لقائي مع برنامج زي الشمس على قناة CBC

How the last Mubarak aide won his battle against the Brotherhood

Magdy Samaan
Egypt Independent

Thu, 18/10/2012 - 18:58

Prosecutor General Abdel Meguid Mahmoud won his battle against Muslim Brotherhood President Mohamed Morsy by exploiting the latter’s violation of the law when Morsy announced an executive decision to remove Mahmoud from office and appoint him ambassador to the Holy See.
Just like in the killing of Egyptian security guards in Rafah, when Morsy had an opportunity to oust the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF), he thought the acquittals of the Battle of the Camel defendants provided a golden opportunity to overthrow the Prosecutor General.
Morsy’s decision to oust Mahmoud seemed to be a revival of the conflict between the judiciary and executive powers. Mahmoud said he would stay in his position since the law states that a public prosecutor may not be removed — unless he or she dies, retires or resigns.
Morsy then backpedaled on his decision with Vice President Mahmoud Mekky saying the whole affair was a misunderstanding, while presidential spokesperson Yasser Ali blamed the media.
Believing that attack is the best form of defense, Mahmoud proceeded to exploit the Brotherhood’s mistake He said he met Hossam Gheriany, head of the Constituent Assembly,with close links to the Brotherhood, and Minister of Justice Ahmed Mekky on Thursday, and claimed both tried to persuade him to resign. He added Gheriany warned him of upcoming dangerous protests.
“The protesters might come to your office and assault you like the late former head of the State Council Abdel Razeq al-Sanhoury,” he says Gheriany told him. Sanhoury, head of the state council at the beginning of former President Gamal Abdel Nasser’s rule and a prominent legal expert, was assaulted in his office in 1954 after he adopted positions independent of the executive authority and cancelled some of the president’s decisions. The military regime in power then managed to control what came to be known as the Judges’ Massacre by ousting some judges and assigning many of them administrative jobs.
Even though Mahmoud is not as important a figure as Sanhoury, times have changed. In his battle, Mahmoud was able to call a press conference at his office and steer public opinion against Morsy’s decision, an unthinkable option in Sanhoury’s time.
Essam al-Erian, the acting president of the Freedom and Justice Party, threatened Mahmoud on Twitter, saying that his best option was to accept the president’s assignment with dignity. The Brotherhood also hoped their call for a protest last Friday was going to mobilize a number large enough to buttress the ousting and pressure Mahmoud to go without a fight. However, their conspiracy was not well-timed. Political powers had already been mobilizing protesters for another protest to mark the 00 days since Morsy assumed power and call for reforming the Constituent Assembly.
Feeling unrealistically potent, Brotherhood members clashed violently with the other protesters, creating the opportunity for Mahmoud to exploit their mishap.
in a tone as defiant as Erian’s, Mahmoud told reporters, “I am addressing the members of the Muslim Brotherhood. Your words won’t scare me. I am staying in my office and will protect myself and my position, as well as the public prosecutors office and the independence of the judiciary.” He went on to say, “my position will only become vacant if I am assassinated, and assassination is something some political factions are used to.”
Paradoxically, members and close observers of the Egyptian justice system are fully aware that defending the independence of the judiciary was never on Mahmoud’s agenda. He was one of Mubarak’s men, who failed to draw a line between the executive branch and his position as public prosecutor. In fact, it often appeared as though the public prosecutor’s office was affiliated with the presidency. Mahmoud is also the last senior official of the old regime to survive Mubarak’s ouster.
Paradoxically, Mahmoud is also responsible for bringing Mubarak’s regime icons to justice today. Almost two years after the revolution, the acquittals of former regime figures and disappointing verdicts have demonstrated that Mahmoud, like the SCAF, was protecting his old friends.
The Public Prosecutor’s office did not present sufficient evidence to indict the defendants, which provided an opportunity for judges to justify their disappointing rulings. Mahmoud, meanwhile, passed the buck onto the executive authorities, which he said did not cooperate in providing evidence.
So it is ironic that today, Mahmoud, described by many, including Fekry Kharroub, head of the Alexandria Criminal Court, as “the most politicized public prosecutor ever” and a former Mubarak man, is at the center of a public controversy over the legitimacy of the new president’s decision on the grounds that it is an assault on the “independence of the judiciary” — a precarious independence that Mahmoud himself is accused of particularly assailing under Mubarak’s rule.
Magdy Samaan is a journalist working at the Daily Telegraph’s Cairo Bureau. He previously worked for Al-Shorouk and Al-Masry Al-Youm.
This article was originally published in Egypt Independent's weekly print edition.

