Amending Article 76 may be a step in the right direction but much more must be done, writes Amr El-Choubaki* Having agreed to postponing any amendment of the constitution and political reforms until after the presidential elections opposition parties watched in shock as President Mubarak told the nation that he wanted Article 76 of the constitution amended and would submit a proposal to that effect to the People's Assembly. The latter, everyone knows, has no option but to approve. The amendment is a major step forward in the long and winding journey towards democracy since it will allow more than one candidate to run for president. For the first time ever multiple candidates, regardless of their real chances, will be allowed to compete for the country's top office. Ironically, the amendment was proposed by the president at a time when the opposition parties had all but given up on immediate reforms. The regime, for once, took a step that transcended the expectations of the opposition. It might be argued the regime did so due to pressure from activists at home and the US abroad. But whether credit goes to the regime or its opponents reform is finally on the march. Many problems lie ahead. First of all, the amendment pits the state party against an all but absent and crisis-ridden legal opposition. For a non-partisan individual to run for president, he or she will have to secure a minimum number of signatures of elected officials in local and parliamentary bodies. This is problematic, since these elected bodies were formed following elections in which only one-tenth of the nation's eligible voters took part. As a result the competition will be between the regime and the aging section of the opposition, while the younger and more dynamic section of the opposition will be left out. How can one imagine a credible rivalry between the National Democratic Party (NDP), supported by the state's administrative and security apparatus, and an opposition that was happy to put reform aside until after the referendum? How can existing parties -- led by profiteers who sell pilgrimage visas and rent out their parties and papers to the highest bidder -- provide credible opposition to the government? How can one trust a system in which the government and the opposition have conspired to let an aging generation run the show? How can one trust a system in which the younger generation's only chance to speak is through the NDP Policies Committee? Parties that, however imperfectly, represent the younger generation are still kept out of the race. The leader of the liberal Al-Ghad (tomorrow) Party is in prison for reasons no one understands. The Nasserist Al-Karama (dignity) Party and Islamic Al-Wasat (centre) Party are still outside the official political scene, harassed and/or denied licences. How can a political movement of the calibre of Al-Karama remain ostracised by the regime? This is a movement with a clear political discourse, parliamentary representation and popular following. Why can it not compete for power, when bogus parties with virtually no popular following can? Spin doctors, diviners and other charlatans inhabit the political scene while Al-Wasat Party, which has solid cultural credentials -- and more women and Christians proportionally than the NDP -- is denied legality. And the reason it is denied any official status is because it is a religious party. This, at a time when Al-Azhar is allowed to censor cultural life in Egypt, punish creativity and hound authors. Amending Article 76 is a definite step forward but it must be followed by other measures that will open up the political arena to fresh competition. The real battle in Egypt is between those who are happy with the by now stagnant status quo, both within government and opposition, and those who want to promote change. The latter have a clear right to operate as legal parties. More articles of the constitution need to be changed, including Article 77, so as to allow the president a maximum of two six-year terms in office. We need a revitalised political scene, with power changing hands among rivals with clearly stated agendas. We need credible democracy. * The writer is a researcher at Al-Ahram Centre for Political and Strategic Studies.
