Issandr El Amrani writes: The ruling by the Supreme Constitutional Court on Thursday has been described by many, including myself, as a coup by proxy. The only democratically elected institution in Egypt is now gone, the SCAF has regained full legislative powers — i.e. the power to rule by decree — and it’s not clear whether the president who will be elected in the next two days will be able to assume his position in any case. Furthermore, we know that SCAF intends to ammend the constitutional declaration now in place or perhaps issue a new one altogether. If it looks like a coup and smells like a coup and is based on absurd legal reasoning, it probably is a soft coup.

The strange thing is that I don’t see much outrage about it outside of Twitter.

The Muslim Brotherhood has chosen to accept the decision and focus on the presidential race. This may be simply a tactical choice to boost its premise that Mohammed Morsi is the revolutionary candidate at a time when the MB has lost its main claim to legitimacy, its parliamentary majority. Others whisper that this indicates a deal in the making, where Morsi will take the presidency. Many MB members grumble but for now their focus is the presidential race, even though SCAF now has the leeway to redefine presidential powers depending on which candidate wins. It may be that the MB is keeping its outrage bottled in case its candidate loses, but the decision not to push on the court’s verdict as illegitimate is certainly puzzling. [Continue reading…]

Hossam El-Hamalawy writes: While many in Egypt are mourning the “death of the revolution” and the ensuing “military coup,” it is time to highlight, or re-highlight some points:
1- To talk about a military coup in June 2012 is to assume that Egypt was run by a civilian government since the toppling of Mubarak, which is completely farcical. The coup, more or less, has been in effect since 11 February 2011, when revolutionaries managed to overthrow Mubarak, and he was replaced by his handpicked army generals.

2- The military junta from the start of the “transitional process” has been in control, and are using all their constitutional, legal, and political weapons to shape the process, and they did not hesitate to use bullets when their “soft power” failed.

3- The military junta are the most keen among all the political players to “handover power” to a civilian government. As of the time of this writing, and over the past week, military APCs and trucks have been roaming the streets, handing out statements, and encouraging people to vote in the second round. Similar propaganda messages, both explicit and indirect, are aired continuously on the state-run TV. The junta wants to “leave,” head back to the barracks, with legal, political, and constitutional assurances that their position, privileges, control over the economy, and decision making, remain unchanged. In short, they dream of the old “Turkish model.”

4- No revolution gets settled in 18 days or 18 months. If we all agree that this is a war with the regime that will last for several years, then why everyone is suddenly panicking and saying it’s over? Did anyone expect that the revolution would be one linear curve of victories? We are definitely going through a catastrophic period, when the counterrevolution is on the offense, but by no means should we expect the revolution to be finished. How many times did we hear or read over the past year and a half, “it’s over! the revolution is defeated,” only to be surprised with a resurgence of street protests, occupations, and labor strikes that force the junta to retreat? [Continue reading…]

The New York Times reports: Egypt’s military rulers moved to consolidate power Friday on the eve of the presidential runoff election, shutting down the Islamist-led Parliament, locking out lawmakers and seizing the sole right to issue laws even after a new head of state takes office.

The generals effectively abandoned their previous pledge to cede power to a civilian government by the end of the month, prolonging the increasingly tortuous political transition after the ouster of Hosni Mubarak last year. The power play has also darkened the prospects that Egypt, the most populous Arab state and one that historically has had tremendous influence on the direction of the region, might quickly emerge as a model of democracy for the Middle East.

Their moves, predicated on a court ruling on Thursday and announced with little fanfare by the state news media, make it likely that whoever wins the presidential race will — at least at first — compete with the generals for power and influence. The military counsel also indicated through the official news media that it planned to issue a new interim constitution and potentially select its own panel to write a permanent charter. The generals have already sought permanent protections for their autonomy and political power.

Robert Mackey writes: As my colleague David Kirkpatrick reports, many of the Internet activists who helped drive Egypt’s 2011 revolution are dismayed about the choice offered by this weekend’s presidential runoff between two conservatives. In meetings with bloggers in Cairo all this week, conversations returned again and again to how best to respond to a deeply unpalatable choice: voting for Ahmed Shafik, Hosni Mubarak’s last prime minister, or Mohamed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood, the Islamist group that was Mr. Mubarak’s main opposition but has managed to alienate many former allies from last year’s protest movement.

