Mubarak appoints women and Copts to PA
It’s rather pathetic, but Mubarak has decided to the enormous imbalance in the composition of the People’s Assembly by appointing five women and five Copts.
That means that out of six Coptic MPs, only one (Minister of Finance Youssef Boutros-Ghali) has been elected, and that election was fixed in 2000 and probably fixed again in 2005! For the women things are scarcely better, with only four actually elected to their posts (again, with one of them probably put in place by a fixed election.) In other words, rather than use its clout (preferably through legal and non-violent means) to put women in parliament, Mubarak’s ruling party preferred to place them ‘ashan al decor at the president’s discretion. Before the elections, NDP leaders defended the decision not to field many Copts and women because they were more likely to lose. Perhaps that’s true, but appointing them is not exactly a solution either.
The Egyptian press is now spreading reports of Coptic businessmen backing a non-religious party that would defend their interests. It’s not clear whether that would be a Coptic party that would not be affiliated with the Church or a liberal party that would defend issues Copts feel strongly about (the latter would be a smarter choice), but considering that existing opposition parties are failing to rise to the occasion, it’s not surprising some are looking for a new alternative. Prominent Coptic politician Mounir Fakhry Abdel Nour has now been kicked out of the Wafd and accused of fomenting a coup against autocratic leader Nomaan Gomaa, and he would be ideally placed to lead such a party. It’s a shame that Egyptian society, however, does not seem to be ready to see a party headed by a non-Muslim today.
(n.b. I haven’t seen the names of the appointed MPs yet, it’s possible Abdel Nour is in that list.)
Incidentally, I meant to mention it a few days ago, but Mubarak also recently passed a presidential decree that changed the regulations on maintenance of churches in Egypt. Copts had long complained that the authorities did not allow them to easily make reparations to churches; under the new regulation — in theory — if they don’t get an answer within three months they can go ahead and assume their request is approved. The construction of a new church, however, must be through presidential permission. This rule is a legacy of an Ottoman decree that restricted church-building; the whole thing is an anachronism and would better be rid of altogether in favor of normal construction and zoning laws that would govern all religious buildings (mosques are currently handled by the Ministry of Awqaf, or religious endowments). His move by Mubarak seems to be in response to the recently-held Coptic conference in Washington, where this issue was a major sticking point. One also wonders whether it’s a point that was raised by Senator Chuch Hagel when he recently visited Mubarak, since I believe Hagel attended the conference. If so I find it rather ironic that a US senator would put pressure on Mubarak over churches but not, say, security forces blocking voters from entering polling stations.
Categories: Egypt.
6 Responses to “Mubarak appoints women and Copts to PA”
- 1 Pingback on Dec 16th, 2005 at 10:49 am
Would a Coptic party really make sense? It could never command more than a small minority of votes, and Egypt doesn’t have the type of political system where small parties can be kingmakers. I could see such a special-interest party working in a PR system where the major parties need the small ones to eke out a majority, but Egypt is likely to remain a de facto one-party state (or at best a two-party state) for the foreseeable future.
Or is the point simply to have a Coptic representative or two from Christian-heavy districts in order to act as ombudsman? (And which districts would be most likely to elect such representatives?)
A Coptic party doesn’t really make sense in itself, but identifying and financing a liberal party that would defend minority rights does. I believe this is what’s being talked about. Once, the Wafd (many of whose leaders were Copts under the monarchy) fulfileld this function; today its newspaper at least seems to have moved to thepseudo-religious Muslim right. (No wonder for a newspaper that sells best among Egyptians in Saudi Arabia.) Its current leadership is not particularly anti-Copts, but it is autocratic and does not share the same liberal values as the old Wafd did. Al Ghad had, for a while, a Coptic president in Mona Makram Ebeid, but Ayman Nour had all the power and began to attract religious conservative Muslims into the party. Any future attempts at a liberal party would probably draw people like Ebeid and Mounir Fakhry Abdel Nour.
