This weekend's episode of a presidential-judicial power struggle gave rise, on the popular and political front, to arguments about the boundaries of the executive authority and judiciary reform. Questions were raised concerning the repeated acquittal of security officers and symbols of the old regime in trials related to the violent incidents of the January 25 Revolution. A further row erupted when President Morsi appointed Prosecutor General Abdel Meguid Mahmoud as ambassador to the Vatican in a bid to contain public anger over a court ruling that acquitted former Mubarak officials accused of involvement in killing revolutionaries on February 2 last year. Abdel Meguid insisted on remaining in office, a right granted by the judicial law. Lengthy negotiations ensued and Morsi withdrew the ambassadorial nomination. The whole process shows clearly that the president was ill advised from the very beginning. Abdel Meguid's removal has been one of the revolutionaries' demands since the uprising; far-reaching change was meant to include the departure of top officials. We dare say that the judiciary, which has remained the country's shield in historic events for more than 20 years, undoubtedly needs to be reformed from within. Such changes should take place via legal channels, as opposed to the case of the Prosecutor General, who is to remain in office until his retirement or entitled to resign out of his own free will. The current law governing this appointment might lack logic, since the president appoints the PG but cannot dismiss him. Until the next parliament hammers out a new law in this regard, the president has no right to act the way he did, although according to a presidential statement the entire matter was caused by a misunderstanding between the two parties. This was the second time that Morsi had to twist around; the first was his decision to reinstall a parliament that had been disbanded by a court ruling. With one eye on the law and the other on revolutionary legitimacy, Morsi seems to have taken confused decisions. The Egyptians, particularly the families of martyrs and those injured during and after the revolution, want to know who is responsible for the lives lost. If those acquitted are truly innocent, then the real perpetrators are still at large and have to be tried. People in the street care little whether the PG or the investigating judges are to blame for the series of acquittals. They only want to see that the martyrs' ultimate sacrifice leads to the implementation of Mohamed el-Zawahri principles of fairness and righteousness.