Although some prominent activists have called on revolutionaries to cast strategic votes for Mr. Morsi to block the standard-bearer of the old order, many others are convinced that it is better not to cast any vote at all in elections conducted under continued, even intensifying, military rule.

I think it’s safe to say that we shouldn’t be trusting or willingly collaborating with SCAF. Especially when they organize the elections.

— Tarek Shalaby (@tarekshalaby) 14 Jun 12

But even those bloggers who have decided not to vote for either candidate are still debating how best to register their disapproval of the election: by staying away from the polls entirely, and seeking to depress voter turnout, or by spoiling their ballots, crossing out the names of both candidates and forcing the authorities to report the number of voters who actively rejected both men.

Al-Masry Al-Youm reports: Presidential campaigns are often ugly, divisive affairs with bitter rivals slinging accusations and recriminations, sometimes veering into the territory of outright dishonesty. But as the fight over Egypt’s presidency heats up between the Muslim Brotherhood’s nominee and Hosni Mubarak’s last prime minister, the country’s largest Islamist organization stands accused of more than just dishonesty or incompetence — the Brotherhood is being bombarded with accusations of killing protesters and instilling chaos during the 25 January Revolution. And some see that as an unnerving harbinger of what could be to come.

The Brotherhood’s nominee, Mohamed Morsy, and Mubarak’s long-serving civil aviation minister and last prime minister, Ahmed Shafiq, are set to compete in the runoff scheduled for 16 and 17 June.

Although Shafiq is not officially backed by Egypt’s military rulers, he is widely viewed as the facade of the generals and the deeply entrenched and highly influential Egyptian security apparatus. Meanwhile, the retired air force general’s campaign draws heavily on the old networks of Mubarak’s disbanded National Democratic Party.

In recent days, both candidates have exchanged a glut of accusations. While Morsy has constantly emphasized Shafiq’s ties with Mubarak’s “corrupt” regime and his animosity to the revolution, Shafiq accuses the Brotherhood of seeking to take Egypt backward by establishing a religious state.

But Shafiq’s attacks haven’t stopped there.

In a television interview last week, Shafiq accused the Muslim Brotherhood of being implicated in the killing of protesters in the notorious “Battle of the Camel” that took place during the 18-day uprising that culminated in Mubarak’s ouster. Eleven people died when pro-Mubarak thugs, some of them riding on horses and camels, attacked Tahrir Square with rocks, Molotov cocktails and bladed weapons.

Since the revolution, the Brotherhood has always taken pride in the role played by their members in defending the square during the Battle of the Camel. Many revolutionary figures and politicians had given Brotherhood youth credit for being a central part of the battle, which marked the last nail in the coffin of Mubarak’s rule. Meanwhile, Shafiq was prime minister during the battle and is currently under investigation for his role in it.

Two low-profile lawyers had reportedly filed a complaint with the general prosecutor against the Brotherhood accusing them of having burned police stations and opened prisons during the revolution. Media outlets, long criticized as mouthpieces of the old regime, have been reiterating these allegations. However, most observers have stated over the past year that they believe the Interior Ministry was responsible for the release of prisoners as a tactic to stir up trouble during the protests.

The allegations, which are reminiscent of smear campaigns routinely launched by the state-media and security apparatus, raise questions of whether the Brothers are faced with mere negative campaigning that only seeks to improve Shafiq’s chances and will eventually cease with the conclusion of the poll or if a potential crackdown on Egypt’s largest political organization looms on the horizon.

For the Brothers, it is more than a mere campaigning tactic.

“If we perceive it only as a part of negative campaigning, we will be missing the larger picture,” Amr Darrag, a leader of the Freedom and Justice Party, told Egypt Independent. Darrag believes the discourse emanating from Shafiq’s campaign and its sympathizers is a reproduction of the old regime and signals that, if Shafiq wins, retaliation against the Brotherhood and revolutionary forces will be in store.

