Cosmetic interventions?

The NDP's proposed constitutional amendments were received with scepticism, writes Gamal Essam El-Din

---

Time for the N word The final cut Shallow on substance

The ruling National Democratic Party (NDP) closed its fourth annual conference last week by proposing a package of constitutional amendments. In his final speech before the conference, President Hosni Mubarak emphasised that 2007 will be the year of "constitutional reform". The proposed changes, he said, will strike a balance between the executive and legislative powers, curtail presidential prerogatives, enhance the cabinet's decision-making role and overhaul the electoral system. Mubarak also vowed that power would be devolved to local councils, judicial authority reinforced, the 25-year-old state of emergency eliminated and a fixed quota of seats for women in parliament introduced.

The ruling NDP conference, however, ruled out three reforms that the opposition argues are essential if political life is to be reinvigorated and a smooth rotation of power guaranteed.

NDP secretary-general Safwat El-Sherif said, "the NDP insists on three No's: no to completely changing the 35-year-old constitution, no to any future change to articles 76 and 77, and no to revoking emergency laws."

Indeed, Mubarak heaped praise on last year's controversial amendment of Article 76, calling it a major step towards reinforcing republican government.

Moufid Shehab, minister of state for parliamentary affairs, dismissed opposition demands for a new constitution to be drafted, saying "the existing constitution includes 70 to 80 articles that enshrine respect for freedom and human rights". These articles, he added, comprise almost a third of the total and should not be subject to change. "The articles that should be changed are those dealing with the system of government [which] should be upgraded to keep abreast of political developments."

The opposition is unconvinced, and a number of political parties and civil society organisations have announced they intend to draft an alternative constitution.

Amr Hashem Rabie, a political analyst with Al-Ahram Centre for Political and Strategic Studies (ACPSS), says their decision stems from the fact the 1971 constitution reinforces tyranny by granting the president such enormous powers. "

The NDP's package of amendments, says Rabie, represents only insignificant tinkering with the constitution and will do nothing to "shake the foundations of presidential tyranny in Egypt [which], as established by the existing constitution, forbids people from choosing their rulers and stands against the healthy separation of powers".

Opposition parties say the NDP's proposed amendments are purely cosmetic. "What kind of change is it to give the People's Assembly the right to withdraw confidence from the cabinet without referring the issue to a public referendum?" asks Rifaat El-Said, chairman of the leftist Tagammu Party. "We all know that the NDP packs the People's Assembly which will never vote against a government or prime minister appointed by President Mubarak and supported by his party."

The same applies to giving the People's Assembly greater power in scrutinising the state budget, which says El-Said, will make not one iota of difference as long as the assembly is dominated by a single party.

"The proposal would only be meaningful in a parliamentary republic in which the government is elected freely, allowing parliament to truly represent political forces within the country," said El-Said, who also believes the consultative Shura Council should be scrapped altogether or else given the kind of legislative and supervisory powers that would allow for a functioning bicameral system.

El-Said further said the opposition was united over the need to eliminate Article 74 that "gives the president absolute powers... in cases where national security is threatened". El-Said dismisses as ludicrous the NDP's suggestion that the article be amended so as to oblige the president to consult with the prime minister and speakers of the People's Assembly and Shura Council in such cases.

Shehab said the decision to leave articles 76 and 77 as they now stand is fully in line with Mubarak's nine-point election programme, and that it was taken after consultations with MPs had shown their amendment was not a major demand.

"But this does not mean," argued Shehab, "that the NDP is seeking to draw red lines before the opposition or prevent the two articles being debated."

The NDP, he stressed, was open to public debate on the two articles, which set conditions for presidential nominees and his term in office.

"These two articles are the core of presidential tyranny and without changing them in a way that satisfies all political forces, Egypt will only be dabbling in a precarious democracy," says Rabie.

Article 76 is of particular concern to the opposition, who believe last year's amendment was an attempt to clear the way for Gamal to succeed his father should the latter stand down when polls are due in 2011.

Opposition and civil society organisations, says El-Said, remain adamant that Article 76 be amended to allow for serious competitive multi-candidate presidential elections, while Article 77, which in its current form allows the president to run for office for indefinite periods of times should be changed to limit presidential terms to five years, of which no one should serve more than two.

Shehab surprised observers by saying the proposed anti-terror law did not aim to replace emergency laws.

"The NDP intends to end the state, and not the law, of emergency," said Shehab. Emergency laws, he continued, would remain on the statute books and could be invoked in times of national emergency, something El-Said describes as a complete backtrack on Mubarak's presidential campaign pledges.