Freedom and democracy… What if?!

Freedom and democracy… What if?!

I always look and examine what my mind wrote at different times in the past to get to know the changes that took place in my thinking, and the reality of the circumstances of this time in order to learn, and to make the acquired experience more valuable.

Today, and next week, I will share with the reader two articles, written and published in 2010, before the January revolution, and the last one published in 2017. So let’s read and compare without sensitivity, for the two articles were actually published in their time, and their ideas were accepted under the regime of former President Mubarak and the regime of President Sisi. I will begin with my 2010 article entitled “Freedom and Democracy… What If?” The article says 2010.

During my political experience over the past twenty years, my thoughts continued and my sentiments settled on the priority and inevitability of democracy as a path for Egypt to renaissance and development. However, during the last five years, in the context of a rich and inspiring experience in the field of human rights inside and outside Egypt, a big question arose in my mind: What if?

What if Egypt achieved the implementation of the main axis of democracy in free and fair elections, as the political elite in the opposition say, who emphasize the word “real” to differentiate between the appearance of democracy that is drawn by the procedures of legislative, local, and presidential elections on time, and the controversy over its integrity and credibility, and the repetition of the desire for fairness Elections and the rights of citizens to stand for election, vote and choose without pressure of money, violence or government influence on the voters who cast their votes, with a very small percentage that makes the elections not representative of the opinion of society, but rather the opinion of no more than twenty percent in the official declaration, and five percent in The conscience of society, regardless of the proof or accuracy of that.

What if the elections were 100 percent fair, and what if the number of voters doubled, and what if millions of Egyptians abroad cast their votes? Will this fulfill our hopes and reach our goals?

What if the elections produced a fanatic or narrow-minded majority that did not recognize the rights of the Copts, for example, or make women an awrah that should be hidden? What if the elections produced a religious regime that would return Egypt to a square that the Egyptian people had skipped since the beginning of the Enlightenment era, which was led and revived by thinkers who belong to religious knowledge The most tolerant and open ones, such as Muhammad Abdo and those who preceded him and followed him from among the imams of thought and enlightenment such as Taha Hussein, Al-Akkad, Ahmed Lotfy Al-Sayed, and before and after them, Rafa’a Al-Tahtawi, Qassem Amin, Mustafa Kamel, Muhammad Farid, Saad Zaghloul and others who are not able to be mentioned in a single article by name.

What if the election system produced a mixture of that and this.. Will Egypt really achieve the pillar of the Renaissance? This is a very important issue, and a political elite argues about it, saying that this is the scarecrow used by the state and the ruling party to bury the idea of ​​transferring power and continuing to rig elections in favor of one group that has been ruling for more than thirty years.. Free and fair elections framework, so be it!

The truth that we must be aware of is that the West, in the context of a cumulative historical development, has integrated democracy and freedom together, and the two elements of liberal democracy have become intertwined and harmonious in the conscience of these peoples in a political fabric that cannot be separated from one another…

As for our world, let us admit that democracy, talk about it, and battles around it flourish, but freedoms deteriorate and that our call for democracy is incomplete and may even be catastrophic if the flourishing of freedoms and the separation of powers is not integrated into its fabric.. The illiberal democracy brought Adolf Hitler, even if it was Free and fair elections were held in Iraq during the days of Saddam Hussein, they would have – in my view – brought him, and if Gamal Abdel Nasser had conducted free and fair elections, then certainly the Egyptian people would have chosen him, and each of these leaders did not respect the freedoms or rights of citizens by calling for the protection of society, and each of them It ended in a national disaster, and let’s look at history, and we will find many other examples. The elections in many third world countries did not lead to a significant improvement in the situation, but rather may lead to a great control of regimes that are more reactionary than under the already existing dictatorships.

Is the fear of turning into a false democracy, or the transformation of a beautiful dream into a nightmare, chaos, violence and new forms of tyranny! It prevents us from dreaming of freedom.

Why does this concern pop up in my mind when I find this large number of developing countries in great difficulties to create stable societies.. and how can we in Egypt be sure of our success in the transition that we are qualified for..

There is no doubt that free and fair elections are the essence of democracy, and a necessary and inescapable condition for it. They may produce inefficient and short-sighted governments, and governments may be unable to adopt policies that advance society… However, all of this makes them inefficient governments, but it does not make them undemocratic. It remains that in this case it is possible to happen in Egypt, and in other countries that are transitioning to democratic regimes, to raise the most important question, which is: Where is the deterrent, so that democracy does not lead to mob rule that ends with military coups to ensure the stability of the country at the expense of freedoms..

In the West, deep-rooted traditions have taken root in protecting the individual’s autonomy and dignity from coercion regardless of its source, whether from the state, the church, or even the majority of society, within a framework that protects minority rights and liberties because it is based on a marriage between democracy and freedom.

As for us, these axioms are still unstable, not in the conscience of rulers or even individuals, within the framework of an educational and cultural system that does not develop this orientation, nor does it make it stable in the societal conscience..

We have no clear institutional framework that prevents those who sit on the throne of government, even if they come with a free and fair popular will, or any government that comes within the framework of a real parliamentary majority, from crossing the bridge using the election box, then to tyranny with freedoms and staying in power by calling for public interest and stability within the framework of an ideological view private or pooled interests

It is not agreed upon or a religious framework that imposes on society a specific culture and prevents pluralism and citizenship.

What do we do to make our call for democracy a call for freedom and the protection of the rights of individuals.. and how to guide the effects of free and fair elections if they bring about a new dictatorship or chaos in which interests are conflicting…

Freedom is the guarantee, not represented by chaos, but by a measure of order. We need guidelines and restrictions.. The real security of freedom depends on the strength of some protective walls that protect it.. This is what produced modern liberal democracy through the accumulation of years that we cannot wait for in our countries.

We must restore the balance between democracy and freedom, as democratic societies need guiding parameters to address this possible possibility.

It starts from three concepts, the first of which without hesitation is justice and the firm application of the law, without selectivity, and to think of the law as the wise restrictions that make citizens free, and the lack of any authority whatsoever, and whatever the degree of integrity of the one who brought it, to continue to rule under any circumstances For more than a specified period, even if the constitution protects society from any ruling regime from amending it in favor of its survival, infringing on the rights of citizens, or excluding them from exercising their rights.

The second is that democracy and freedom as an essential condition in not moving to chaos, governed by the application of justice and serious development within the institution of justice to ensure the right, and eliminate corruption within its framework, not from a political or ideological standpoint, but from a neutral standpoint to protect Egypt from the next shot.

I can only end this part of my article on democracy and freedom by emphasizing the third axis, which is education, as it remains the main and basic axis for building a person who is able to see the future from this perspective. It is something that I will discuss and I will continue to fight for, regardless of the obstacles and challenges.

And we’ll continue next week with a treatment from the 2017 article