http://www.juancole.com/2012/07/morsi-provokes-constitutional-crisis-in-egypt-by-recalling-parliament.html
http://www.debka.com/article/22164/Israel-perturbed-by-Obama%E2%80%99s-outreach-to-Mursi---against-his-word
To signal disapproval and concern over the impact on Israel’s security of Washington’s unconditional outreach to Muslim Brotherhood-ruled Cairo, Prime Minster Binyamin Netanyahu has ordered the speeding up of construction on the fortified fence on the Israel-Egyptian border, known for decades as “the peace border,” and completion of the expanded military deployment in the border region.In Jerusalem, the Obama administration is seen as suddenly backtracking on the conditions set the incoming Egyptian president in the last week of June, which essentially made US support of his regime conditional on his performance in key fields:
and.....
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/07/201279124421528560.html
Katatni and Morsi are both members of the Muslim Brotherhood, which won nearly half of the parliament, and the ongoing political conflict between the military and Egypt's elected officials is seen by many liberal and secular politicians as a battle to determine the Brotherhood's post-revolution political powers.
"All the rulings and decisions of the Supreme Constitutional Court are final and not subject to appeal ... and are binding for all state institutions," the court said in a statement on Monday.
The military supported the court's position in a statement of its own, saying it's order to dissolve parliament in June "represented the implementation" of the court's decision, which found the manner of the parliamentary election unconstitutional.
Yussuf Auf, a judge in the Giza governorate and constitutional scholar, said he believed Morsi had exceeded his power by reconvening parliament, and that this represented "a severe problem for the rule of law in Egypt".
"I think it's just a political conflict, it's not a legal conflict ... between the president and the military council, and the two parties are trying to find a legal basis for their decisions, just to support their point of view," he said.
Analysts believe that the military council and state institutions still packed with old regime loyalists have attempted to constrain the Brotherhood in the months since their parliamentary gains.Two days before the presidential election began last month, the court ruled that the legislature's election was unconstitutional since political parties were allowed to run for one-third of seats reserved for individuals.
Days after the court dissolved parliament, and just minutes after polls closed in the presidential election, the military issued a unilateral package of constitutional amendments stripping the president of his role as commander in chief, asserting autonomy over their budget and affairs, and assuming the power to legislate until a new parliament could be elected.
Though the constituent assembly tasked with drawing up Egypt's new constitution is currently functioning, after being selected by the dissolved parliament, the SCAF also gave itself the power to choose a new assembly if the current one runs into any problems.
The amendments were seen as a pre-emptive attempt to limit Morsi's powers, should he win.
For the past month, the Brotherhood has argued that the court's decision was wrong and that the military, at the time the executive authority in the country, had no legal right to order parliament dissolved.
Morsi provokes Constitutional Crisis in Egypt by recalling Parliament
Posted on 07/09/2012 by Juan
Egyptian President Muhammad Morsi tried to steal third base on Sunday, announcing that he was calling back into session the dissolved Egyptian parliament. It would continue to meet, he said, until new parliamentary elections, to be held within 60 days of the completion of the new constitution. He thus took on both the Supreme Court and the officer corps, setting the stage for a face-off.
The law under which the parliament had been elected was found unconstitutional by Egypt’s Supreme Court in mid-June, and it found that the body was null and void as a result. The Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) then ordered the parliament dissolved. It later scheduled new parliamentary elections for late 2012, after a new constitution is crafted. SCAF also rather weirdly declared that in the absence of a legitimate civilian parliament, its 22 officers would serve as the legislative branch of national government until the new constitution was in place and a new parliament could be elected.
I personally think that this attempt to replace the parliament was intended to give SCAF the right to appoint and oversee the constituent assembly that will draft the new constitution, so as to be in a position to safeguard the prerogatives of the military and to forestall a total Islamization of the constitution.
Morsi decreed that the parliament elected late last fall continue to meet until a new one was elected. This decree puts him in the position of trying to overrule the Supreme Court as well as trying to overrule SCAF.
It also gives Egypt two national legislatures at the same time, the military and the civilian. Or more likely it is intended as a way of making the military go back to its barracks, since with a civilian executive, legislature and judiciary, there is no real room for SCAF in governance.