“For the old regime, it is a matter of survival,” said Darrag. “The [retaliation] will not be restricted to the Brothers.” [Continue reading…]

David Hearst writes: The Nile Palace Bridge, where some of the fighting in Egypt’s revolution took place, is today a popular shrine. The bedlam of street life in Cairo, a city of 12 million people where traffic lights are an afterthought, is amplified on this bridge.

Kids taunt each other by hanging off the bridge over the fast-flowing Nile. They could not have produced a better image for the revolution itself. A year and a half on, it is perilously poised.

On Thursday, two days before voting in the second round of the presidential elections, the army and the old regime showed their hand by getting the judges they appointed to the constitutional court to declare the parliamentary elections – won overwhelmingly by the Muslim Brotherhood – null and void. The court went further and ordered parliament’s dissolution, even though it may not have the power to do that.

At a stroke, the gameplan of SCAF – the ruling military council – became clear for all to see. If parliament were dissolved, the constituent assembly drawing up the constitution would be abolished with it. If on Monday the army’s candidate, Ahmed Shafiq, is declared the winner, the old regime would have conducted a clean sweep of the revolution: the power to order new parliamentary elections, the power to rewrite the consitution and the presidency. A counter-revolution in all but name.

For some observers like the columnist Fahmi al-Huweidi, signs of the counter-coup were apparent before the constitutional court’s decision. “Journalists who were paid by the old regime and who had disappeared from the media for over a year suddenly began resurfacing with a barrage of articles saying why they were supporting Shafiq. Who gave them the courage to speak out like this? It would be have been impossible a few months ago.”

Another sign was a bizarre declaration on Wednesday by the justice minister empowering all members of the security and armed forces and police to arrest any civilian causing trouble in the streets – a power not seen since emergency rule, which Egypt has only just abandoned. It was as if they were anticipating trouble.

But the move may be backfiring. The Muslim Brotherhood did not take the bait by withdrawing its candidate, Mohamed Morsi, from the race, thus handing the presidency to Shafiq – although there were fierce arguments within the movement at their headquarters in Moquatom in Cairo to do just that.

Instead, the quiet technocrat Morsi came out fighting in the early hours of the morning. He said the Egyptian people would not allow a counter-revolution, and if the weekend’s vote was rigged in favour of Shafiq, the brotherhood would call everyone out on to the streets and the revolution would be “stronger” than it was before. [Continue reading…]

Tony Karon writes: The coup d’état that began 18 months ago in Egypt with the ouster of President Hosni Mubarak initially camouflaged itself in the language of revolution and promises of democracy, even as it worked to prevent the collapse of the old order and divide and conquer its challengers. But Thursday’s rulings by the Supreme Constitutional Court have shed the disguise: Egypt will be effectively ruled by the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) junta and its backers in the bureaucracy and judiciary until further notice.

The court, a holdover from the Mubarak era, not only slapped down a law passed by the democratically elected parliament to bar officials of the former regime from running for office but also effectively dissolved the legislature itself. The first ruling upholds the candidacy of the military’s preferred option, former Mubarak Prime Minister Ahmed Shafik, in Saturday’s presidential-election runoff against the Muslim Brotherhood’s Mohammed Morsi. And given the events of recent weeks, the smart money wouldn’t bet against him coming out on top in the race for a position whose powers have not yet been defined, a process over which the military retains a prerogative. Dissolving the parliament on the grounds that one-third of its seats were allegedly elected in an unconstitutional manner (albeit under the supervision of the junta and judiciary) may have even more far-reaching consequences: the Constituent Assembly, a highly contested body appointed by the parliament to draft a new constitution, is unlikely to survive the dissolution of the legislature that created it.

“Today’s moves by the Constitutional Court on behalf of the ruling Supreme Council of the Armed Forces seem difficult to overcome and likely to push Egypt onto a dangerous new path,” warns George Washington University analyst Marc Lynch, who was an adviser to the Obama Administration during last year’s Arab rebellions. “With Egypt looking ahead to no parliament, no constitution and a deeply divisive new President, it’s fair to say the experiment in military-led transition has come to its disappointing end. Weeks before the SCAF’s scheduled handover of power, Egypt now finds itself with no parliament, no constitution (or even a process for drafting one) and a divisive presidential election with no hope of producing a legitimate, consensus-elected leadership. Its judiciary has become a bad joke, with any pretense of political independence from the military shattered beyond repair.” [Continue reading…]

Ian Black writes: Egypt, a Cairo wit quipped recently, is “lost in transition”. The serious point is that although Hosni Mubarak stepped down in February 2011, the country’s progress from autocracy to democracy has been halting and complicated by tensions, divisions and violence at every turn.

