Cairo Magazine - The day the gloves came off

A handful of Kifaya members, including writer Sonallah Ibrahim, demonstrated against the referendum at Saad Zaghloul's tomb.

Tara Todras-Whitehill

The day of the referendum to approve the amendment of Article 76 of the constitution should have been a historic occasion. True, the week before the referendum had been tumultuous, with the announced amendment falling short of the expectations set by President Hosni Mubarak’s 26 February speech, and the nation’s main opposition parties and movements calling for a boycott. Still, with the referendum a sure win, the political system was set to get at least a little more open by allowing multi-candidate presidential elections.

Instead, as the sun set on 25 May, the government and the opposition were even more alienated from each other than before, following the violence that broke out during anti-referendum demonstrations that injured a number of opposition members. Forty six members of the opposition were arrested.

The opposition stated that the amendment to the Article 76 is too restrictive concerning who can run for president and called for a boycott of the referendum. The Kifaya (Enough) movement then staged a pair of demonstrations on the day of the referendum which were greeted with NDP counter-demonstrations—as has increasingly been the case.

In a departure, however, the NDP supporters attacked the Kifaya demonstrations, shocking the country and stealing the headlines around the world from the referendum itself. According to the Interior Ministry, 54 percent of the country’s eligible voters went to the polls, with 83 percent approving the amendment.

“I really don’t know why some sectors of the NDP decided to use physical violence against demonstrators,” said Muhammad Sayyed Said, deputy director of the Al Ahram Center for Strategic Studies and a member of Kifaya. “I don’t believe they acted wisely at all. They lost a lot. They caused substantial moral losses because this is certainly going to be interpreted as state policy, even though it’s not clear if this is just small sectors [of the party].”

U.S. President George W. Bush, whose wife only a day before the referendum had praised the move as “bold and wise,” expressed his distaste for the events of that day. “The idea of people expressing themselves in opposition to government and then getting beaten is not our view of how a democracy ought to work,” he said.

In the weeks leading up to the referendum, the government went to great pains to present it at home and abroad as a major reform step. Prime Minister Ahmed Nazif talked about it a great deal during his trip to the United States only a week earlier.

Presidential spokesman Suleiman Awad expressed annoyance on 28 May that the focus of the whole event had shifted from the referendum to the violence and said that the American press had exaggerated the event.

“When you have more than 54,000 electoral units nationwide, [and] when you have two sad, unacceptable incidents taking place in the greater Cairo area, this is not something to be exaggerated in the way some circles did,” he told Reuters.

NDP supporters went after isolated knots of Kifaya supporters.

Dana Smillie

The Journalists’ Syndicate, on whose premises much of the violence took place, apparently takes the events more seriously and in a 28 May meeting called for the resignation of Minister of Interior Habib Al Adly, whose ministry oversaw the whole process. The syndicate accused the NDP of hiring gangs of thugs and criminals and using them to attack journalists and opposition members while security forces stood by and watched.

Ali Shams Eddin, the former secretary of youth for the NDP, believes the party made such a strong show of force on the day of the referendum because it was so concerned about the outcome. “The NDP was very keen that this day pass in a calm way,” he said. “So when the demonstration of the opposition took place, the youth of the NDP were there to try to make a type of balance.” In the end the move backfired and the focus is now on the violence.

This is exactly what the Kifaya movement intended, claims Magdy Allam, a member of the NDP Policies Secretariat and leader of the party’s demonstration that day. “This is actually a campaign by Kifaya to take away the focus from the referendum,” he told Cairo. In fact, according to Allam, the violence was caused by the members of Kifaya.

“We had ten people wounded that day,” he said. “It was a real shame on Kifaya members, shouting at the National Democratic Party illegal words that are outside our ethics and laws.”

According to witnesses and journalists, including this one, present at the clash sites, the responsibility for the violence rested on the people carrying the pro-government banners. At both the tomb of Saad Zaghloul in Mounira and at the Journalists’ Syndicate in Downtown, NDP counter-demonstrations formed up in front of the Kifaya demonstration and then, once security moved out of the way to let them through, attacked the Kifaya members.

In contrast to the chaos around the demonstrations, the polling places were often oases of calm. Polling places in Agouza, Bab Al Shaeriya and Downtown were quiet and peaceful with only the occasional visitor, aside from government workers brought in by microbus to vote.

Anecdotal evidence suggests that most people did not bother voting—in an informal poll conducted by Cairo on the day of the referendum, no one admitted to voting. Some cited work or just the fact that they didn’t think their vote would make any difference. Others suggested the political environment was not conducive to such an activity.

“If there was freedom I would go vote,” said a taxi driver that day.

Opposition figures cast doubt on government claims that the turnout was over 50 percent, and suggest it was more like 10 or 20 percent, though it is usually much higher in the countryside where the ruling party mobilizes whole villages to vote.

Cairo polling stations were sparsely attended.

Josh Stacher

There have also been accusations of fraud. The liberal opposition daily Al Wafd published photographs showing a couple of its reporters voting several times that day. Visitors to polling stations also noted that locks weren’t always on the ballot boxes and in some cases government employees at the polling station were a bit over-enthusiastic in helping people fill out their ballots.

The question on many people’s minds now is: if the referendum—whose result was a foregone conclusion—saw this kind of violence, what will happen during this fall’s elections, especially legislative ones that might witness real competition?

“Egyptian elections usually witness some level of violence,” admitted Abdel Moneim Said, the director of the Al Ahram Center and a NDP member. “Usually it is not something that is disruptive of the whole process and in the next one it will depend on the nature of the candidates.”

In the 2000 elections, heavily contested districts often saw NDP supporters preventing voters for the opposition candidates from entering polling stations. Candidates often hire people to promote their interests on election day. Occasionally violence broke out, but security forces only intervened if opposition supporters gained the upper hand.

“I don’t expect the involvement [of hired enforcers] in the future, particularly with the picture that came out in the referendum,” added Said.

With the referendum out of the way, parliament will present the draft of the new law to elect the president, as well as the new laws governing political activity.