The parliament had appointed a constituent assembly to draft a new constitution. It has continued its work, but SCAF has asserted that it has the prerogative of dismissing current members and appointing 100 new members to complete this task. If the civilian legislature that appointed the original constituent assembly is revived, does that forestall SCAF from proroguing it and appointing a new such body by military fiat?
Given that the Freedom and Justice Party of the Muslim Brotherhood and the Nur Party of the hard line fundamentalist Salafis have a majority in parliament, a reinstatement of this parliament would allow the Brotherhood to pass fundamentalist laws and have their fellow Brotherhood member, Morsi, quickly sign off on them.
Some Egyptian observers believe that this move threatens a confrontation between Egyptian secularists and the religious forces, and that there could be social violence over it, or even a military coup.
Egypt is therefore even more engaged in a high wire act than before.
The story begins with the 1971 constitution, from the old socialist period, which contained:
and......Article 87The law shall determine the constituencies into which the State shall be divided and the number of elected members of the People’s Assembly must be at least 350 persons, of whom at least one half shall be workers and peasants elected by direct secret public balloting. The definition of worker and peasant shall be provided by law. The President of the Republic may appoint a number of members not exceeding ten.This constitution did not assume a multi-party democracy, and the election of working class independents was intended to be a form of direct democracy.Over time, however, in the late Sadat period (1970-81) and in the tenure of Hosni Mubarak (1981-2011), multiple political parties became more prominent in Egyptian political life, even though in Mubarak’s time the National Democratic Party always got the vast majority of seats. The half of seats dedicated to workers and peasants thus became associated with the idea that they should be preserved for independents, i.e. candidates not backed by parties. Mubarak connived at putting NDP members into those seats, and the Supreme Court ruled against him in 1987 and 1990, though parliament was not dissolved because that was a presidential prerogative that he did not exercise. Mubarak dragged his feet till the next stacked, compliant parliament was elected.In summer of 2011, SCAF limited the seats dedicated to independents to one third instead of half, having been pressured by Egyptians who were afraid that Mubarak loyalists would dominate the independent seats. Then SCAF amended the law to allow party-backed candidates to run for the independent seats. Since the National Democratic Party had been dissolved, the idea was that this step would put remaining Mubarak loyalists at a disadvantage. A lot of people at that time were mainly worried about a return of the old regime.In late March of 2012, SCAF issued a rump interim constitution, which mainly consisted of selected articles from the 1971 constitution, including article 87, verbatim.An independent candidate who had to try to compete with party-based candidates sued after the elections were held in November and December, and the Supreme Court found that the SCAF amendments allowing parties to contest the one third of seats reserved for independents was prejudicial to the independents, especially since Egypt has only 3 million members of political parties, so that most voters are independents.In short, the court found that the SCAF amendment under which the elections were conducted was unconstitutional (ironically, article 87 now only existed in the military-issued rump constitution of late March):[The Court concluded that] the elections for Parliament were conducted on the basis of texts that have [long] been deemed unconstitutional by this Court. [See SCC collection of decisions, vol. 4, decision of 19 May 1990] The entire establishment of Parliament is null since the elections, which means its effective disappearance under the force of law since that date, without need for any further measure. This is the result of the unconstitutionality of the laws mentioned, and the application of the absolute and universal effect of decisions in constitutional cases, binding on all [citizens] and on the state in its various powers in accordance with Article 49 of the Law of the SCC.Some observers keep saying that the Supreme Constitutional Court did not actually dissolve parliament. It most certainly did, mandating “its effective disappearance.” Spokesmen for the court after the decision made clear that the court was dissolving parliament.Just to be on the safe side, apparently, SCAF then also dissolved parliament.The Muslim Brotherhood argued at the time that the Supreme Constitutional Court had the right to find that the one-third of seats set aside for independents had been improperly elected, but did not have the judicial or executive authority to order parliament’s “effective disappearance.” The practical steps that should be taken, they said, should have been left to the administrative courts or to the new president as an decision of the executive. (See Nathan Brown’s excellent description of the controversies in mid-June.)In essence, Morsi simply gave effect Sunday to that Brotherhood argument of mid-June.Interestingly, however, Morsi now accepts the Supreme Court/ SCAF contention that the ruling does require new, early parliamentary elections. The main point of difference is whether the old parliament should remain in session in the meantime.Since parliament is usually in recess in summer, and always during the fasting month of Ramadan, which is approaching, it is unlikely that Morsi’s resurrected parliament will even meet very much. His call for parliament to reconvene is a symbolic attempt to clip SCAF’s wings and to assert his powers as the elected president against their continued junta.So he is trying to steal third base. The question is whether SCAF and the Supreme Court will risk trying to get him tagged out. And whether the spectators and fans will rush the field and riot.