Now, just two days before the runoff round of an already polarised presidential election, an extraordinary twist has created profound new uncertainties. The most dramatic interpretation is that it spells a decisive victory for the forces of counter-revolution. “It is like The Empire Strikes Back in the Star Wars saga,” commented the popular blogger Zeinobia. Others denounced it furiously as a judicial coup.

It is not surprising that the constitutional court decided that Ahmed Shafiq, Mubarak’s last prime minister, is eligible for the race, having ruled against a “political isolation” law that would have prevented him seeking office as a member of the old regime.

The judges, appointed under Mubarak, are widely seen as representative of the “deep state” that has survived the convulsions of the Egyptian chapter of the Arab spring to manoeuvre, manipulate – and retain power – behind the scenes.

Shafiq’s battle against Mohamed Morsi, the candidate of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice party, has been dubbed a “nightmare scenario” by Egyptian commentators who see it as a throwback to the bad old days when the military-backed presidency was ranged against the world’s oldest Islamist movement, with little else in the way of independent political forces between them.

But the court’s second ruling is far more volatile in its implications. The dissolution of the entire parliament – not just byelections for the third of MPs deemed to have been improperly elected – means that the Islamists who dominate it, from the Brotherhood and the hardline Salafi Nur party, will feel disenfranchised and cry foul.

David Ignatius spoke to Khairat el-Shater, the leading strategist of the Muslim Brotherhood: Shater was conciliatory when he talked about a Brotherhood victory. “Egypt is too big a responsibility for one group to lead it. It has to be a coalition,” he asserted. He didn’t talk about a Muslim state; indeed, the word Islam barely surfaced in the 90-minute conversation. Yet the conversation was scary when he talked about what would happen if the Brotherhood should lose.

But turmoil is ahead for Egypt, he says, if Ahmed Shafiq, a hard-line former prime minister, appears to win Sunday’s runoff. I say “appears” because Shater was already accusing Shafiq of “soft-rigging” the polls before Thursday’s court ruling. And he made a not-so-subtle prediction that if the Brotherhood’s rival should win, there will be violence.

The Egyptian people “will not accept Shafiq as president,” he said flatly. “From the first day of the announcement, people will be back to Tahrir Square. If the choice of the people is to protest, we will join the people.” He warned that foreign countries shouldn’t make quick moves to recognize Shafiq.

“The coming revolution may be less peaceful and more violent” than the one that toppled Mubarak, Shater predicted. “It may be difficult to control the streets. . . . Some parties, not the Muslim Brotherhood, may resort to further violence and extremism. . . . When people find that the door to peaceful change is closed, it is an invitation to violence.”

Mohamed Morsi, the Muslim Brotherhood candidate in Egypt’s upcoming runoff presidential election, writes: Despite yesterday’s tumultuous events, millions of Egyptians will nevertheless head to the polls this weekend to pick their first post-revolution president. Egypt’s constitutional court has invalidated the recent parliamentary election but has allowed Hosni Mubarak’s former PM, Ahmed Shafiq, to continue to stand for president . As the only other remaining candidate, I alone represent an unequivocal departure from the old regime that was toppled by the revolution of 2011.

I was nominated and elected by constituents – parties, groups, and individuals – who marched the streets of Egypt calling for change. I was jailed by the old regime. I belong to the middle classes that were sold out by the old establishment. I hold political and social views that are shared by many in our society but were suppressed or criminalised by the old regime. I understand the ambitions, values and standards held by many mainstream Egyptians.

For the sake of the Egyptian people and for the world, we must find the shortest and safest route to a stable, safe and sustainable transition in Egypt. To this end we need a detailed programme for change and renaissance, outlining clear priorities and specific plans. This I can offer.

On the political front, Egyptians revolted against an oppressive regime with the clear aim of regaining their freedom and affirming their liberties. Nothing short of a complete overhaul of the political system will be acceptable. It is not enough to remove a ruler or restructure a police force. We must spread and reinforce freedom, forming new political parties and a free mass media.

