Doaa El-Bey and Gamal Nkrumah cover the climatic approach of Egypt's presidential elections and the new Saudi-Bahrain axis Newspapers noted with relief that the presidential elections would be held on schedule. A ruling was passed last week by a lower administrative court suspending presidential elections set for 23 and 24 May because of administrative errors, namely that the law does not give the Presidential Elections Commission (PEC) ultimate powers to call for elections. Al-Ahram on Sunday stated 'Supreme Administrative Court rules presidential elections on time' . Al-Masry Al-Youm bannered 'Presidential race sidesteps trap set by lower administrative court'. Al-Wafd wrote 'Supreme Administrative Court saves presidential elections' and Al-Shorouk on Monday quoted a judicial source saying parliament cannot amend the law of the constitutional court. Newspapers also looked at the mini cabinet reshuffle by Prime Minister Kamal El-Ganzouri late last week. Al-Akhbar on Monday had 'New deal between parliament and government following reshuffle'. Looking at the presidential elections, the editorial of the official daily Al-Ahram pointed to the criteria and concept according to which the people will choose the president. The long historical experience of the Egyptian people, the editorial said, contributed to their awareness of the importance of developing their country. And that awareness was present during the 25 January Revolution. The revolution, the editorial added, did not only aim to topple an old regime, but also to build a new society in which values like liberty, democracy and social justice reign. In that context, people realise the importance of the new president. Thus, they will be very careful in choosing the man who would realise their ambitions in developing their country and providing it with its basic needs. "People understand that the next president will rule the state of law and democracy. He should believe in the rotation of power as the core of democracy and political and social development. And according to these concepts, the people will select their president," the edit concluded. Kamel El-Ashri questioned how the ruling military council can state that there is no president without a constitution and in the meantime the presidential elections will not be postponed until the constitution is drafted. Given that the constitution cannot be written before the presidential elections, then there must be a catch. The catch, according to El-Ashri, is simply a surprise by the ruling military council; be it a few articles to be added to the constitutional declaration, or an annex to the declaration or a new constitutional declaration altogether. However, El-Ashri ruled out the last option because of its complexities. The other question El-Ashri raised is when that step would come. He expected it to be declared after the first round of the presidential elections and before the run-off because that would benefit the ruling council in two ways -- it will know where the election is heading and second, the run-off will most probably be between an Islamist candidate and one from another trend. Disclosing extra articles in the constitutional declaration at that time would be welcomed by the two trends because each one would be concerned that the other would monopolise authority if given absolute powers. That step would herald the start of a transitional period, which according to the writer has not started yet. "There will not be a genuine balance of power except after the emergence of a strong civil trend that would change the rule of the game," El-Ashri concluded in the independent daily Al-Shorouk. Mahmoud Khalil described the present election scene as "between earth and heaven". The programmes of the candidates, the slogans they raise and the whole scene fits somewhere in between. "The candidates give the voters strange promises that can send them to heaven. But these promises prove to be shallow when one tries to apply them on the ground," Khalil wrote in the independent daily Al-Masry Al-Youm. Candidate Hamdeen Sabahi, Khalil explained, promised to provide decent living standards to all Egyptians in 100 days, Ahmed Shafik pledged to uproot thuggery in 24 hours and Amr Moussa stated that he could resolve all of Egypt's economic problems via telephone. Those candidates, Khalil said, claim that the solutions to all problems are available given there is a will and they say they have the will. Other candidates are described as heavenly or holy like. Mohamed Mursi, for example, promised a blissful life once Sharia law is applied. The writer applied the same theory to the way PEC runs the elections. "The constitutional declaration came to emphasise the heavenly nature of PEC whose decision cannot be questioned. The parliament tried to bring it down from that sublime position by the disenfranchisement law but failed. In his conclusion, Khalil wrote the revolution would stay lost between earth and heaven until the people bring it down safely to earth. However, if the present rulers decided otherwise, the soul of the revolution would descend to heaven. Alaa Uraibi wrote the rulings passed by the Supreme Administrative Court regarding the presidential elections and referring the disenfranchisement law to the Constitutional Court shed light on a dangerous issue "that was overlooked by many of us -- why legal experts differ in interpreting laws. Uraibi ascribed the differences to either a defect in the wording, a deficiency in the ability of some experts to analyse or the disparity in political interests and culture. Uraibi highlighted the difference over Article 60 of the Constitutional Declaration to support his argument. The article outlined the procedures to elect the constituent assembly to draft the new constitution. The first interpretation adopted by most MPs stated that the members of the assembly would be elected from members of one of the houses of parliament. However, Uraibi added, other legal experts emphasised that the assembly members should be from outside the houses of parliament. That difference was extensively covered by the newspapers, satellite channels and even moved to Tahrir Square. It was settled by a court which ruled in favour of the second interpretation. Another legal battle erupted between the Islamist trend which opposes referring the disenfranchisement law to the Constitutional Court and minority groups who are in favour of the decision. The two examples proved that the difference in interpretation is mainly due to a difference in political interests. The Islamists in both cases, Uraibi elaborated in Al-Wafd, the mouthpiece of the opposition Wafd Party, interpreted the two situations according to their own interests and political agendas. That fact prompted the writer to warn from the laws issued by the present parliament. He called on the ruling military council not to ratify any of these laws and wait until the next parliament. A few writers commented on the minor government reshuffle. Mohi Abdel-Ghaffar noted that finally the prime minister surrendered to parliament and the Freedom and Justice Party (FJP) by reshuffling his government. However, he described the comedown as being victorious because it was a minor change. The strange thing, Abdel-Ghaffar wrote in the official daily Al-Akhbar, is that El-Ganzouri sacked three ministers who never caused trouble and kept other minister who did, including Faiza Abul-Naga and Gouda Abdel-Khaleq. "The government reshuffle proved that we have not learnt anything about democracy and that we still have a long way to go before understanding its principles," he wrote. The reshuffle Abdel-Ghaffar concluded did not serve any purpose except to appease the FJP and the speaker of parliament who suspended the parliamentary session until the reshuffle.
