CAIRO: Following last week s violent protests, writers focused on the judges crisis in anticipation of similar events. Whether in reports or editorials, newspapers prioritized the issue along with other related topics.
Al Ahram offered its spin on events, saying the Brotherhood had fueled the crisis. In a series of articles, along with a front page editorial by Al Ahram editor Osama Saraya, the paper said the Brotherhood was looking to serve its own agenda by agitating the masses and initiating the violence.
The same opinion found its way to other state-run newspapers, albeit with different approaches. In Al-Gomhuria, Abdel Azim Ramadan said that the Kefaya (Enough) movement protests are nothing but artificial demonstrations with nothing more than the participation of young women and men in demonstrations that have no purpose but making traffic jams and gathering youth over a no case. He said their demonstrations are unrelated to the real problems of the masses.
Abdel Azim said that he was appalled by the charges leveled at the demonstrators that they insulted the president. It s a serious ethical crisis if they have reached the point of insulting the president, he added.
It was only during President Hosni Mubarak s era, Abdel Azim explained, that demonstrations became a part of political life. Before that, he continued, civil organizations didn t even exist.
The picture, however, was completely different in independent and opposition newspapers. Except for Soliman Gouda in Al-Masry Al-Youm, who called for an approach other than demonstrations and media spats to solve the crisis, writers mainly defended the current situation.
Al-Destour editor Ibrahim Eissa said that in no democratic nation in the world are citizens put on trial for criticizing, attacking or describing [the president] by any description.
In Al-Masry Al-Youm, Magdy Mehanna criticized the way some have minimized the ongoing crisis, making it into a mere conflict of opinion. Referring to comments made by lawyer syndicate leader Sameh Ashour that the media and Muslim Brotherhood are promoting lies, Mehanna called for a separation of personal conflicts from nationwide interests. Mehanna pointed to the conflict between Ashour and the Brotherhood.
The [judges ] conflict is not between two opinions or two judiciary sides, Mehanna explained. In reality, the conflict is between the judges and state authority. He said that the appointed Higher Council for the judiciary, which the judges club is disputing, represents authority.
[Thursday] witnesses the second round of the series of public confrontation with the system in the judges crisis, wrote Mohamed Mostafa Shardy in Al-Wafd, referring to May 18. Citing the government measures to prevent demonstrations on that day, he said the state should allow peaceful protests.
The stubbornness of the government, he added, has united all national opposition powers including the right, the left, the Brotherhood, artists and other different organizations.
I agree with the government that demonstrations upset national security, he continued, but could the government solve the conundrum and explain the reasons that push us screaming out in the streets. The judges crisis is not the problem, it is part of it, he said. It was the catalyst behind the public s attempt to preserve one of its rights after many were lost.
The newspapers preoccupation with the judges did not, however, affect the attention Gamal Mubarak s visit to the United States received.
It isn t a problem that Gamal Mubarak visits the United States, wrote Gouda in Al-Masry Al-Youm. The problem is in the secrecy of his visit last week, he added. Why is it private? Why is it secret? And why is it at this specific time [during the judges crisis]?
Gouda called for clear answers for these questions before public opinion would volunteer with answers from its own imagination.
In the same newspaper, Mehanna published an anonymous letter commenting on the visit. The letter writer inquired about Mubarak s authority in making the visit, whether it was as the head of the policies committee of the National Democratic Party or as the president s son.
The letter writer drew a comparison between describing Gamal Mubarak s talks with American officials as a national duty whereas a meeting between Egyptians and the American ambassador is considered treason.
The letter coincided with increasing international criticism of the way the Egyptian government has dealt with protestors and activists. The criticism was first refuted by state-run newspapers as intervention in Egyptian sovereignty.
The truth is that President Mubarak is the president of Egypt, but he is not Egypt, responded Eissa.
