By Salama A Salama Some well-intentioned people are under the impression that the opposition parties wasted a chance when they discontinued dialogue with the ruling party and took no part in formulating legal amendments that have been promoted as ushering in political reform. Had the opposition parties been more forthcoming with proposals, we are told, the government would have listened to their views and accepted their advice. And this, it is said with tedious regularity, would have been more useful than marching in the streets chanting anti- government slogans. That, at least, is what supporters of the ruling party say now that the process of legal amendments is almost over. Unfortunately, the amendment of Article 76 and subsequent legislation, including the political parties law, throws doubt on the sincerity of such arguments. With or without dialogue the public has yet to see any evidence that the National Democratic Party (NDP) actually wants change. The NDP was perhaps hoping that the other parties would stop quibbling and accept its point of view. That, understandably, didn't happen, and now we are left with an amended Article 76, and a presidential elections law that with the best will in the world can be described as cosmetic, and without it as disfiguring. Much bickering may have taken place but little has been resolved. Electoral rolls have not been vetted and voters remain unsure whether their votes will make any difference. Those who rewrote the exercise of political rights law appear to be under the impression that penalties for those who don't participate will be enough to get voters to the polling stations. NDP parliamentarians, for no obvious reason, have opposed the use of transparent ballot boxes. They also opposed the formation of an elections committee that is not under the justice minister, though he is just a government employee. Many, including myself, will decline to vote if they sense that fraud is a possibility. The political climate may have undergone some slight improvement with the disappearance of huge numbers of security forces from the streets but even this may not last. No one knows yet if their disappearance is due to some real desire to refurbish Egypt's reputation and shake off its image as a police state or if it is in response to foreign advice. Whatever the motive, the move is hardly enough to reassure voters. We've just witnessed how elections were conducted in Lebanon and Iran. Large numbers of people turned out to vote, without heavy police deployment and without the suspicion of fraud. Lebanon has undergone a grinding crisis since Rafik Al-Hariri's assassination and the Syrian withdrawal. Yet it was able to carry out free elections and has put together a parliament that is well-balanced and representative of the country's entire political gamut. Iran, a country Washington would have loved to brand as undemocratic, exhibited a similar high level of integrity. Polling stations were packed with voters who chose from among seven presidential candidates and the government did not lift a finger to tip the balance in favour of any particular candidate. The Iranian people, like the Lebanese, showed themselves to be vibrant and open to change. No boycott was carried out by any political group in either country. On the contrary, all forces and parties took part in a fair contest. The Egyptian people have the right to minimum political and legislative guarantees that elections, both presidential and parliamentary, will be free and fair. Egyptians are entitled to vote without fear, fraud or intimidation.
