Three no's

By Salama A Salama

---

The National Democratic Party (NDP) has proceeded with its second annual congress without giving signals to the effect that a major political breakthrough is on the way. One cannot expect something drastic to happen, something that would change the country's political future, something that would put to rest the questions everyone is posing -- everyone except the NDP. Over the past few weeks, NDP leaders have issued a steady stream of statements, launching vague but catchy slogans, dodging every question the public needs to see answered. All in all, the NDP is holding its ground on three issues. It is offering a resounding "no" in reply to three crucial questions.

The first "no" is that of constitutional change. Gamal Mubarak, secretary of the NDP Policies Committee, has said that the conference is not going to discuss constitutional amendment in this session. His was at least a more straightforward answer than that offered by NDP Secretary-General Safwat Al-Sherif. The latter came up with a convoluted answer to the question of constitutional amendment: it is possible but only when "the time is right".

The second "no" is related to the first. The NDP congress is not discussing the issue of the coming presidential elections. It is not preparing for elections that give the nation a choice of multiple presidential candidates. Everything that has been said or done so far suggests that the NDP is preparing for a nationwide referendum reinstating President Hosni Mubarak (whose current term in office expires in November 2005) in power. This attitude leaves the NDP in a state of "plausible deniability" on the matter of power transfer. It keeps alive the rumours that enticed the BBC to predict that the NDP is grooming Gamal Mubarak to be the next president -- a claim that President Mubarak categorically denied on more than one occasion.

The third "no" is about the relation between the government and the opposition, about the abrogation of the state of emergency, about the NDP's hegemony over political power. How long, one wonders, will the forces of political opposition -- parties, unions, and NGOs -- have to live under stifling restrictions? How long will political groups, such as the Islamist trend, remain deprived of legitimate participation in the process of democratic change?

The three "no's" are the NDP's answer to the nation's most urgent questions. The NDP is not going to stoop to a discussion of these questions. It is not in a hurry to make up its mind about them. What matters to the public does not necessarily matter to the NDP. So, what topics is the NDP interested in? The NDP congress focussed on future legislation concerning education, agriculture, taxes, monopoly, and personal status laws -- all of which are executive matters, none of which had to wait for the annual congress to be discussed.

The People's Assembly bill, the political rights bill, the parties and unions bill, all these may just wait a while longer, for they impact on the question of amending the constitution. So far, the NDP has kept quiet about many things. So, perhaps we don't know the whole story. Perhaps we should wait and see.