Perplexing changes

Pundits of various political hues concurred that Monday's referendum on constitutional amendments was a one-sided affair, note Gamal Nkrumah and Mohamed El-Sayed

---

A multi-pronged assault on the legality of the proposed constitutional amendments continued unabated this week. Political commentators of differing ideological orientations proved that there is real political debate in the media about the true meaning of the proposed constitutional amendments.

Pundits condemned the provisions of the proposed constitution that they say would water down judicial supervision of elections. Voter turnout was low, because as many writers indicated, "people's votes don't count."

There is no doubt that there is a unique unanimity at the top about the absolute necessity of constitutional reform. Mohamed Barakat, writing in the daily official Al-Akhbar, wrote a front-page column, "Participation... our collective duty".

Barakat, obviously pro-government, was optimistic about the nature of the constitutional changes. "We all realise that the proposed amendments represent a real change in Egyptian political life. They explore the broad horizons for freedom and democracy, lay the foundations of citizenship and full equality, grant equal rights and duties to all Egyptians and support political parties and pluralism," he said.

There is one lesson that Egypt could learn, this time from no less an august person than the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar Sheikh Mohamed Tantawi, the most authoritative voice of Islam in the country. Magdi El-Gallad, editor-in-chief of Al-Masry Al-Yom, mocking at the grand imam of Al-Azhar's call upon people to go to vote in the referendum and likening those who refuse to cast their votes as "those who fail to testify", El-Gallad wrote tongue-in-cheek, citing a verse from the Holy Quran. His tone was philosophical, if not outright irreligious.

Moreover, El-Gallad invoked God to forgive him, saying he will not vote in the referendum not only because he "objects to the constitutional amendments" but rather because "I see it a leap backward, or because I know the real intentions behind them, or because I feel humiliated as a citizen when I see with my bare eyes the scandal in the parliament committed by the members of the ruling National Democratic Party's members who kept raising their hands in approval [of the amendments] while they were asleep."

El-Gallad had even more to say on the subject. "It is because my single vote will be cast by someone else [in other words. those who rig the votes]. So why shall I go to the polling station to cast my vote? [And even if I go], I will mark 'no', and then leave and get punched or be beaten by the stick of a Central Security soldier."

He went on to extrapolate about the nature of vote-rigging and electoral fraud in contemporary Egypt. "We have electronic ballot boxes. While you cast the 'no' vote in the box, it turns out to be 'yes' when they count the votes. How shall I deal with these magic boxes. Oh my God! Please don't be angry with me. I have been disobedient to you in one thing by 'hiding my testimony', but there are those who make you angry every moment by not [looking after] the 75 million of your slaves."

Obviously, El-Gallad was taking the mickey out of the heavy-handed tactics of the government in its vain attempt to legitimise electoral fraud. His sharp criticism and satirical wit reflects how the utter frustration with the established political order has prompted wider political debate in the press.

The sad truth, many commentators conceded, is that no Arab country seems yet to have a credible and viable democracy. And Egypt, the Arab world's most populous country, is no exception to the rule.

There was more criticism of the nature of the electoral and democratic process in the country by all and sundry in opposition and independent papers. "In fact, Egypt has started in the past months to witness protests, strikes and sit-ins which move from one city to another and from one factory to another. Even ill people and doctors in hospitals go on strike; janitors, civil servants, parents are going on strike. The scale of demonstrations is becoming broader and broader as the people begin to get bored, as the economic pressure on them is becoming unbearable," complained Ibrahim Issa in the independent weekly Al-Dostour -- which will turn into a daily starting from next Saturday -- about the strikes and demonstrations that have swept the country in the past months.

Issa's tirade proved once again that the overwhelming majority of political commentators in Egypt are far from being lukewarm about the proposed constitutional amendments.

The pundits, like the populace at large, is restive and angry and demand radical political reform. They seem to be fed up with the mediocrity of the prevailing political system.

"Corruption and tyranny are driving people crazy... and the way police deal with the Egyptians is worse than the way the Israeli forces deal with the Palestinians... protests of the deprived people that break out every day in every corner of Egypt is a signal the regime cannot understand, that this is the end of [the regime's] legitimacy," Issa noted.

Tarek El-Beshri, also in Al-Dostour, wrote specifically about the paramount importance of lifting the emergency laws if the constitutional amendments are to have any credibility.

"Political reform depends on putting an end to the emergency state without replacing it with the so- called anti-terror law," El-Beshri explained. The state of emergency was identified by many pundits as the real threat to political stability in the country and the main hindrance to democratic change in Egypt today.

"Proposing the constitutional amendments in this manner is considered undermining attempts to introduce political reform, and this is in the interest of a certain group in the regime," he warned.

However, El-Beshri made a specific revelation. As far as he was concerned, the entire palaver concerning constitutional amendments is nothing but a farcical charade. He was as critical of the "docile" opposition as he was of the "scheming" government. "The opposition fell into the trap set up by the regime and accepted to play secondary roles in the 'constitutional play' the end of which is a foregone conclusion," El-Beshri said.