http://www.debka.com/article/22164/Israel-perturbed-by-Obama%E2%80%99s-outreach-to-Mursi---against-his-word
Israel perturbed by Obama’s outreach to Mursi - against his word
DEBKAfile Exclusive Report July 9, 2012, 6:46 PM (GMT+02:00)
US Deputy Secretary of State William Burns and Egyptian President Mohammed Mursi
Israeli government and military leaders were taken aback by the news of US President Barack Obama’s invitation to the new Egyptian president Mohammed Mursi to visit Washington in September - in breach of the president's assurances to US Jewish leaders at the White House last month, DEBKAfile’s exclusive Washington and Jerusalem sources report. His key assurance was that Mursi would not be invited to the White House and Obama would not maintain direct telephone contact with him until he met certain conditions, the foremost of which concerned a public and unambiguous commitment to Egypt’s 1979 peace treaty with Israel.
They American Jewish delegation was assured that President Mursi would be required to devote a section of his earliest speech on foreign affairs to the specific affirmation of his profound commitment to the peace pact with Israel. The unspecific pledge to uphold Cairo’s international accords he made upon his election on June 24 would not satisfy the US president, the American Jewish delegation was promised. Indeed the new Egyptian president would also be required to table the peace pact with Israel in the new Egyptian parliament for ratification.
With these assurances, the Jewish delegation was satisified.
However, it turned out Monday, July 8, that, instead of standing by his promises, President Obama had sent Deputy Secretary of State William Burns to Cairo for two days of interviews with Egyptian officials, in none of which did future relations with Israel figure. President Mursi’s spokesman then announced that the US official had handed the new president an invitation to visit the White House in September. Neither Burns nor the White House contradicted him.
With these assurances, the Jewish delegation was satisified.
However, it turned out Monday, July 8, that, instead of standing by his promises, President Obama had sent Deputy Secretary of State William Burns to Cairo for two days of interviews with Egyptian officials, in none of which did future relations with Israel figure. President Mursi’s spokesman then announced that the US official had handed the new president an invitation to visit the White House in September. Neither Burns nor the White House contradicted him.
Furthermore, in a briefing to reporters after he saw Mursi, Burns vehemently denied that the peace pact had been discussed.
Next Saturday, July 14, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is due in Cairo after a visit to Israel.
Next Saturday, July 14, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is due in Cairo after a visit to Israel.
Those conditions were first revealed by DEBKA-Net-Weekly:
1. Observance of a democratic agenda;
1. Respect for human rights, namely women’s’ status and minority rights, especially relating to the Christian Copts;
2. The formation of a broad national unity government representing the country’s active mainstream parties - not just his own Muslim Brotherhood.
3. Making the 1979 peace treaty between Egypt and Israel a central pillar of his foreign policy;
4. Public affirmation of his commitment to uphold peace relations with Israel.
5. A resolute effort to curb the terrorist elements running wild in Sinai and threatening Israeli security by restoring Egyptian control.
6. An end to the rabid anti-American and anti-Western rhetoric pervading Egyptian media and the persecution of Western NGOs operating in Egypt.
The last three points give those demands the weight of an ultimatum:
1. Respect for human rights, namely women’s’ status and minority rights, especially relating to the Christian Copts;
2. The formation of a broad national unity government representing the country’s active mainstream parties - not just his own Muslim Brotherhood.
3. Making the 1979 peace treaty between Egypt and Israel a central pillar of his foreign policy;
4. Public affirmation of his commitment to uphold peace relations with Israel.
5. A resolute effort to curb the terrorist elements running wild in Sinai and threatening Israeli security by restoring Egyptian control.
