SOME five months ago, the revolutionary presidential candidates failed to reach the run-off in the presidential elections. The Egyptian citizens, especially those that backed the revolution and did not belong to any of the Islamists movements including the Muslim Brotherhood (MB), were in a great dilemma in choosing between the two candidates. Neither fulfilled their aspirations of launching a new phase of civil democratic rule of the country. Herein, the different political civil parties and even ordinary citizens found themselves with the bitter choice of voting for Ahmed Shafiq, the final premier of president Hosni Mubarak or Mohamed Morsi. Morsi was the candidate of the Muslim Brotherhood, the group, which, although it had not planned for the revolution nor participated in its early days, was still considered as a partner in the revolution at a later stage. The result of the presidential run-off was the victory of Mohammed Morsi with 51 per cent of the elections because of the last minute support some influential revolutionary factions showed towards him. However, other revolutionary powers could not make this compromise and choose either to fully boycott the process or negatively participate in it by heading to the ballot boxes to spoil their ballot papers, expressing their refusal of both candidates. I was one of those who advocated this second choice despite well knowing that it would not change having one of these two unacceptable candidates named as the first elected president of Egypt. At the time, writing in this corner, I advised citizens who voted in the first round of the elections for candidates other than these two men to take this approach to form a strong opposition front to help protect the revolutionary principles. However, the country suffered fierce polarisation, forcing most civil revolutionary powers to make the bitter choice between supporting a religious fascist regime or a civil one belonging to the corrupt toppled regime of Mubarak. Revolutionaries were divided between accepting a new president that once belonged to Mubarak regime and empowering the political Islamists with their extremist agenda. Where the former was concerned, they argued that they were better able to oppose a civil authority than one sheltering behind religious dogma. Others found that it would be a betrayal of the revolution to bring to the Presidential Palace a man that was contemptuous of young revolutionaries and caused their murder in Tahrir Square. They also admitted that the Muslim Brotherhood was their partner at the revolution even though the group later meant to gather all its fruit for themselves at the cost of other powers. That is how society was divided in the run-off that ended with the victory of Mohammed Morsi with such a small majority. Since then, the nation was wishing success to the newcomer because of an honest desire to overcome deteriorating conditions in the society, especially at the economic and social level. However, what I had feared happened. The Muslim Brotherhood and their Salafist supporters, thrilled with the sense of victory, considered it their chance to change the historic image of Egypt as a moderate Muslim society to one giving utmost priority to rule by the extremist version of the Islamic Shari'a (religious law) rules. These including the hedoud (penalties), such as cutting off the hand of a thief, which had been replaced by other civil penalties many centuries ago in Egypt. Their intended means lay in enforcing their agenda and thinking on the Constituent Assembly (CA), while writing the draft constitution, and in replacing heads of the different influential state authorities and press institutions and newspapers that belong to the Government with others sympathetic to their streams. Fortunately, different revolutionary factions realised that threat and quickly formed strong political parties into which some small revolutionary parties were integrated to form a strong opposition in face of these overt policies of the ruling Muslim Brotherhood 's party to dominate the scene. President Mohammed Morsi having refrained from fulfilling many of his promises to achieve reconciliation between the different political factions, especially pertaining to the writing of the constitution, the civil powers found no other way but to have its members withdrew from the CA. Before that, some powers even brought cases against the CA's skewed formation and the Shura Council (consultative Upper House of Parliament) for being elected by a wrong law. In face of this threat to their plan to dominate society and all state institutions, the Muslim Brothers' President took the unprecedented stand of issuing a decree giving immunity to the CA and the Shura Council against the expected ruling of the Constitutional Court. This was expected to be made yesterday, December 2. The decree also included changing the Public Prosecutor and giving the president the right to take any exceptional procedures he regarded as necessary for protecting the revolution or the state institutions. Despite the fierce reaction from the judicial authority, including the Judge's Club, the Court of Cassation, the Court of Appeal, and the Constitutional Court, together with the Bar Association, the Press Syndicate, as well as civil political parties and revolutionary movements, the president insisted on not recanting the controversial decree. Meanwhile, the Muslim Brotherhood and the other Islamists factions underestimated this opposition and claimed to enjoy public support for the presidential decree and decisions related to it. Herein came the public response last Tuesday in the form of massive demonstrations in Tahrir Square and many governorates expressing their opposition to the decree and even threatening to prolong their protests until the decree is withdrawn or the president toppled. Instead of getting the clear message of the public opposition towards this decree, MB leaders continued to take an arrogant stand, claiming that they were in the majority and could organise a similar ‘million-man' demonstration in Tahrir Square expressing support for the President's decree! This problem now is this power-show with every party challenging one another, instead of reaching a compromise to the chronic dilemma, which might drag the country into a civil war if the MB insist on demonstrating in Tahrir, where the civil powers are protesting. The group has recently announced that it would do so on Saturday December 1. While I am writing this article on Thursday, the clouds of the crisis are thickening between Tahrir strikers and elements of the security forces and the MB militias. The only promising point in the present crisis is the strong opposition front the civil powers with their different backgrounds have managed to form after long months of division. Hopefully, the President will realise the major loss he will suffer if he does not revoke this decree in terms of losing all his supporters other than Islamists. Additionally, he would be responsible for a potential national bloodbath, if he does not take the courageous decision to assemble all the political powers in a national dialogue to resolve the crisis.
