Nearly three years after the ouster of President Hosni Mubarak, Egypt is at a critical crossroads: Will it move toward democratization or regress into authoritarianism?
With a vote on a new constitution slated for the next couple of months, and promises of parliamentary and presidential elections by summer, Egypt’s military-backed interim government claims it has a road map to correct the country’s deviation from the goals of the 2011 revolution. But the passage last week of a law effectively quashing the right to public protest suggests the opposite.
According to the new law promulgated by the interim president, Adly Mansour, the government must be notified of all gatherings of more than 10 people. Demonstrations overnight or at places of worship are banned. Moreover, the Interior Ministry, which controls the country’s police force, has full discretion to reject applications; given the fact that police brutality is a frequent complaint of protesters, this arrangement poses a serious conflict of interest. Few Egyptians trust the ministry to approve requests fairly and without politicized prejudices. And the tedious paperwork demanded by the law means that the ministry can drag out the approval process for months.
As Egypt braces for its second attempt at passing a constitution via a public referendum, the timing of the protest law was no coincidence: It was designed to quell anticipated dissent by civil society and youth groups who have been largely excluded from the constitution-drafting process, as they were in 2012.
While the law’s proponents point to similar legislation in Western democracies regulating the time, manner and place of public protests, they overlook the alternative channels available in those societies for expressing dissent. A free press and the ability to criticize government policies without risk of arrest under trumped-up charges are crucial government oversight mechanisms.
— Read the full article published on December 3, 2013 on the New York Times here.
