Al-Ahram Weekly | Chronicles

Two of the most powerful men in Egypt, Prime Minister Ismail Sidqi and prominent businessman Ahmed Aboud, fought head-on in 1934 on construction projects that served the country -- and their egos. Professor Yunan Labib Rizk visits the competing camps

In March 1934, in a series called "Integrity in government", Al-Siyasa related that while Prime Minister Ismail Sidqi was in hospital in Europe, he wrote to Abdel-Fattah Yehia who was then standing in for him, warning that the relationship between Minister of Works Ibrahim Fahmi Karim and the prominent businessman Ahmed Aboud was harmful to the reputation of the cabinet. According to the report, the minister of works responded that it was the relationship between Sidqi and the prominent construction contractor Monsieur Dantemauro which was truly affecting the cabinet.

It is difficult to believe the latter part of the story in the Liberal Constitutionalist newspaper. It is unlikely that a cabinet member at that time would have had the audacity to speak out so bluntly against his prime minister. Nonetheless, the story did mark the beginning of the exposure of a case of corruption and abuse of power which habitually runs rampant in authoritarian governments such as those of the Sidqi era.

Not long after the Al-Siyasa story appeared did Egyptians receive confirmation of the first part of the story. On 12 March 1934 Yehia, now prime minister, issued a statement announcing that he had indeed received a letter from Sidqi asking him to caution Karim against his association with Aboud. Aboud allegedly was exploiting his friendship with the minister of works by telling contractors who were submitting bids on the Gabal Al-Awliya Dam project that their bids would not stand a chance unless they took him on as a partner. According to the acting prime minister's statement, Karim responded that it was Dantemauro who was the guilty party. Karim said that the Italian contractor went to London, contacted bidders on the Aswan Dam extension project and showed them a photograph of Sidqi bearing the dedication, "To my friend Dantemauro".

Perhaps the issue would have blown over had not Sidqi and Aboud both issued statements in their defence, signalling the opening volleys in a battle between two of the biggest fish in the Egyptian sea: Ismail Sidqi with his lengthy record of political service and clout, and Ahmed Aboud, perhaps the most powerful Egyptian financier at the time.

Aboud stated that his relationship with the prime minister was all solid and aboveboard at the beginning of Sidqi's tenure. Then, one day, Sidqi asked him to give Dantemauro some work on the Aswan Dam extension project, which he did. The same thing happened again when the Egyptian Public Bus Company announced a tender for the construction of a large garage. Aboud said, "His Excellency called me to recommend one of the bidders and I gladly complied with his request." Eventually, however, Aboud felt that Sidqi was beginning to ask for too much. Their friendship soured and Sidqi's hostility began to surface. "An example of this was that rumour that I had made deals with most, if not all, companies that were allowed to participate in the bidding on government contracts, a rumour that not even a child would believe."

Sidqi, on the other hand, stated that while he was convalescing in Europe he learnt of rumours that Aboud had been in contact with all the British contracting firms that were bidding on the Gabal Al-Awliya Dam project in order to persuade them to include him in their tender. Ibrahim Karim at the time was in Britain to collect tenders for this project as well as a fertiliser extracting project at the Aswan Dam. Sidqi said, "The rumours had it that Aboud hinted at the power of his connections with the minister of works and with me and that he had in fact obtained written pledges from some or most of the contractors specifying his share if they win the contract."

The ex-prime minister went on to relate that Aboud had visited him in the health resort in which he was staying in Europe and informed him that he was on his way to London for talks with one of the companies bidding on the Gabal Al-Awliya Dam project in the hope that that company would take him on as a subcontractor in the event that it wins the bid. Sidqi said that he told Aboud to stress to the company that the government would only accept the bid it believed to be the most suitable and that no amount of string-pulling would persuade it otherwise. Sidqi denied all the stories Aboud related regarding his attempts to use him to rig the tender processes.

In his statement, Sidqi had scoffed that Aboud was not a contractor but a middleman. Angered at this slight, Aboud wrote a lengthy open letter to Sidqi in Al-Ahram in which he reminded the former prime minister that at the time of the bidding on the Naga Hamadi Barrages contract, Sidqi had agreed that Aboud would be appointed adviser on this project if his firm won the bid. He also pointed out that he was a member of the board of directors of a company he had founded, and asked, "Is a person who founds companies and owns most of their capital a mere middleman? I have nothing to do with brokering. I am a businessman responsible for the financial transactions of my companies."

