![]()
Problems on hold
President Mubarak:
Youssef Sidhom
In an interview with
The words are beautiful, and—coming
from the president of the republic—confirm that the State views all citizens as
equal regardless of religion. If the aim of such talk was to secure the concept
of “national unity” and to consolidate the relations between the “two elements
of one nation”, then some believe that this aim was fulfilled. My personal view
is that this aim was only fulfilled on the by-now familiar level of
tranquillisers, that is masking the real ailment through sedation with sweet
rhetoric, instead of working to treat it. It pains me to write that the
“national unity” and “two elements of one nation” slogans have become outdated,
meaningless, and are no longer acceptable. Among the circles of intellectuals
and writers, these slogans have gained notoriety as confirming the
categorisation of Egyptians according to their religion, then hailing a hollow
unity between the people of both religions. This in turn breeds deplorable,
discriminatory concepts and practices, which even the best rhetoric can in no
way beautify.
The president said that
differentiation between Copts and Muslims is nothing but an allegation made by
foreigners. I beg to disagree. Inequalities exist; they are well-established
and documented. And worse, having been the subject of steady official denial,
nothing has been done to remedy them. During the recent sectarian events of
last month, I noted that it was comforting that many Muslims have now come to
acknowledge the inequalities and denounce them. They discussed what could be
done to fix the faults in citizenship rights for Copts, within the wider
national Egyptian perspective, regardless of colour, gender, or religion.
I cannot imagine that the president
is unaware of the fact that one of the major inequalities between Muslims and
Copts concerns the legislation which governs their rights to build their
respective places of worship. Muslims enjoy absolute, unfettered rights to
allocate, purchase, or own land upon which they can build mosques. They are
offered facilities to obtain approvals and building permits from the relevant
authorities. Copts, on the other hand, face countless obstacles or obstructions
in securing land—whether through allocation by the State or direct purchase—for
building a church. Then begins the long, agonising journey of
applying for the required security approvals to build the church. This
process involves the required fulfilment of the notorious Ten Conditions—a
legacy of an outdated, discriminatory regulation which dates back to 1934, and which places confining, all-but-impossible to meet
conditions to build a church. If the Ten Conditions are however fulfilled, the
application has to garner a long ascending list of official and security
approvals, up to that of the president of the republic who alone holds the
authority to decree the building of the church. No time span limits the period
required until the final approval; the agony may be indefinite. What a
difference between this ++Via Dolorosa++
Copts have to traverse to build a church, and the rosy one traversed by their
Muslim partners in the homeland to build a mosque!
This legislation which maintains the
approval of building churches in the hands of the head of the State alone goes
back to the 1865 Ottoman Himayouni Edict, when
This legislative flaw is but one of
the forms of discrimination between Copts and Muslims. It is not the
only one.