At the grassroots, people must be free of government interference, and allowed to choose public officials through fair elections. No party or group or class must ever be allowed to monopolise the political power in the country. As part of this agenda, I will transform the position of the president to an institution, with clear and delineated roles given to a number of vice-presidents (representing political and social forces other than the Freedom and Justice party that nominated me, and including a woman for the first time in modern Egyptian history), as well as a number of presidential aides and a team of advisers, all working in a transparent political environment and subject to oversight by parliament and civil society. [Continue reading…]

The New York Times reports: Egypt’s Supreme Constitutional Court on Thursday ruled that the Islamist-led Parliament must be immediately dissolved, while also blessing the right of Hosni Mubarak’s last prime minister to run for president, escalating a battle for power between the remnants of the toppled order and rising Islamists.

The high court, packed with sympathizers of the ousted president, appeared to be engaged in a frontal legal assault on the Muslim Brotherhood, the once-outlawed organization whose members swept to power in Parliament this spring and whose candidate was the front-runner for the presidency as well. The presidential election runoff is scheduled to go ahead Saturday and Sunday.

“Egypt just witnessed the smoothest military coup,” Hossam Bahgat, director of the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights, wrote in an online commentary. “We’d be outraged if we weren’t so exhausted.”The ruling means that whoever emerges as the winner of the runoff will take power without the check of a sitting Parliament and could even exercise some influence over the election of a future Parliament. It vastly compounds the stakes in the presidential race, raises questions about the governing military council’s commitment to democracy, and makes uncertain the future of a constitutional assembly recently formed by Parliament as well.

The decision, which dissolves the first freely elected Parliament in Egypt in decades, supercharges a building conflict between the court, which is increasingly presenting itself as a check on Islamists’ power, and the Muslim Brotherhood.

The ruling, by the highest judicial authority in Egypt, cannot be appealed and it was not clear how the military council, which has been governing Egypt since Mr. Mubarak’s downfall in February 2011, would respond. But in anticipation that the court’s ruling could anger citizens, the military authorities reimposed martial law on Wednesday.

Robert Mackey writes: Three weeks ago, after the first round of Egypt’s presidential election set up a final runoff between a leader of the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood and a former general who served as Hosni Mubarak’s prime minister during last year’s revolution, the activist blogger Mahmoud Salem joked that the candidate of the old regime might be forced to embrace some sort of wild conspiracy theory to deflect responsibility for the killing of hundreds of protesters during the uprising.

Imagining what the former prime minister, Ahmed Shafiq, might say if the issue came up during a televised debate, Mr. Salem wrote that he might claim that protesters in Cairo’s Tahrir Square who were killed by snipers during one particularly chaotic and bloody day — remembered mainly for a bizarre horse and camel charge of Mubarak defenders — had been shot not by government agents but militants from Hamas, the Palestinian Islamist faction.

#ShafiqvsMorsydebate ” u did nothing while our youth were getting killed on camel day” “they were getting killed by hamas snipers” #he3

— Mahmoud Salem (@Sandmonkey) 25 May 12

Although both candidates ultimately declined to participate in even an “indirect” debate, during an interview on Egyptian television last week, Mr. Shafiq did in fact try to shift the blame for the deaths of protesters from the government he served last February onto the shoulders of Muslim Brothers who took part in the demonstrations.

Speaking of those killed on Feb. 2, 2011, during what’s known in Egypt as the Battle of the Camel, the day of violence that followed the irregular cavalry charge, the standard bearer of the old regime claimed that the men attacking protesters from rooftops above Tahrir Square were not government-hired thugs, but Muslim Brothers.

Although Mr. Shafiq offered no proof for the accusation, and claimed only that he had “read this in a newspaper,” he also hinted darkly: “The day will come when the people will know the truth about who really killed the protesters in the square.”

The Guardian reports: A mob of hundreds of men assaulted women holding a march demanding an end to sexual harassment in Cairo, as attackers overwhelmed male supporters and molested several of the marchers in Tahrir Square.

Some victims said it appeared to have been an organised attempt to drive women out of demonstrations and trample the pro-democracy protest movement.

