On Monday, March 26, 2007, Egyptians voted in what could be Egypt’s most controversial and key constitutional referendum. On the ballot were 34 amendments, which many opposition supporters believe questions the ruling regime’s “vision” for the future of democracy in Egypt. Although likely to be one of the most definitive measures President Hosni Mubarak has taken to ensure the future political climate in Egypt, the referendum yielded an unsurprisingly low voter turnout according to opposition newspapers. The low turnout was largely due to a boycott by a united opposition front and general apathy in Egypt towards referenda. Though the official results will not be announced until Tuesday evening, it is expected that the amendments will pass, moving Egypt farther away from a robust Democracy.
Key Amendments and Key Opposition
Of the 34 constitutional amendments on the ballot, three key amendments heightened tensions across all political and social spectrums, ranging from the nation’s largest (albeit “banned”) oppositional party, the Muslim Brotherhood (MB), to the latest popular secular movement, Kifaya (“Enough”):
• Article 5: Bans political activity/parties based on religion
Largely viewed as a means to prevent MB and other religious parliamentarians from running in any future presidential or parliamentary elections, this amendment bans political activity based “on any religious reference of basis.” The Egyptian government does not allow the MB to form a party, but under the current system it could host a presidential candidate as an independent if it wins enough seats in parliament and local councils. Proposed changes could also clear the way for the government and ruling party to change the electoral system so that the MB cannot compete for parliamentary seats, as they did with some success (88 seats in Lower House of Parliament) in 2005.
• Article 88: Removes judicial supervision of elections
Revisions could also weaken the role of judges in monitoring elections by replacing them with a “supreme independent council,” most likely appointed by the government. Judges risked their careers and their lives by speaking out against electoral practices they witnessed during the 2005 parliamentary elections.
• Article 179: Invokes special powers to fight terrorism
In an effort to “eradicate” the 27-year-long “emergency laws” in Egypt, the government plans to change the constitution to allow police and government the power to arrest suspects, search homes, read mail, and monitor telephone conversations without a warrant. In addition, the amendment will enable Egypt’s president to bypass ordinary courts for people suspected of terrorism, which is equivocally defined. Although the government argues that the amendments will enable the state of emergency to be lifted, oppositional groups as well as international non-governmental organizations believe the changes would give the misuse of these powers a bogus legitimacy, at best.
Cracking Down on Some Opponents
During the months leading up to the referendum, Egypt has ‘cracked down with an iron fist’ on many of the nations’ oppositional fronts. The authorities began targeting MBs in December 2006, and about 210 MBs remain in detention, most of them without formal charges. During the week of March 11, 2007, 47 MBs were arrested (source). Of that total, 39 members, including the 3rd in command, Khairat el-Shatir, were arrested and charged with money laundering and terrorism.
The government has also targeted independent student bloggers, who post anti-government, or anti-Mubarak sentiments. On March 12, 2007, a high court in Alexandria upheld a four-year prison sentence handed down last month against student blogger, Abdel Karim Suleiman, for making online statements deemed insulting to religion and the President (source). The 22-year-old received three years for insulting religion and one year for defaming the president after posting an entry on his blog lashing out at Cairo’s most prestigious Sunni-Muslim institution, Al-Azhar University. This is just one example of the many bloggers arrested in recent months for exercising freedom of expression, a sign seen by many as the continued deterioration of democracy in Egypt.
The Referendum’s “Silent Supporters”
On the other side of the referendum controversy are the “silent supporters” – many of Egypt’s Coptic Christian minority. Copts in Egypt represent a mere ten percent of the population and, therefore, have kept their opinions regarding the new amendments mostly to themselves. One amendment many Copts support, in particular, is the banning of political activities based on religion. Many Copts fear that the opposite of such an amendment could potentially lead to additional religious discrimination. If the MB gains more power and sway politics in their direction, i.e. govern based on Islam, Christians fear it would end their struggle for equality in the predominantly Muslim nation.
Clearing the Presidential Path
Much debate is already being generated regarding the next presidential election under the new changes. With the new amendments, President Mubarak and his government have made it easier to preserve the nation’s future leadership position for his son, Gamal Mubarak. In light of President Mubarak’s increased powers, orchestrating the next presidential elections in favor of Gamal will be virtually effortless, especially since the monitoring committee will be at his disposal.
The US has found it increasingly difficult to critique Egypt because of the strategic relationship and support the US wants from Egypt for their policies in Iraq and in the ongoing Palestinian/Israeli conflict. We believe the new referendum will likely complicate Egypt and US relations in the near to long term based on Egypt’s sliding commitment to democracy. Finally, we believe that implementing these changes to the constitution could potentially create a new wave of religious clashes, unrest, and resentment between the Muslims and Christians in Egypt.