Nour Party Dispute Resolved, But New Islamist Parties May Still Benefit

Magdy Samaan | October 16, 2012

A rift within the Salafi Nour Party over the organization’s leadership has been contained, but the very public dispute has left several unanswered questions about the Islamist movement in its wake. Are the disputes within the Nour Party related to an inability to take a truly democratic approach within the party ranks? And while resolved, has the dispute opened the door to other Islamist parties taking the lead in the upcoming parliamentary elections?

Disputes over internal party elections were initially covered up, the truth only coming to light after the public resignation of several members. In an attempt to contain the conflict, party head Dr. Emad Abd al-Ghafour simply canceled the elections. Twelve senior party members responded by pushing forward with elections, while also calling for Abd al-Ghafour’s resignation.
The struggle came to an eventual end when members of the Salafi Calling [al-Da’awa al-Salafiyya], the committee from which the Nour Party was born, took steps to resolve the discord. Their efforts resulted in reconciliation between the two disputing factions and a renewed confidence in Dr. Abd al-Ghafour as Party Chairman.
The internal squabble could be seen not only as a result of the Salafi movement’s resistance to democracy, but also as a result of its late entry into Egyptian politics. The Nour Party itself emerged out of a number of Salafi organizations, receiving both financial and logistical support from the greater Salafi movement, which in turn is supported by Saudi Arabia. Unlike the unified Muslim Brotherhood, the Salafi movements do not work as one cohesive group; they are parties that do not believe in democracy but are compelled to deal with it out of necessity.
During the Mubarak era, the Salafi movement abstained from political participation because they considered democracy a Western system of governance, one which does not conform with their Islamic values. The Salafi Calling often rebuked the Muslim Brotherhood for participating in Mubarak’s political game. After the January 2011 uprising, Islamist apprehension that secular movements would take control of the government pushed the Salafi Calling to enter the political arena, forming the Nour Party, together with a number of Salafi organizations.
In last year’s parliamentary elections, the Nour Party’s Islamist Coalition, secured 24% of the seats in the People’s Assembly. The party then sought to fully implement Islamic Sharia. This effectively pushed them to the right of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party (FJP), which called instead for a gradual implementation of Sharia.
A bemused Egyptian public watched on as individual Salafi politicians displayed their political naïveté in the newly elected parliament; calling for a ban on teaching English in schools, labeling it the ‘language of infidels,’ interrupting a parliamentary session with the call to prayer; and worst of all MP Anwar al-Balkimi claiming that he was assaulted and mugged by two men - the truth later emerging that he had in fact had a nose job.
This inexperience coupled with fractures within the second largest Islamist party could be of benefit to newly formed conservative parties. Among them is the ‘Egyptian Umma Party’ (al-Umma al-Misriya), formed by Sheikh Hazem Salah Abu Ismail. Disqualified from the presidential race on a technicality, Abu Ismail demonstrated his popularity during his bid for presidency, and as a result offers a viable alternative to the Nour Party. Abu Ismail’s vision includes a uniform leadership for the Salafi movement, currently plagued by internal disputes due to the fact that a personality around which the Salafis can rally has not emerged.
On the other hand, former Brotherhood member Dr. Abdel Moneim Abul-Futuh’s party - ‘Strong Egypt’ (Misr al-Qaweya) provides a political avenue for moderate Islamists. Together, Abu Ismail and Abul-Futuh have aligned themselves more closely with the revolutionary demands, in comparison to the Nour Party and the Brotherhood’s FJP.
These new Islamist parties already sought to highlight the differences between themselves and the Muslim Brotherhood by criticizing President Mohamed Morsi’s policies. By so doing, they hope to also take advantage of the Brotherhood’s mistakes offering voters an alternative to the FJP.

