Mustafa Kamel El-Sayed* wonders whether Egypt will follow the Palestinian or the Tunisian path The decision taken by President Mubarak last Saturday to ask the Egyptian parliament to amend Article 76 of the Constitution, concerning procedures for the nomination of the presidential candidate, opens the door to the possibility of a major overhaul of the political system providing a number of conditions are met. The decision is particularly praise-worthy given that the president was in a position to maintain the status quo. While it is true that civil society organisations and popular movements, as well as some opposition parties, called for this amendment, the president could have ignored the calls. US newspapers, particularly the Washington Post, have been extremely critical of the Egyptian government, and of President Mubarak, in recent weeks. US officials have called on the Egyptian government to lead the region along the path of democracy. The imprisonment of Ayman Nour, member of the People's Assembly and leader of Al-Ghad (Tomorrow) Party, has been roundly criticised. But the president could easily have ridden out these particular storms, especially after opposition parties joined the NDP in denouncing what they called "unacceptable US interference in the internal affairs of the country". In this context, the president's decision, taken willingly, was a clever move that won praise in both Egypt and the US. Amending Article 76 of the Constitution invites two scenarios, one that might be termed Tunisian, the other Palestinian. The Tunisian constitution was amended to allow competitive presidential elections. The Tunisian government has conducted two elections under the amendment, in both of which it retained its monopoly over the electronic media and used its control of local authorities and the security forces to deprive opposition candidates of any real chance of campaigning freely. The elections lacked any credibility in the eyes of the Tunisian people and the international community. Tunisia's political system has not changed as a result. It remains as authoritarian as ever, with news of human rights violations in the country a daily item on the Internet, the one medium through which human rights groups in Tunisia can inform the outside world of what is happening in the country. On the other hand the Palestinian Authority has conducted two elections for the post of president, that of 1996 that resulted in the election of Yasser Arafat and the recent election that endowed his successor with a popular mandate to direct Palestinian affairs in the coming crucial years. On both occasions several presidential candidates campaigned freely, apart from harassment by Israeli authorities in the most recent campaign of candidates opposed to Mahmoud Abbas. The two elections were conducted under the scrutiny of international monitors from inter-governmental and governmental organisations. Mustafa Barghouti, the major opposition candidate, won over 22 per cent of the vote, and has not accused Abbas of any undue interference in the electoral process. For the Palestinian, and not the Tunisian, model to prevail in Egypt requires that several issues be addressed, the most important concerning the eligibility of presidential candidates. Limiting candidates to the nominees of political parties or those who obtain the support of members of the People's Assembly and elected local and regional councils is a non- starter. It excludes candidates who are not members of a political party and who are unlikely to have a base in either the People's Assembly or local and regional councils, both dominated by the NDP. More acceptable would be a requirement demanding nominees secure a fixed number of signatures -- 20,000 for example, from each governorate -- before their nominations be accepted. The neutrality of government ministries, local authorities, the security forces and national media must all be guaranteed if the elections are not to be hopelessly skewed in favour of the sitting candidate. Judicial supervision of the election should not be limited to the booths where citizens cast their vote, as was the case in the last election, but should cover all stages of the electoral process, including the preparation of voter lists. If these conditions can be met then we can expect future presidents and parliament to examine other clauses in the Constitution, as well as a raft of legislation, that have provided a legal foundation for authoritarianism in Egypt. The powers of the president of the republic, as well as the provisions of the political parties law, top the agenda in this regard. And it goes without saying that all such developments will lack credibility if they are not accompanied by the lifting of the state of emergency and an end to all violations of civil and political rights in the country. A tall order indeed. * The writer is professor of political science at Cairo University.
