IS the act of opposition a crime that requires punishment? In the democratic system, the opposition plays a vital role in ensuring liberty, fairness and even legitimacy of the ruling regime. With the disappearance or weakness of the opposition, any ruler can turn into a dictator, a fact that was long realised by our ancestors. Thus, it sounds silly to hear someone accuse other persons of treachery or direct charges at them of carrying out sabotage or threatening public security and social peace for no other reason than taking the position of opposition to the ruling regime. Since President Mohamed Morsi assumed rule of the country after the June 2012 elections, some voices have suggested forming the presidential team and the government from the different political parties to work together for re-building the country politically and economically according to principles of the great January revolution. However, certain politicians saw that it is their role at this stage to take position of the opposition and co-operate with the President rather than seeking to share rule. Accordingly, they were willing to present advice and respond to any invitation to meet the President to express their views over different issues. These especially included writing the constitution and forming the new parliament. Things were going well in the country until the President surprised the whole nation in general and the opposition in particular with his presidential decree of November 22. This decree gave immunity to his decisions against judicial overview and prevented the Supreme Constitutional Court from dissolving the then Constituent Assembly and the Shura Council. It also included the appointment of a new public prosecutor in place of then prosecutor Mahmoud Abdel-Meguid. Herein, the opposition realised the President's attempt to monopolise rule, as his decree fully ignored the advice and opinion of the different political powers and former presidential candidates put forward in their numerous meetings. Therefore, the direct reaction of the opposition powers was the formation of the National Salvation Front (NSF) with the aim of confronting the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) plans of dominating the state institutions and the political scene. The NSF called for protest against the presidential decree, a move, which although carried out peacefully and legally was received with accusations and criticism of the religious parties that supported the President in his decisions. The MB even sent some of its members and followers to attack the peaceful demonstrators who were holding a sit-in outside the Presidential Palace in Heliopolis. Although such act of violence was photographed and broadcast by different satellite channels, none of the perpetrators were brought to justice for such a criminal act. Instead some parties attempted to show that the civil demonstrators were the one that violently confronted the Islamists causing the death of a number of them! Some Islamists also imposed a siege of both the Supreme Constitutional Court and the Media Production City. Their intentions were to prevent the former from issuing a ruling against the Constituent Assembly and the Shura Council and terrorising the media into desisting from criticising the President. Many such events took place in the country that escalated violence and counter-violence between the two sides that reached its climax on Friday, March 22 in the Moqattam area where the Muslim Brotherhood headquarters is located. Some civil activists decided to demonstrate close to the MB guidance bureau in objection to its interference in the ruling affairs of the country and the assault by some MB members of some activists and journalists a week earlier. Herein, society started to sense a real threat of the eruption of a civil war in the country between the Islamists and the civil powers. Instead of taking speedy procedures to curb this possibility and call for a national dialogue to reach a political solution to the present dilemma, the President threatened to take some exceptional procedures against certain political activists and opposition members that he accused of plotting against the country's stability. The Public Prosecutor, appointed by the President in accordance with the November 22 decree, started sending calls for some activists to be investigated over accusations of inciting protesters to commit violent acts against MB premises and followers. Such acts and accusations on the side of the ruling authority against the opposition would only mean spilling more fuel on the fire instead of cooling the street tension. Initiatives for effecting political reconciliation between the two sides have faded away and have been replaced by trading accusations over the wounding and injuring of citizens at the Moqattam "battle". What aggravated the dilemma is the ruling issued on Wednesday by the Court of Appeal of the return of the dismissed Public Prosecutor to his office. This ruling came to challenge the President's decision of appointing a new prosecutor, who became accused of bias towards the MB regime and closing his eyes on the many atrocities long perpetrated by the MB followers and supporters against civil and political activists. Apparently, the Presidency and the MB will not comply easily with the court ruling and accept the return of the dismissed prosecutor Abdel-Meguid. So shall we expect more escalation of the present unrest and problems between the ruling regime on one side and the opposition, the public street and the judicial authority on the other?
