24 - 30 January 2002
Issue No.570
|
Al-Ahram Weekly Online 24 - 30 January 2002 Issue No.570 |
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 | Current issue | Previous issue | Site map | ||
MPs in mudslinging match
The ruling National Democratic Party has used its majority to veto the discussion of embarrassing questions to cabinet ministers. Gamal Essam El-Din reports
The People's Assembly has vetoed all discussion of three parliamentary interpellations -- questions that must be answered by cabinet ministers -- aimed at taking the government to task for alleged corruption in the banking sector and the proliferation of private monopolies.
All three interpellations were directed at Prime Minister Atef Ebeid. They were submitted by Seif Mahmoud, an independent MP for Port Said, and Ragab Hemeida, the sole parliamentary representative of the opposition Liberal party and MP for Abdin district in downtown Cairo. Two of the interpellations charged that several banks were illegally permitted to give hefty loans to a handful of businessmen in violation of banking regulations.
The Assembly on Saturday rejected the interpellations after a stormy debate and a stinging verbal clash between Hemeida and independent MP Mortada Mansour, a lawyer. Mansour slammed independent and opposition MPs, arguing that it was unconstitutional to direct interpellations against the prime minister about the banking sector.
"Article 125 of the Constitution states that every member of the People's Assembly shall be entitled to address interpellations to the prime minister concerning matters within his jurisdiction. The banking sector does not officially fall under the prime minister's jurisdiction and this why it is unconstitutional to direct interpellations to him on this matter," Mansour said. He argued that the charges contained in the interpellation should, instead, be referred to the prosecutor-general.
Mansour's words stunned most MPs and he ended up trading accusations with Hemeida. The fiery exchange erupted when Mansour alleged that Hemeida's interpellation was motivated by his own personal interests rather than by objectivity.
According to Mansour, Hemeida tried to obtain loans from Banque du Caire on several occasions but his requests were turned down by the bank's chairman Ahmed El-Bard'ie. Mansour also reminded MPs that Hemeida has been stripped of his parliamentary immunity a record number of 13 times. On each occasion, Hemeida was investigated by prosecutors after being accused of issuing worthless bank cheques.
An enraged Hemeida struck back by reminding MPs that Mansour himself was one of four deputies who submitted interpellations on corruption in the banking sector last year.
"You should ask yourselves why he suddenly decided to withdraw his interpellation. The reason is that he is now acting as a lawyer for many indebted businessmen. At the moment, therefore, it is not good for him personally when these lousy businessmen face corruption charges in parliament," Hemeida said.
"Worse," added Hemeida, "Mansour was El-Rayan's lawyer."
El-Rayan is an infamous businessman who, in the late 1980s, owned an investment company which was charged with wide-ranging corrupt practices. El- Rayan is currently in jail, where he is serving a life sentence (25 years). In parliament, Hemeida claimed that El-Rayan gave Mansour a villa in Cairo's upmarket Mohandessin district in return for his legal services.
The fiery mudslinging between the two MPs split the house, and forced deputies to take sides. Astonishingly, deputies from the ruling National Democratic Party (NDP) decided to rally behind Mansour. This is unusual because Mansour is generally regarded as a harsh critic of the NDP and Prime Minister Ebeid's policies.
Joining forces with Mansour, two of the NDP's most prominent MPs argued that the responsibility to answer questions about the banking sector rests with the Central Bank of Egypt and not with the prime minister.
This was enough for Assembly Speaker Fathi Sorour to make his decision. Backed by the automatic approval of NDP deputies, Sorour indefinitely postponed the discussion of Hemeida and Mahmoud's interpellations.
"This does not mean that these two interpellations will never be debated, but they will have first to be discussed by the Budget and Economic Affairs Committees in closed meetings," Sorour said.
Moreover, Sorour was adamant that a further interpellation be dismissed from discussion in parliament. The interpellation was also submitted by Mahmoud. He charged a prominent businessman, Naguib Sawiris -- manager of Orascom Group -- with using "forged documents" to obtain loans.
Sorour said this interpellation would be totally rejected because its charges were not corroborated by supporting documents.
Hemeida, however, told Al-Ahram Weekly that he felt Sorour's decision on his interpellation reflects a wider government strategy to block any discussion on issues related to the banking sector.
"Last year, Prime Minister Atef Ebeid met with NDP deputies and said that parliament should not openly debate bank lending practices. This is why, acting at Sorour's behest, they have decided to veto all interpellations on the banking system for the second year running," Hemeida said.
To the further dismay of opposition and independent MPs, the Assembly also decided that only one interpellation could be discussed every month. At the moment, there are nine interpellations outstanding while parliament has just five months until the summer recess. According to most opposition and independent MPs, this decision represents a further erosion of the Assembly's supervisory powers.
Of the nine interpellations filed, one concerns corruption charges against Naguib Sawiris. Sorour accepted the question because, he said, it was corroborated by "sufficient documentation."
The interpellation, directed against Telecommunications Minister Ahmed Nazif by independent MP Mohamed El- Badrashini, accuses Sawiris of irregular behaviour in his 1998 acquisition of the nation's first mobile telephone license. For his part, Sawiris has recently accused El-Badrashini of using parliamentary immunity to slander him in public in an interpellation delivered last June on the same subject. During parliament's last summer recess, Sawiris submitted two requests asking that El-Badrashini be stripped of his immunity, both of which were turned down by Sorour.
El-Badri Farghali, a leftist MP for Port Said, has submitted an interpellation concerning private monopolies. Farghali charges the government with manipulating the iron and steel market in favour of private monopolies. One such monopoly, claims Farghali, has been acquired by Ahmed Ezz who now acts as chairman of parliament's Budget and Plan Committee and whose companies control 60 per cent of the local steel market.
Port Said duo Farghali and Mahmoud have submitted the largest number of interpellations. From the nine, they together account for seven of the interpellations submitted. Six of these deal with economic matters, but only one raises a thorny political issue -- the government's failure to obtain compensation for Israel's mass murder of Egyptian prisoners during 1956 and 1967 wars.
The Assembly began its sessions this week by discussing an interpellation submitted by Farghali. The interpellation, directed against Health Minister Ismail Sallam, claims that the application of market-economy principles in Egypt has led to a serious deterioration in the health of millions of poor Egyptians.
© Copyright Al-Ahram Weekly. All rights reserved
 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
| ARCHIVES Letter from the Editor Editorial Board Subscription Advertise! |
WEEKLY ONLINE: www.ahram.org.eg/weekly Updated every Saturday at 11.00 GMT, 2pm local time weeklyweb@ahram.org.eg |
 Al-Ahram Organisation |
Recommend this page