CAIRO: Terrorism is a red line that I will not allow anyone to cross, said President Hosni Mubarak in a speech to announcing the pending constitutional amendments Tuesday.
The President promised to eliminate the 25-year state of emergency once a new anti-terrorism law is passed. The proposed anti-terrorism law, like the rest of the draft amendments, is subject to a public referendum for approval.
While the ruling National Democratic Party (NDP) argues that anti-terrorism legislation will ensure more protection from terrorists, many accuse the government itself of terrorism and abuse of power.
But political pundits and analysts are skeptical of the proposed anti-terrorism law, particularly because the President did not clearly state the context of the law nor provide details.
Opposition parties and political observers have long accused Mubarak’s NDP of rigging elections and using the emergency laws – introduced after President Anwar Sadat s assassination in 1981 – to stifle dissent in Egypt.
The current emergency law gives the government sweeping powers to detain suspects and restrict public gatherings.
The new law is meant to secure us from the law of the jungle, Hussein Amin, NDP member and chairman of the mass communications department at the American University in Cairo (AUC) told The Daily Star Egypt.
Although Amin does not think that we should fight force by force, he indicated that the recent show of aggression demonstrated by Al Azhar University’s Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated students last month have highlighted the need for a law to protect us from threatening forces.
But Hamdy Hassan, a Brotherhood MP, ruled out any implication this demonstration is reason enough to implement an anti-terrorism law, referring to the students’ martial arts show as a peaceful student exercise.
The law has been in progress for months, long before the incident, Hassan said.
Hassan also stated that a definition of “real terrorism can be construed from events at Ain Shams University when students fought with knives on campus in front of the university security guards who could not stop them.
We need the government to define terrorism because I see lots of terrorism conducted by the NDP. What happened in the last parliamentary elections in 2005 when 14 people were killed in elections is terrorism in my point of view. The government did not do anything about that, Hassan said.
Diaa Rashwan, political analyst at Al Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies, fears that the law may change some constitutional articles that deal with personal freedom.
Amin disagrees: “The anti-terrorism law has an international context. It is present everywhere to maintain security. These laws are promoted in the USA and France, do you see a lack of personal freedom there? I do not think so. The law is for terrorists not for journalists, Amin added.
Amin stressed that the law will be debated at the People’s Assembly and by civil society. The public will scrutinize the law which will be discussed in the media.
It is wise for the state to discuss the law with different groups before jumping into it, Amin said.
But many say they have yet to receive details outlined in the draft of the proposed law.
Hassan denounced this “secrecy by the NDP and the government around the constitutional amendments generally and the anti-terrorism law specifically.
The government is keeping everything secret as usual so that it can issue laws that suit its own benefits and interests, Hassan said.