The attack on Friday follows a spate of smaller-scale assaults on women in Tahrir Square, the epicentre of the uprising that forced former president Hosni Mubarak to step down last year.

Earlier in the week, an Associated Press reporter witnessed around 200 men assault a woman who eventually fainted before others came to her aid.

Friday’s march demanded an end to all sexual assaults. Around 50 women participated, surrounded by a larger group of male supporters who joined hands to form a protective ring around them. The protesters carried posters and chanted. After the marchers entered a crowded corner of the square, a group of men waded into the women, heckling them and groping them. The attackers chased the the marchers as they tried to flee. Several women were cornered against railings and groped, according to reports. Eventually, the women found refuge in a nearby building.

Sharif Abdel Kouddous reports: As Egypt enters the final days of its so-called “transition,” the entire political process is on the verge of collapse.

The essential foundations of a post-Mubarak government that were supposed to have been lain over the past 16 months – the legislature, the presidency, the constitution – each suffer a crisis of legitimacy, the result of a military-managed transitional process so deformed that it barely make sense anymore.

Meanwhile, the lack of any semblance of reform within key state institutions – most notably the security forces, the judiciary and the media – was reconfirmed in the most dramatic of ways this month with the verdict in the trial of Hosni Mubarak, his sons and other top regime officials.

The turmoil has triggered massive protests across the country barely three weeks from the scheduled handover of power from military to civilian rule, with hundreds of thousands of Egyptians taking to the streets in a bid to reclaim their revolution.

The escalation of political crises began last month in the wake of the highly anticipated presidential elections. The first round of the poll left the country with a bitter, divisive outcome, pitting Ahmed Shafik, a stalwart of the Mubarak regime against Mohammed Mursi of the Muslim Brotherhood.

The result has left the majority of voters facing the most difficult of dilemmas, forced to choose between one candidate who is the very embodiment of the former regime that they rose up against last year; and the other a member of a conservative Islamist group that is that is, in many ways, the mirror establishment – highly hierarchical and disciplined, supported by patronage networks – and is widely viewed as having abandoned the revolution early on in the pursuit of its own interests. [Continue reading…]

Robert Mackey reports: Activists in Cairo and Alexandria rallied on Wednesday on the second anniversary of the killing of Khaled Said, a young Egyptian whose death at the hands of police officers provoked outrage and acted as a catalyst for the wave of popular anger that eventually swept Hosni Mubarak from power eight months later.

As the Egyptian newspaper Al-Masry Al-Youm reports, Mr. Said’s mother, Laila Marzouk, said at his grave that she cannot bring herself to vote for either of the remaining candidates in Egypt’s presidential election.

According to an Egyptian blogger who writes as @TheMiinz, Ms. Marzouk told Al Watan, another Egyptian newspaper, that being forced to choose between Ahmed Shafiq, a retired general who served as Mr. Mubarak’s last prime minister, or Mohamed Morsi, the candidate of the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood, was like being asked to select one deadly disease over another.

The New York Times reports: Former President Hosni Mubarak’s health has deteriorated so sharply since he was sentenced to life in prison on Saturday that the authorities are close to a decision to return him to a hospital outside the penal system, Interior Ministry officials said on Wednesday

Before his sentencing, Mr. Mubarak had been confined to hospitals but not jailed. Relocating Mr. Mubarak, 84, would stoke five days of street protests over the verdicts handed down against him and several top security officials last weekend in a trial for corruption and the killing of protesters.

On Wednesday, the state news agency said that Mr. Mubarak had suffered several heart attacks, a nervous breakdown, high blood pressure and severe depression since his transfer to a prison hospital. He was in the hospital’s intensive care unit and on a ventilator, the state news agency said.

Security officials said Wednesday that an Interior Ministry medical committee had examined him and recommended moving him to a military hospital or other medical center.

An extraordinary crowd of tens of thousands flooded central squares of the capital and other cities Tuesday night in scenes rivaling the early days of the protests that brought him down. And the outrage has become a powerful but unpredictable variable in the runoff set for June 16 and 17 to decide Egypt’s first competitive presidential election in which Mr. Mubarak’s last prime minister, Ahmed Shafik, faces Mohamed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt’s largest Islamist group.