If the secular parties do not truly succeed in coming together as a powerful political body in the upcoming elections, these new Islamist parties may instead be able to benefit from the errors of the Islamist parties that came before them. As a result, we may see a new composition in the coming parliament, in which the majority held by the FJP and Nour will go to Aboul Futuh and Abu Ismail’s parties instead. There is also the possibility that the members of the now-defunct National Democratic Party may secure a higher percentage of representation in the coming elections if a strong civil coalition does not emerge.

أحزاب إسلامية جديدة تسعي للاستفادة من أزمة حزب النور

 

 

 

مجدي سمعان

 

Egypt Source

| October 16, 2012

 

الخلافات التي شهدها حزب النور السلفي في مصر تم احتوائها لكنها تركت أسئلة حول الحركة الإسلامية تبحث عن اجابات، فهل الخلافات داخل الحزب متعلقة بعدم قدرة الحزب الإسلامي على إرساء ممارسات ديمقراطية حقيقية؟ وهل سيفتح الصدع في الحزب الباب أمام أحزاب إسلامية جديدة للمقدمة في الانتخابات البرلمانية المقبلة؟

 

الخلافات حول الانتخابات الداخلية في الحزب كانت مكتومة ولم تظهر إلى العلن إلا مؤخرا، حين فوجئ الجميع بتراشق أعضاء الحزب بالإتهامات في الإعلام واستقالات متوالية لأعضائه.  مما دفع الدكتور عماد عبد الغفور، رئيس الحزب، إلى إصدر قرارا بإلغائها، إلا أن 12 من أعضاء الهيئة العليا قرروا استمرار الانتخابات، وإقالة عبد الغفور من رئاسة الحزب.

لكن شيوخ الدعوة السلفية تداركوا الأمر ونجحت جهودهم في التوصل إلى التوفيق بين الجبهتين المتصارعتين، وتجديد الثقة في الدكتور عماد عبد الغفور رئيسا للحزب، ليبقى الحزب وتعود الصراعات للغرفه المغلقة.

 

هناك بعض الأسباب التي أدت إلى الأزمة طبقا للتصريحات المنشورة لقيادات سلفية، من بينها، وجود صراع ما بين قيادة الحزب وشيوخ ما يسمي بـ"الدعوة السلفية" وهي الهيئة التي انبثق عنها حزب النور، وهو ما أدي مطالبة أعضائه بفصل الحزب عن الدعوة السلفية وعدم تدخل مشايخها فى القرارات.

 

كان التيار السلفي خلال حقبة مبارك يعزف عن المشاركة السياسية معتبرا أن الديمقراطية هي نظام غربي لا يتوافق مع النظام الإسلامي، وكان شيوخ الدعوة السلفية يلومون جماعة الإخوان المسلمين لانخراطها في اللعبة السياسية، لكن عقب انتفاضة يناير 2011، دفع قلق هذه التيارات من سيطرة التيار العلماني على الحكم إلى النزول إلى الساحة السياسية بقوة من خلال حزب النور، الذي انبثق عن عدد من التنظميات الإسلامية السلفية، بقيادة الدعوة السلفية، وتلقي دعما ماليا ولوجستيا من التيار السلفي المدعوم من السعودية. لكن وبعكس جماعة الإخوان المسلمين التي تعتمد على تنظيم سياسي مستقر مبني على مبدأ السمع والطاعة لأعضائه منذ نعومة أظافرهم، فإن الحركات السلفية لا يجمعها إطار تنظيمي واحد مبني على قواعد واضحة، فهي أحزاب لا تؤمن بالديمقراطية لكنها إضطرت للتعامل بها إلى حين.