In all events, these exchanges constituted no more than a minor skirmish preliminary to the greater battle ahead. This was not long in the offing, and it focussed on the Corniche in Alexandria. Dantemauro, with all his well-known connections to Sidqi, just happened to have been one of the two major contractors to have won the bid to construct that famous seaside thoroughfare.

Dantemauro and the other contractor, Cartaregia, had agreed to undertake the Corniche project for the city of Alexandria in exchange for LE280,000 to be paid in five LE56,000 instalments. Trouble began to brew at the time they were due the second instalment. Dantemauro now estimated that the costs of completion would come to LE430,000, on which basis he asked the municipality to up the instalments to LE86,000 and to pay him the outstanding LE30,000 from the previous year's instalment.

After considerable and heated debate, the Alexandria Municipality agreed, on the basis of a majority vote, to pay LE100,000 into the National Bank accounts of the two contractors. The dissenting vote came from the government's representative on the board, the implications of which would shortly be manifested in the creation of a committee "to investigate matters pertaining to the Corniche construction operation in Alexandria".

Until now, Sidqi had nothing to fear. The committee, after all, was made up of senior government officials who, he was certain, would "adhere to the legally stipulated course that will lead to the disclosure of the full truth". To his great dismay, however, he soon learned that the investigatory committee had been remiss in the pursuit of its duties, or at least that was his reaction upon reading of the committee's findings in the press. In its report, the committee faulted the Alexandrian municipal board, the civil works commission and the former minister of interior who was none other than Sidqi himself.

Although Sidqi declared he would file suit against that report with the public prosecutor and would raise the issue in parliament in which he was a member, it appeared that such threats would not deter the government from tarring the reputation of its ex-prime minister and ex-minister of interior. Two short news items in Al-Ahram of 3 and 4 May 1934 seemed to confirm this. The first reported that the minister of interior refused to approve the payment of LE100,000 into the contractors' accounts, insisting on sticking to the originally agreed upon instalment of LE56,000. The second related that when the bank received the municipality's check for only LE56,000, it wrote to the municipality to remind it that the amount due was LE116,000. The letter added that if that amount was not received in full, the contractors would be forced to take legal action over the outstanding sum on the grounds that "the agreements signed between the two parties stipulate full payment of the instalments for work completed."

With a nudge from the notorious Zaki El-Ibrashi, King Fouad's right-hand man, the government of Abdel-Fattah Yehia stoked the flames with the dramatic decision to dissolve the Alexandria Municipality board. In justification of this action, the government cited the findings of the investigation committee report, censuring the board's general-director and his deputy, the secretary-general, the head of the engineering department and his deputy and other officials on the commission. Al-Ahram added, "The general-director will face charges in the Supreme Disciplinary Court which reviews cases involving senior officials appointed by royal order. The secretary-general and other board members will be brought before an ordinary disciplinary board."

The Supreme Disciplinary Court would consist of the minister of justice as presiding judge, the minister of awqaf (religious endowments), chief magistrate of the court of appeals, the public prosecutor and the deputy ministers of interior, finance, public works and foreign affairs. While this body was preparing its case, the government formed a new municipal board. Consisting of 12 members, it included six Egyptians, three Britons, a Frenchman, an Italian and a Greek. Hussein Sabri, mayor of Alexandria, was appointed chair.

According to Al-Ahram, the Supreme Disciplinary Court had not convened since 1927 -- seven years earlier. On that occasion, it was investigating Galal Fahim, secretary-general of the Ministry of Agriculture, who was cleared of all charges.

Meanwhile, the national press and above all the Wafd Party newspapers which harboured a deep-seated hatred for Sidqi, began to point the finger at the man who, in his capacity as minister of interior, they felt was ultimately responsible for the scandal. Of these, perhaps Kawkab Al- Sharq was the most explicit: "The blame for this tomfoolery lays first and foremost at the doorstep of His Excellency Sidqi Pasha. He is the first person officials and investigators should be looking at in order to uncover the truth. He had been the helmsman of the government, the director of the nation's financial policies and the master of the Ministry of Interior -- three positions at once and accountable to no- one. All that power vested in one man should not exempt him from responsibility, as His Excellency would like us to believe. On the contrary, he has heavy responsibilities to bear and some difficult accounting to do. There is no running away from this fact."

