Parliamentary elections and the modern civil state

The young politician said: Do you not think, Doctor, that it is time for the dialogue to move to the parliamentary elections that will take place within weeks and affect us for the next five years?

His colleague added: We ended our dialogue last week with a desire to discuss the values ​​of freedom, justice and integrity, which are the needs of the current stage in building the homeland and the citizen, and we are eager for dialogue about freedoms, which is one of the values ​​that we believe that your generation has wasted!

I said: Freedom is a great value, and it may be the first in the order of values, and it needs justice and the application of the law, otherwise it will turn into chaos that is destroyed and not built. The means that man has devised for the people to participate in governing themselves is: democracy and the practice of the people’s choice of their representatives.

The young politician said: We heard you calling for party alliances, rather for political mergers, so what brings together any party alliance if it differs in its ideologies from right to left?

I said: What unites the electoral party alliance is the belief in the modern civil state, which the constitution referred to after the disaster of religious rule for a year, and which the people overthrew with their free will and effective action on June 30. And remember, guys, that the Egyptian constitution begins with this phrase:

“We are now writing a constitution to complete the construction of a modern democratic state with a civil government.”

“The political system is based on political and partisan pluralism, the peaceful transfer of power, the separation and balance between powers, the correlation of responsibility with authority, and respect for human rights and freedoms as set out in the constitution.”

This is the premise of the constitution and Article 5 of it, which the Egyptian people approved by an overwhelming majority in 2014.

The constitution is our reference, legitimacy is our way, and the law is our means.

The educated young woman said: What is the civil state that you and the constitution mean?

And her colleague said: And why do we want a civil state in the first place, and why do we call it this name that makes it in contrast to the religious state or the military state, which raises sensitivities without meaning?!.

I said: The modern civil state has a government that preserves and protects all members of society, regardless of their national, religious or intellectual affiliations. There are several principles that should be present in the civil state, and if one of them is missing, the conditions of that state will not be fulfilled, the most important of which is that the state is based on peace, tolerance, acceptance of others and equality in rights and duties, as it guarantees the rights of all citizens, not as a gift from the ruler, but as a right of his duty. Preserving it.. One of the most important principles of the civil state is that no individual in it is subject to a violation of his rights by another individual or party. There is always a supreme authority that is the authority of the state through law-enforced mechanisms, which individuals resort to when their rights are violated or threatened to be violated. It is the state that applies the law and prevents the parties from applying forms of punishment themselves.

One of the principles of the civil state is trust in the various processes of contracting and exchange. The civil state does not have arbitrariness or breach of contracts in favor of one group after another. The civil state is characterized by equal opportunities between citizens and institutions on declared bases, as well as faith and the application of the principle of citizenship, which means that the individual is not known by his profession, religion, territory, money or authority, but is defined by a social legal definition as a citizen, that is, he is a member of society with rights and duties. It is equal to all citizens.

One of the most important principles of the civil state is that it is not established by mixing religion with politics. Nor does it hostile or reject religion. Rather, religion remains in the civil state a factor in building morals and creating the energy for work, achievement, and progress. What the civil state rejects is the use of religion to achieve political goals, as this is inconsistent with the principle of pluralism upon which the civil state is based, and this matter may be considered one of the most important factors that transform religion into a controversial and controversial subject, and into interpretations that may distance it from the world of holiness and enter it into The world of narrow worldly interests.. The civil state is also characterized by the principle of respect for the law and democracy, which in essence prevents the state from being forcibly taken by an individual, an elite, a family, or an ideological tendency.

Power is transferred in it within a framework of the individual’s freedom of expression, candidacy and election, and all its institutions are placed within the scope of accountability, and the executive, supervisory and judicial powers are in balance, so that no authority overpowers another.

As for why we want civil government with the definition I mentioned, this is because the alternation of power, the oversight of state institutions, and the balance between powers, is the protector of individuals and their rights mentioned in the constitution. The possibility of alternation of power puts each ruler before the moment of his leaving the government and the reckoning of the masses. Yes, there are dictatorial regimes that have achieved developmental breakthroughs, but they are the exception, and the utopia of the just dictator who, despite his perpetual rule, does not take the helm of power and thinks that he is above the law is unstable.

Their colleague said: So, any system of government that achieves this is a good system of government!

I said yes.

Another said: What is the opposite of the modern civil state?

I said: The opposite of civil rule is religious rule that uses religion and belief to achieve political powers, and does not recognize citizenship except for those who adhere to their religion. It is a dictatorship armed with religion.

The second opposite is the dictatorial regime, which is armed with a humane ideology imposed on the people, as was the communist regime, which failed and collapsed and fell.

The third opposite is any dictatorial regime that armed with intimidation of the people to impose the will of a group of them on the rule.

The three have one thing in common, which is that power is not transferred peacefully except through revolutions, coups, demolitions and assassinations.

The educated young woman said: Do you avoid talking about the military state, Doctor?

I said: No, my daughter. The definition of military rule is not of my own making. It is the rule in which the military take over all powers and suspend civil laws or submit them to their control. It is an exceptional system that countries resort to in case of emergency crises and security disruptions, and in which a state of emergency is decided permanently until the danger is removed from the country, and peace is granted in it.

The executive has wide powers until security and stability return to the country.

But there is another definition of military rule, which is wrapped in civilian clothing. It is the ruling that directly or indirectly prevents civilians from reaching power, and aborts partisan and political work so that the civil forces have no value in the elections, and it interferes with civilian rule by controlling civil institutions. Between the authorities, all state institutions are marginalized.

The dangerous thing is that over time, the argument for staying in power and stopping the transfer of power becomes linked to the absence or inefficiency of an alternative, which is the natural result of the marginalization of civil state institutions. Society often loses confidence in civil institutions, and a sense and certainty is generated that civil society is lax without a system and is not fit to run the country.

All of this may happen in a country or some of it, and events may lead to it.. But history says that all dictatorial regimes, no matter how accomplished in moments, are like building a sand castle on the beach, often ending in violations of freedoms, coups, wars, revolutions or Assassinations destroy what has been accomplished, and return the country to ground zero again.

The first young man said: What about Egypt?

I said: The only way to sustain the success of the ruling system in Egypt is to learn from mistakes by accumulating experiences and devolving power. As for Egypt now, it is entering a phase after the transitional years, and we are in a new constitutional presidential period, during which the election of Parliament will be renewed, and procedures for the transition to decentralization are implemented and during which Electing localities for the first time after more than ten years. I am optimistic about the importance of positive participation in the parliamentary elections and raising the ceiling of freedoms. This is what we support, and put it to the test by declaring an electoral alliance within the framework of legitimacy and law.

Freedom of candidacy, the right to choose between alternatives, the balance of powers, and accountability are the basis of good governance.