 

حل حزب النور في المرتبة الثانية خلال الانتخابات البرلمانية الماضية حيث حصل تحالف الكتلة الإسلامية الذي قاده على 24% من مقاعد مجلس الشعب. وجاء في برنامجه أنه يهدف إلى تطبيق الشريعة الإسلامية، بشكل كامل. وهو ما يجعله على يمين حزب الحرية والعدالة الإخواني التي تتبنى منطق التدرج في تطبيق الشريعة.

 

وكنتيجة لحداثة عهد شيوخ السلفية بالسياسة فقد أثارت بعض تصريحاتهم ومواقفهم السخرية في الشارع المصري، من بينها مطالبة أحدهم في مجلس الشعب بمنع تعليم اللغة الإنجليزية في المدارس المصرية، لأنها "لغة الكفار"، ومقاطعة أحد نوابهم لجلسة من جلسات البرلمان برفع الآذان. فضلا عن بعض الفضائح الشهيرة مثل إدعاء النائب أنور البلكيمي تعرضه للإصابة في وجهه نتيجة لهجوم مسلح من قبل مجهولين سرقوا مبالغ مالية كانت بحوزته، وتبين أنه قام بإجراء عملية تجميل فى الأنف.

 

اهتزاز صورة ثاني أكبر الأحزاب الإسلامية سيصب في صالح أحزاب إسلامية جديدة تسعي إلى تجديد دماء التيار الإسلامي الذي يتطلع للحفاظ على مكاسبه خلال الانتخابات البرلمانية المقبلة من خلال بناء كيانات حزبية جديدة لتجاوز انخفاض شعبية التيار الإسلامي نتيجة للأخطاء الناتجة عن الممارسة. من بين تلك الأحزاب، حزب "الأمة المصرية" الذي يؤسسه الشيخ حازم صلاح أبو إسماعيل، وينتظر أن يتصدر الأحزاب السلفية بديلا لحزب النور في الانتخابات البرلمانية المقبلة، حيث يمتلك أبو إسماعيل شعبية وقواعد انتخابية بناها خلال حملته للترشيح للانتخابات الرئاسية، لثبات موقفه الداعي إلى تطبيق الشريعة الإسلامية دون موائمات. كما يعد أبو إسماعيل قيادة موحدة للتيار السلفي الذي تتنازع داخله كثير من القيادات، في ظل عدم بروز شخصية داخل حزب النور يلتف حولها السلفيين، وتحسم التناقض بين شيوخ الدعوة السلفية وسياسيو حزب النور. وحزب "مصر القوية" الذي يؤسسه الدكتور عبد المنعم أبو الفتوح، عضو جماعة الإخوان المسلمين السابق والمرشح الرئاسي الذي حل في المركز الرابع، ويمثل الوسط الإسلامي. ويتبنى أبو إسماعيل وأبو الفتوح مطالب أكثر ثورية من حزب النور وحزب الحرية والعدالة الإخواني.

 

وفي هذا الإطار تسعي الأحزاب الإسلامية الجديدة إلى إظهار قدر من التمايز بينها وبين جماعة الإخوان المسلمين، من خلال انتقاد بعض سياسات حكومة الرئيس الإخواني محمد مرسي، كي تجني هي ثمار أخطاء الجماعة في حالة ما اتجه مزاج الناخب إلى اختيار حزب بديل لحزب الحرية، ولا تذهب الأصوات إلى العلمانيين.

 

وفي حالة عدم نجاح التيارات المدنية في العمل سويا خلال الانتخابات المقبلة ضمن كيان سياسي قوي، فإن الأحزاب الإسلامية الجديدة قد تجني هي ثمار أخطاء الأحزاب الإسلامية التي سبقتها وقد نرى تركيبة جديدة للبرلمان المقبل، تستبدل فيها أغلبية حزب الحرية والعدالة والنور بأغلبية حزب مصر القوية والأمة المصرية. وهناك احتمال أيضا إلى أن يحظي أعضاء الحزب الوطني القديم بنسبة تمثيل أعلى خلال الانتخابات المقبلة إن لم يظهر تيار مدني قوي.