Sidqi was not the type of person to take this assault lying down. He moved in two directions at once. First, he fulfilled his threat to resort to legal action against the government. In a letter to the public prosecutor he stated that the government, after having pledged not to release the findings of the investigatory committee to the public, went ahead and leaked portions of it to the press. "That official report contains statements damaging to my esteem and reputation. As the body that issued that report was not authorised to investigate me, that it did so was illegal and punishable by law. I appeal to you to kindly take the necessary legal measures."

Secondly, in keeping with this second threat to make a stink in parliament, he wrote the following to Speaker of the Chamber of Deputies Mohamed Tawfiq Rifaat:

"Now that the newspapers have published the full report issued by the Corniche investigation committee (which testifies to the government's reneging on its commitment to maintain the confidentiality of this report), the honourable members of parliament have been able to see for themselves the odious allegations levelled against the former minister of interior. Some of these allegations pertain to his administrative actions and others to his personal behaviour. All of them, if true, would tarnish his name and reputation, which is why I am duty bound to myself and to my country to shed the light necessary to set to rest all upright and vigilant consciences.

"The Chamber of Deputies is the only authority that has the right to conduct a hearing on this matter, in that I am one of its members and that it is vested with the right of parliamentary supervision over the behaviour of government ministers. I, therefore, appeal to you to present to the venerable chamber my request to conduct a parliamentary investigation by the people's representatives."

Because the public prosecutor's office was not acting quickly enough, Sidqi soon told Al-Ahram that he, himself, would file suit in the National Courts against the current minister of interior, the Egyptian members of the investigatory committee and the newspapers that had published the committee's report. He would also take similar action against the British members of the committee in the British consulate.

He then called the speaker of parliament to ask him to put his appeal before the house in that day's session. Tawfiq Rifaat told him that the house's agenda had already been set and was full enough as it was. Sidqi, however, insisted that his letter be brought up, either after the question-and-answer session or after discussions on the Ministry of Agriculture budget.

The session in question took place on 21 May 1934. After parliament questioned the government on the problem of the real estate debt and agricultural policy, the speaker of the house addressed the Sidqi matter. "Today's agenda is packed with budgetary questions and the agenda for the next two days holds a long list of government projects to discuss. Sidqi's request, therefore, has been deferred to Monday," he said. That meant a week from then. Although, as was customary in Egyptian parliamentary sessions, pro-government deputies shouted out their approval, Sidqi was determined to have his say. He stood up and proclaimed in his familiar strident voice:

"Gentlemen, a few days ago when a member of this house sent you a letter to which you took offence, you were not deterred by budgetary matters or government projects from bringing up the matter before the house. I believe that the word that so incensed you is nothing compared to the dangerous allegations that have been levelled against me. Such allegations cannot be ignored. Yet, when my request on this matter comes up, it is deferred for an entire week in order to give the national library budget priority."

Unruffled by the assault, the speaker brought the question of deferment to a vote. The majority of the house approved, causing Sidqi to declare that he withdrew his petition and would now take recourse to public opinion. He then stormed out of the chamber, followed by a small train of MPs who were still loyal to him.

Sidqi's threat to turn public opinion quickly became a subject of jest among the opposition newspapers. During his days in power Sidqi had been notoriously aloof to public opinion, clamping down strongly on the opposition and the press. Now, however, the shoe was on the other foot, and such ridicule would not prevent him from pressing ahead with his threat and airing the dirty laundry of the pro-royalist era that had brought him to power. The dirt appeared in a lengthy statement that Al-Ahram published in full over three successive editions, from 23 to 25 May 1934.

According to Sidqi, "exploitation" of the Corniche project began in the summer of 1932 while he was away in Europe. "Yehia Pasha, acting prime minister at the time, imagined that focussing on this and other issues, with the help of Zaki El-Ibrashi, would harm me. That was when the Corniche project became one link in the chain of propaganda episodes that lasted until my resignation."

Another cause of that campaign, he said, stemmed from the competition between a contractor and the "businessman well-known for his influence and connections, Aboud Pasha", over the Gabal Al-Awliya Dam project. "The prime minister at the time was buffeted by that gale because he could show no leniency towards such behaviour, which is why that influential man said one day, 'Sidqi Pasha is going to pay a heavy price for this.' I was going to present the municipal board substantial proof that a minister in that cabinet was working closely with Aboud for no other purpose than to bring down the government."

