Headlines, Human Rights, Middle East & North Africa

POLITICS-EGYPT: Judges Get “Conditional” Approval to Watch Vote

Emad Mekay

CAIRO, Sep 4 2005 (IPS) - Thousands of Egyptian judges who had threatened not to monitor the country’s first-ever contested presidential elections if a fair vote was not guaranteed said this week that they will supervise the balloting after all, but called on the U.S-backed government of Pres. Hosni Mubarak to meet certain demands.

Egyptians will go to the polls Sep. 7 to choose among 10 presidential candidates, with the incumbent and long-serving Mubarak widely expected to win amid accusations that his ruling National Democratic Party may be preparing to rig the vote.

Mubarak has ruled Egypt since the assassination of his predecessor, Anwar Sadat, 24 years ago. Until the constitution was amended earlier this year to provide for multi-party voting, parliament would nominate a single candidate and voters had to check either “yes” or “no” on the ballot.

The meeting of the “the Judges Club”, an informal syndicate for the country’s justices, on Friday modified their earlier position. The judges now say they are ready to monitor the elections but that they cannot be held responsible for its results since many of their demands have not been met.

The judges’ position is particularly important since they will be the only independent group to monitor the elections. Cairo has refused to give permission to international observers or civil society groups to take part.

Egypt’s constitutional requirement for judicial supervision of elections gives the country’s judges leverage in their ongoing campaign for greater autonomy vis-à-vis the executive and the heavy-handed State Security Police, which has often harrassed and jailed opponents of the government.

The Judges Club, which represents some 8,000 judges, had threatened in July to boycott any supervisory role on Sep. 7.

One condition the judges here – the most populous country in the Arab world with 73 million people – want the government to meet is for the elections to take place over a number of days instead of just one day. They argue that the number of judges is not enough to monitor all of the polling sites in one day, and an extension would more likely guarantee a fair and transparent vote.

The judges, who spearheaded the ongoing debate about the undemocratic nature of Egypt’s presidential elections, have also demanded that civil society groups be allowed to watch the balloting.

“If the Presidential Elections Committee doesn’t respond to our demand, then we’ll declare to the entire world that we are not responsible for the elections and that we will not be held accountable for its rigging,” said Justice Zakaria Abdelaziz, head of the Judges Club. “It’s already enough that we have shouldered the burden and the consequence for forgery and rigging since 1952.”

Several civil society groups backed the judges’ position, seeing new hope for grassroots organising against the Mubarak administration.

The Kefiya movement, which groups activists from different non-governmental organisations, demonstrated in Cairo on Friday to support the judges.

An affiliated website called “20s” and named after young activists in that age range described the judge’s move as “heroic”. Several independent newspapers and intellectuals also backed the judges, saying that without proper judicial supervision, the government is likely to rig the vote as it has in the past.

But the ruling party has not been idle in the face of escalating opposition. Ever since the “Judges Revolt”, the government through its ministry of justice has resorted to a series of intimidating tactics to dissuade the judges from their position, critics complain.

One amendment to the elections law requires an aspiring independent candidate to secure endorsements from hundreds of members of bodies like the People’s Assembly, the parliament – a near impossible mission since most of these bodies are dominated by the ruling party.

This provision effectively barred any independents from challenging Mubarak, leaving a small and mostly insignificant opposition. Of the nine candidates running against the 77-year old Mubarak, only two are considered serious competitors. First is the Ghad Party’s Ayman Nur and the second is Wafd Party’s Numan Gumaa.

Both parties have roots in Egypt’s wealthy classes and former feudalists who were part of the monarchy’s ruling elite before the 1952 military coup that overthrew the royals and brought the army to power.

Several other small parties have boycotted the election, calling it a charade.

The country’s largest organised political group, the Muslim Brotherhood, remains banned by Mubarak’s secular government. It too is boycotting the elections.

But the latest move came just one day before the judges’ Friday meeting, when the government-appointed Presidential Elections Committee decided to ban some 1,700 judges from monitoring the elections for “having an active political role”. Those ruled out were the leaders of the “revolt” and are known reformists.

While punishing Mubarak’s critics, the government doled out some carrots to undecided judges. It said it will give a one year’s salary to judges that monitor the elections – an attractive offer for many – prompting widespread criticism by non-official media and independent analysts.

On Friday, Human Rights Watch issued a report warning that key features of Egypt’s decades-long authoritarian rule remain in place, making a truly free and fair election at this moment beyond reach.

The group said that the elections could see a repeat of the widespread fraud and intimidation that have characterised recent votes.

Still, “The significance of this election isn’t the possibility of unseating Mubarak, but the fact that many Egyptians have boldly challenged his quarter-century of rule,” said Joe Stork, deputy Middle East director at Human Rights Watch.