysed the change in the judges' attitude. The state's partial response to two of their other demands also played a part. Judges have been calling upon the government for more than a decade to amend the current judicial authority law, which they argue curbs their authority. The draft proposed by the Cairo Judges Club and presented to the Justice Ministry in 1991, recommended that judges be financially independent from the government, and that the justice minister should no longer control the judiciary budget. Instead, the Supreme Council of the Judiciary should take charge of all judges' budgetary and financial affairs. The Supreme Council of the Judiciary should also, by means of the draft, replace the Justice Ministry in evaluating judges' performance. The Supreme Council, according to the draft, should be reformulated to represent the will of judges rather than the will of the government; its members should be elected by the general assemblies of both the appeals and cassation courts. The draft also called for upping the number of judges -- currently seven -- in the council itself. These three long-shelved demands were finally approved by the justice minister, who referred them to the Supreme Council of the Judiciary for an endorsement before being submitted to the People's Assembly. The council, while accepting the first two demands, stood firmly against the third demand regarding its reformulation. "Of course, as an appointed council, it will not be in its favour to have its members elected," Mekki said. He promised that the council's attitude would be on next month's general assembly agenda.