6. An end to the rabid anti-American and anti-Western rhetoric pervading Egyptian media and the persecution of Western NGOs operating in Egypt.
The last three points give those demands the weight of an ultimatum:
7. Not until all the above steps are taken, will President Morsi be welcomed in Washington as an official guest.
8. Furthermore, not until the Egyptian president has satisfied Washington on all these scores will the Obama administration use its influence with the World Bank to ease Egypt’s dire liquidity problems and help find the cash to buy food on world markets. If Morsi can’t find the money to feed the population, hungry Egyptians will be out on the streets of their cities once again - clamoring this time for his and the Muslim Brotherhood’s removal.
Those conditions have mostly gone by the board along with President Obama’s promises,DEBKAfile’s sources report.
and.....
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/07/201279124421528560.html
| Egypt's top court rebukes president's decree |
Judges tell President Morsi he cannot reconvene parliament after they ordered it dissolved last month.
Last Modified: 09 Jul 2012 21:17
|
| Egypt's Supreme Constitutional Court has rebuked newly elected President Mohamed Morsi, meeting in a special session to assert that Morsi has no right to reconvene parliament after the court ordered it dissolved last month. On Sunday, Morsi issued a decree reconvening the parliament in defiance of the court and the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF), both of which wanted parliament dissolved. Saad el-Katatni, the speaker of the erstwhile parliament, said lawmakers would convene at 10am on Tuesday in reponse to Morsi's decree, two hours earlier than their usual meeting time. But it remained unclear which MPs would join. |
Katatni and Morsi are both members of the Muslim Brotherhood, which won nearly half of the parliament, and the ongoing political conflict between the military and Egypt's elected officials is seen by many liberal and secular politicians as a battle to determine the Brotherhood's post-revolution political powers.
"All the rulings and decisions of the Supreme Constitutional Court are final and not subject to appeal ... and are binding for all state institutions," the court said in a statement on Monday.
The military supported the court's position in a statement of its own, saying it's order to dissolve parliament in June "represented the implementation" of the court's decision, which found the manner of the parliamentary election unconstitutional.
Yussuf Auf, a judge in the Giza governorate and constitutional scholar, said he believed Morsi had exceeded his power by reconvening parliament, and that this represented "a severe problem for the rule of law in Egypt".
"I think it's just a political conflict, it's not a legal conflict ... between the president and the military council, and the two parties are trying to find a legal basis for their decisions, just to support their point of view," he said.
Analysts believe that the military council and state institutions still packed with old regime loyalists have attempted to constrain the Brotherhood in the months since their parliamentary gains.Two days before the presidential election began last month, the court ruled that the legislature's election was unconstitutional since political parties were allowed to run for one-third of seats reserved for individuals.
Days after the court dissolved parliament, and just minutes after polls closed in the presidential election, the military issued a unilateral package of constitutional amendments stripping the president of his role as commander in chief, asserting autonomy over their budget and affairs, and assuming the power to legislate until a new parliament could be elected.
Though the constituent assembly tasked with drawing up Egypt's new constitution is currently functioning, after being selected by the dissolved parliament, the SCAF also gave itself the power to choose a new assembly if the current one runs into any problems.
The amendments were seen as a pre-emptive attempt to limit Morsi's powers, should he win.
For the past month, the Brotherhood has argued that the court's decision was wrong and that the military, at the time the executive authority in the country, had no legal right to order parliament dissolved.
| "The SCAF did not hand over power totally to the new president ... and this is the point," Auf said, adding that Egypt's judiciary had suffered a "huge negative effect" from ruling on numerous political cases since the 2011 revolt. "One way to solve the problem is to have the supplementary constitutional declaration amended and give the legislative powers to the [parliament] again," he said. "If I have to choose between the legitimacy of the SCAF or the president, I have to choose the legitimacy of the president." In its Monday statement, the military said its constitutional declaration "came as a result of the political, legal and constitutional circumstances that the country was facing". It added that the declaration "ensures the continuity of state institutions and the [military council] until a news constitution is drafted". The military said it was "confident" that all state institutions will respect constitutional declarations. |
No comments:
Post a Comment