Through 2004 and 2005, the throne of President Hosni Mubarak (see photo in next column) barely shook from the cacophony of calls for reform and new leadership from different groups in Egypt . His concessions, reforming election laws, setting campaign regulations, and establishing oversight bodies for the elections were calibrated to strengthen rather than moderate his own power by doing just enough to take the rug out from under opposition parties. The opposition parties, a motley group of leftists, Nasserists, and Islamists were divided enough for Mubarak to keep them under control. They attempted to form a united front whose slogan was ?Kifaya? (?Enough?). The Kifaya demonstrations produced scenes of unprecedented and stunningly courageous acts of resistance and protest that were broadcast across the globe, giving some the idea that this grassroots movement and its extraordinarily brave and fed-up organizers through their persistence represented a burgeoning revolution.
The solidarity that was supposed to be represented by Kifaya did not carry through to election day, when attempts by the movement to coordinate their opposition candidates and platforms failed, partially because of voter apathy. The Muslim Brotherhood , the most organized opposition group, was able to get its members and supporters to the polls, resulting in a massive and unexpected victory. Meanwhile, however, the Mubarak regime was able to divide and weaken other Kifaya components. The regime fought the ability of new political parties to be licensed, with the al-Ghad party of Ayman Nour winning legitimacy only after a rough court battle and other parties, like Karama, were blocked out altogether. Nour was jailed for five years on trumped up charges of forgery, and hundreds of other political activists were detained.
Now, the pro-reform throngs are rallying behind a new and unexpected group: Egyptian judges. There has been tension between the judiciary and the executive in Egypt for some time now, as judges have lobbied for an independent judiciary for nearly two decades. In the lead-up to the election, the judges made a show of strength when a meeting of 3,000 judges decided that the group would only agree to supervise the elections if Mubarak guaranteed them complete and independent oversight. Egypt?s constitution requires judicial oversight of elections. Mubarak relented. Following the elections, the judges announced that they planned to write a report detailing the police intimidation, assault, and election fraud that they had witnessed. Two judges in particular, Mahmud Makki and Hisham Bastawisi, called for an investigation. The Egyptian Minister of Justice told them that they would be brought before a disciplinary court for their actions.
Immediately, the Judges? Club, the professional association of Egyptian judges, rallied behind their colleagues, and the Egyptian people, in turn, rallied behind the judges. The regime reacted fearfully. During a sit-in organized in protest of Makki and Bastawisi?s hearings, the Mubarak regime sent thousands of security forces to surround the small group of protesters, beating some and arresting 50 of them. A judge who tried to intervene on behalf of the protesters was beaten by police. The scene was much worse at protests that occurred during the disciplinary hearing for the two judges with numerous assaults and arrests reported (see article). Makki and Bastawisi have announced that more than 50 people were arrested on the charge of ?supporting the judges.? During this time, a new slogan of the pro-reform movement has emerged: ?I am with the judges? (source).
Those ?with the judges? now include various reformers under the Kifaya movement as well as the newly ascendant Muslim Brotherhood. Mubarak?s regime is clearly worried about the revolt of the judiciary. The judges are a part of the establishment, and the regime will have difficulty functioning without them. They are not politicians and have a simple demand: judicial autonomy and the rule of law. It is not a political platform but an appeal for fairness. The judges are a group that reformers of all colors can gather around.
The regime is reportedly concerned. Rami Khouri, writing for the Daily Star, sums up, ?the judges frighten the regime because they are numerous, organized, respected, credible, politically active, and making reasonable demands.? Khouri also optimistically compares the members of the Judges? Syndicate to Lech Walesa in Poland , who led the workers? union in Gdansk that eventually turned into the Solidarity movement.
The reaction of the Mubarak regime to these events has worn away at gains or goodwill that it earned with the limited reforms made in 2004 and 2005. With the elections and those reform measures, the regime raised peoples? expectations. Current attempts to ?manage expectations? with violence and repression are adding fuel to the fire. Although it is unlikely that the regime will be upset anytime soon, current events signify the beginning of a gradual building of domestic dissatisfaction that undermines and could eventually weaken Mubarak and the expected successor of his regime, his son Jamal.