But the real problem isn’t attracting a Coptic poltiical elite into a secular party; it’s growing the grassroots movement to support the party at elections. Many Egyptian Muslims have the impression that Copts mistrust them so much that they will back the NDP and the regime no matter what, because it has a track record of being against Islamists. This is partly true. Copts are truly alarmed at the success of the Muslim Brotherhood and the growing role of religion in politics, despite reassurances from the Brotherhood that it fully suppports Coptic rights.
(And which districts would be most likely to elect such representatives?)
A long time ago, a Coptic politician could have been elected in any place with a substantial Coptic population. But times have changed and Egyptians are more religiously chauvinistic. I can only think of a few places that are “natural fits” for a Coptic candidate, and it would have to be one who reaches out to Muslims. This would be certain areas of Shubra (northern Cairo, in some sense the Brooklyn of the capital) and areas of Upper Egypt where there are very large Coptic minorities. Perhaps also parts of Alexandria, but I am not sure. Of course under a PR system it would be much easier to have more Coptic politicians in parliament. In Egypt’s only truly competitive and fair elections, the ones in elite social clubs, there often tends to be a tacit agreement that the boards of the clubs should always include Copts because they should be representative of their membership. There are quite a few skilled Coptic politicians around, in a PR system they would have a good chance of being included at several points on the list by all parties (even the Muslim Brotherhood gave backing to some Coptic candidates during the elections, one hears, and refused to run against others–for instance in the area of Alexandria where sectarian clashes recently took place.)
Once, the Wafd (many of whose leaders were Copts under the monarchy) fulfileld this function; today its newspaper at least seems to have moved to thepseudo-religious Muslim right.
I’ve also noticed some of the left parties like Tagammu flirting with Islamism - an attempt to form a strategic alliance with the ikhwan, or to piggyback on its popularity?
In any event, what are the chances that a new liberal party could get official approval?
In Egypt’s only truly competitive and fair elections, the ones in elite social clubs, there often tends to be a tacit agreement that the boards of the clubs should always include Copts because they should be representative of their membership.
Do the elite social clubs include the professional associations, or are their elections less competitive and fair? I’d been under the impression that the professional syndicate elections were pretty much straight-up.
Issandr & Jonathan
The law permitting the President to appoint 10 MP´s is one that was put into practice after the parliamentary elections in 1964, which only returned a single MP to parliament. It haven´t that much of a difference though. Women had 31 special constituencies in the 1984 elections, but that was changed in 1987. Correct me if i´m wrong Issandr ,but didn´t an amendment to the Khat al Hamayouni in 1998 make the governor in each governate responsible togheter with the interior ministry, instead of a presidential permit.
By the way the Khat al Hamayouni from 1856 was a progressive law, meant to give religious minorities a higher status. It made it obligatory to enter the army for every subject for instance. The law was not well recieved by the Church at the time.
The problematic part is the ammendment from 1934, which stipulates 10 different condition on where, and why a church can be built or repaired.
As far as a coptic/liberal party goes, if anyone came up with the idea of a Coptic party based on religious grounds, that would not be granted permission according to the constitution , for the same reasons as stated for the MB. I don´t really now if the liberal trend would benefit from another liberal party, Wafd and al Ghad seems to be more than enough. As for coptic interests, they are best served in a democratic society , and not by preserving a political system who want´s to democratize in tiny bits, every once in a while. Eventhough you´re absolutely right that many copts who votes, choose the NDP over any other party for stability.
All the three politicians named above, is linked to the old coptic political establishment of the monarchy, reintegrated into the political sphere by Sadat´and Mubarak in the seventies and eighties . Mounir Fakhri Abd al Nour´s father was a leading wafdist politician as was Mona Makram Ebeid´s great uncle, Makram Ebeid. She´s also related to the first Sec General of the NDP, Fikri Makram Ebeid. As for Yousef Boutros Ghali, apart from being the nephew of the former UN Sec General, his great grand father was Egypt first Coptic PM in 1908-1910.
about copts participating in pokitical life . dont forget leaders like makram ebaid , wisa wasef , botros ghali , to name but a few . i am a muslim , but this is something between me and God all mighty . politics has nothing to do with religion . i woeld say , politics wise, this person is a patriot or not , but not a muslim or not . there are a lot of bad unpatriotek muslims . equaly, there are many patriotek copt . by the way , the word copt means egyptuan