CAIRO - On heading to the ballot boxes to vote on March 19 in the referendum on the constitutional amendments, the public knew that they were choosing between a clear timetable presented by the ruling Supreme Council of the Armed Forces for the creation of a new parliament and the election of a new president within six months, and another, unknown way to launch the new Egypt. In other words, most of the people who voted ‘Yes' in the landmark referendum knew that, by September, they would have a new president and parliament, to be followed by a new constitution. A total of 77.2 per cent of the people voted ‘Yes'. They now realise that the endorsed amendments are part of the SCAF's Constitutional Declaration for forming a temporary constitution for the country, until the creation of a new one, a year or more from now. This has amazed the public, especially those who voted against the constitutional amendments, rejecting the former Constitution and calling for making a constitutional statement instead. The latter and others are now wondering whether there will indeed be a constitutional statement after all. Meanwhile, the main opposition to these amendments was on the grounds that the SCAF insisted on electing a new president within six months and holding parliamentary elections within two months. These opponents, mostly educated people and revolutionaries, believe Egyptians need to be given more time to form new political parties prior to the elections, so that the new parliament will not contain the same old faces from the National Democratic Party and the Muslim Brotherhood, the country's most organised political movement. The SCAF has now postponed the parliamentary election till September, giving the revolutionaries five or six months to start forming their parties and to gain more ground in different governorates prior to the elections, something they kept calling for. The SCAF, having forced its vision on society, is apparently offering some compromises to regain the trust of the revolutionaries and try to bridge the gap and the division in society in the aftermath of the referendum. Nevertheless, we might now need to reach an agreement over the other controversial issues surrounding the presidential elections and the electing of the constitutional committee, before we do anything else.