Elsewhere in this document, Sidqi accuses Yehia of obsession with the Corniche issue from the moment he formed his cabinet [29 September 1933]. Yehia had asked the director of the municipal board to tell him anything that could be held against Sidqi. "Indeed, on more than one occasion he asked for the accounts of the Corniche contractor in the hope of finding anything to condemn me. At first he did this tactfully, then he resorted to threats until finally he gave up."

In the second portion of his statement, Sidqi explains his motives for initiating the Corniche construction project. The Corniche was not a sudden brainstorm, he wrote. It dated back to some 25 years ago when he was secretary-general of the Alexandria Municipality Board. Today's project was thus "the natural extension of the eastern port avenue, the construction of which cost the city over a million pounds". Alexandria had to undertake this extension, "because of the vast improvement that would accrue to its Mediterranean seafront; the need to order and regulate seafront traffic to better serve the promenades, parks and beaches; and the potential this would offer of increasing the city's revenues from assorted fees and taxes".

The Corniche project had been initially delayed because of the Great War. Although it was later resumed, work on it proceeded very slowly before it ran into a large obstacle: British barracks. It was only in 1930 that this property was handed over to the government, "after which nothing remained to impede the resumption of the construction that would bring the Corniche to its natural end at Muntazah Palace".

Beautification, traffic regulation and taxes were not the only considerations Sidqi had in mind when he encouraged the resumption of the Corniche project. The global depression had recently struck, taking a heavy toll on the Egyptian economy and its employment rates. Not only was it sound policy "to generate work prospects for as many unemployed as possible", the project would "encourage Egyptians to spend their holidays in Egyptian resorts instead of travelling abroad every summer".

Sidqi then turned to the investigatory committee's charges against him pertaining to this project. Contrary to the report, he had not approved it without having ascertained Alexandria Municipality's financial resources. The committee had overlooked the fact that the municipal budget and the Corniche project had been discussed by the municipal board in the same session. As a result, both issues were brought to Sidqi's attention simultaneously, "enabling me to ascertain the financial status of the Alexandria Municipality".

Nor was it correct to fault him for not putting the project up for tender; Egypt had no laws requiring such a step. In addition, "Readers may be surprised to learn that even Paris had put a complete halt to the tender system for its public works because it realised that it encouraged incompetent companies to offer cheaper bids on public works contracts."

Finally, he scoffed at the accusation that he had not bothered to study the designs for the Corniche project. "Is it the job of the head of a government to involve himself in the technical details of public works projects to the extent of scrutinising their designs and specifications when specialised technical departments exist for this very purpose?" he asked.

In the last portion of his statement, Sidqi addressed the allegations aimed at his person. The most important were those pertaining to his relationship with the Italian contractor Dantemauro whom Sidqi was alleged to have favoured and promoted at the expense of the Alexandria Municipality in exchange for benefits free of charge. Sidqi countered that when, in 1930, he accepted the post of prime minister, with its meagre salary, he had given up a profession from which he was earning a fixed annual income of LE8,000 plus a pension of LE1,500. Such a person was not the type to be lured by money, nor the type to "beg Mr Dantemauro to build me a farm, repair my home or give me a car".

On the other hand, Sidqi did not deny that his friendship with Dantemauro dated to 1905. However, he stressed that the bond was founded on Sidqi's admiration for the man's "moral fibre, excellent character, philanthropic tendencies and his many worthy contributions both to the community to which he belongs and to Egypt which he regards as his second homeland". He went on to affirm that he had paid the Italian contractor every piastre he owed him on work he had commissioned from him and that he had the receipts to prove it. "If parliament had agreed to my request for an investigation on the subject I would have submitted all this information and documentation," he added pointedly.

In the wake of Sidqi's statement, the government opted for a curious silence on the issue. In part that was because events occurred that would spare the former prime minister from the present prime minister's wrath, the events that would cause the Yehia government to fall, bringing in the Tawfiq Nassim government on 14 November 1934. In the midst of that commotion, the only action that took place in connection with the Corniche project scandal was the prosecution of Alexandria Municipality Director-General Ahmed Sadiq. He was brought before the Supreme Disciplinary Court on 15 charges, most of which were dropped. The court then ruled to pension off the municipal official -- an anti-climactic conclusion to a battle whose protagonists had been such mighty fish in the Alexandrian sea.

Al-Ahram: A Diwan of contemporary life (554)

Testing times

		15 - 21 July 2004 Issue No. 699 Chronicles	Current issue Previous issue Site map
Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875