CAIRO: When reading the official transcripts of the investigation held with Egypt's toppled president, I had nothing to do but to be in a state of disbelief. Hosni Mubarak's answers varied from “I don't know” to “this is not true.” Out of the blue, the president himself had no idea about what was going on in Egypt? He didn't know about the details of weapons' bargains? Neither does he know about the procedures of such deals. Even when he was asked about exporting gas to Israel and the estimated losses of about $714.87 million due to the cheap price that was agreed upon, he said “concerning this issue, those taking over the petroleum sector are whom should be asked.” Every single operation happened he blamed the direct entity taking over it for causing that damage, as if the president doesn't exist, or his job is merely symbolic. Now we find the defense lacks any justified responses. Short answers seem to dominate. But what the president seemingly doesn't know is a fatal mistake, a folly. Because if he knew it and he was silent about it, that's a mistake. And if he didn't know as he claimed, then the mistake becomes a folly and his guilt doubles. I'm not going to judge a person who is still on trial, but if all the sectors and officials in his era have done these fatal mistakes, why did he kept silent all this period? Why didn't he choose the right persons who are known for efficiency and not corrupted as they turned out to be? Why does he insist not to take on any responsibility? Why he is laying on his bed in his fancy suite while other prisoners suffer from the tough mattress even though they have not committed crimes more disastrous than the ones Mubarak did? I think there should be a clause in the Constitution that punishes any official if he simply says “I don't know” or “this is not among my specialization.” And as for the president, let's suppose that he really doesn't know all of this, he doesn't know the wealth of his sons, neither does he know that there were protesters killed by the brutal police under his authority, nor does he know what the procedures of weapons purchases are. Then what does he know? And though they are not small details, what hinders any upcoming president from resorting to this silly answer? The accountability of such a position should make him think one hundred times before claiming that he had no idea about what was going on. Not only this, but he claimed that Mrs. Mubarak has no balances in banks, neither stocks in the stock market, and all what she owns belongs to her inheritance from her parents. So what would he say about her deciding to give away her assets that proved to be illegal? If she herself admitted making use of her position, why is he still defending? Yet more, I have my own comments over the procedure that has been taken with Suzanne Mubarak. If she has decided to give away those illegal assets, she still should be behind bars. Because there should be a deterrence for her and her counterparts who may come in the future and do exactly the same. What hinders them from doing the same and saying “well, if something has been proved, I will give those assets away. If not, I can enjoy them. And in both cases I'm not going to be in jail.” That was the question in my mind all this past period, why Mrs. Mubarak has been released? If there is no deterrence, then we leave an open door for anyone lured by the position to take as much as she can, and eventually she will not lose anything in both cases. Suzanne is free, but the motivation for doing is free too. Who guarantees to us that this is not going to happen again? And yet a very important question too, don't we deserve not only our assets to be back, but the interests on those assets too, that have been accumulated over long years? We need to see justice happen in front of our eyes. It's not only that we want back our stolen assets, but also we need to give a lesson to whomever thinks that he/she can manipulate his/her position. We need to kill any incentive for any upcoming president to cheat our people and steal their money. I think what Mrs. Mubarak has given away is part of my taxation I pay as you exactly pay, but I'm not going to tolerate it. The deficiencies in such decisions are countless. Some people might say, we can let them go but only in case they return our money. This make it seems as if they are still the stronger party, who can run away with their crimes and the money is more like a donation from them. But this is not the case; we have every single right to sue them for causing physical and psychological damage. I'm afraid that I don't know if I can sue the president for not knowing how the country was ruled in a time when he should have been the first one who knew. “I don't know” is no longer a valid answer, Mr. Mubarak. The accountability that you took on your shoulders and the many ministers that you appointed to protect this country didn't make for a second to remind you of the oath you had made? It was more like a formality rather than an honest oath. So, such accountability doesn't end at the word “I have no idea” or “this is not true.” Please, correct us if we are wrong. You barely provided anything. They were such provocative replies that merely underestimated the power given in hand of the president. BM
