On the Wahington conference
On promoting
reform
As I resume my articles on the recent Washington conference, I begin by reminding my readers that
this conference which is unanimously
termed by our media as the “Coptic conference”
was in fact on “Democracy for Muslims and Christians in Egypt, and supporting
democratic change in the
Middle East”. In my presentation, I will disregard the speeches and discussions which diverted from the
conference perspective, and
exploited it instead to discharge
angry protest at the curtailed
human rights, religious freedom, and democracy in the region without
offering any view of reform. I will focus on the
papers which offered objective views, and extended bridges towards change and reform. I begin with excerpts of my own paper.
“Egypt is already
on the road to political reform. We should
support this change by actively
taking part in it on all levels. Democracy does not stop at freedom of expression, which is already fully
warranted in
“Human rights standards in Egypt fall widely
short of the acceptable, especially
considering the
international treaties of which
Egypt is signatory. However, it is hoped
the National Council for Human Rights (NCHR) will play a positive role in this respect.
“Citizenship rights standards are the prime concern of national
programmes at this stage. Only the consolidation of citizenship rights concepts can end the
religious bias which divided and
separated Egyptians throughout the past three decades.
At the outset
of 2005, in the wake of sectarian incidents that led to a sit-in by thousands of Copts at the
St Mark’s cathedral grounds in
“Religious freedom in Egypt is incomplete.
Even though the Constitution stipulates freedom of worship for Muslims and Christians,
the latter face legislative
discrimination regarding the
rights to build and restore their places of worship. Whereas mosques are built and renovated with
absolute freedom, churches are subject to a plethora of presidential, political, and security approvals. Worth noting is that
presidential decrees aiming at easing
these approvals are issued from time to time—all very praiseworthy, yet the real question remains one of equality between Egyptians. We hope the
new Parliament would issue the widely-supported unified law for places of worship swiftly enough.
“Measures of competence and merit regarding
appointment to leadership and
high-position government and official posts remain severely shaken. Copts are regularly excluded from such appointments,
not due to any Constitutional,
legal, or declared policy, but due to rampant, undeclared
fanaticism. The real decision-makers on all levels—in the presidency, government, universities, or
public institutions—tend to look the other way. Since
no real criteria exist to measure such behaviour,
and in the absence of accountability on that head, it is
hoped that the NCHR or the ECCR—once it is established—could monitor the problem and recommend
remedies.
“The marginalisation of Copts and the discrimination against them have led to their withdrawal,
in bitterness, from public and political life, and hence their
notoriously low
participation in politics. This naturally
resulted in their scarce numbers on parties’
candidate lists in parliamentary
and municipal elections, a scarcity often explained away by the argument that they had no real chance of being elected. This may be due to the
erroneous concept of ‘Muslim
elects Muslim and Copt elects
Copt’, which in turn reflects an unprecedented tendency to ‘religionise’ politics. The challenge is to fight such thought
on the long term through calling upon Copts to assume a thoroughly active part in politics,
and on the short term through changing
the election law to allow for list candidacy—which would afford
Copts and women better chances—instead of the present individual candidacy system.
“A
full programme—tackled in detail
by the media during the recent elections—of
political, democratic reform awaits the
new parliament. The main features are the separation between State and religion, the stipulation of
a maximum of two presidential
terms for the president, the appointment of a vice president, separation between State authorities, abolishment of the state of emergency, freedom
of foundation of non-religious
political parties, freedom
of establishment of written, audio, and video media venues, and freedom of formation of civil
society organisations. These measures
constitute in their entirety a comprehensive system
of reform which could serve to modernise Egypt and benefit all Egyptians—Copts being part and parcel of them.
“Civil
society institutions and the
people of Egypt bear a historic responsibility in dissipating the sectarian inflammation which leads to the eruption
of violence at the first surfacing of underlying problems, no matter how trivial. The build-up of sectarian problems has resulted in the withdrawal of each sector within
its own self-imposed
boundaries of church or mosque. It is
now up to civil society to draw
them back into common activities and positive co-existence, to destroy the
alienation and repulsion which nurture fanatic thought.
“It is of the
utmost importance that, as we gather here
in Washington to candidly expose and
discuss our problems and perspectives of reform, we agree
that our aim is to support the reform that
has already begun in Egypt. In this context, we call upon the Egyptian
government, political
parties, and civil society institutions to place our problems on the table in Egypt—the natural place for it—around which
all the sons and daughters of Egypt can gather for a national
dialogue. Let us put an end
to denying our problems, which drove some of us to go outside Egypt to discuss them freely
and risk being accused of seeking empowerment from outside even
as we truly seek it at
home.”