Dictatorial powers assumed by Morsi.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

And the Egyptian revolution comes to an end. Welcome the new Pharaoh, somewhat more Islamic than the old Pharaoh. Rights will now be suppressed and rule by decree implemented "to protect the revolution"--which began to enable such rights.

Islamist President Mohamed Morsi assumed sweeping powers yesterday, drawing criticism he was seeking to be a "new pharoah" and raising questions about the gains of last year's uprising to oust Hosni Mubarak.

The move is a blow to the pro-democracy movement that toppled the long-time president, himself derided by many as a pharoah, and raises concerns that Islamists will be further ensconced in power.

"The president can issue any decision or measure to protect the revolution," according to a decree read out on television by presidential spokesman Yasser Ali.

"The constitutional declarations, decisions and laws issued by the president are final and not subject to appeal."

Nobel laureate and former UN atomic energy agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei lashed out at the declaration, which would effectively put the president above judicial oversight.

"Morsi today usurped all state powers and appointed himself Egypt's new pharaoh. A major blow to the revolution that could have dire consequences," ElBaradei wrote on his Twitter account.

Mr Morsi also sacked prosecutor general Abdel Meguid Mahmud, whom he failed to oust last month amid strong misgivings among the president's supporters about the failure to secure convictions of more members of the old regime.

He appointed Talaat Ibrahim Abdallah to replace Mr Mahmud and, within minutes of the announcement, the new prosecutor was shown on television being sworn in.

In his pronouncement, the president also ordered "new investigations and retrials" in the cases dealing with the deaths of protesters, a decision that could net senior military officials and see Mubarak reinvestigated.

He also said no judicial body can dissolve the upper house of parliament or the Islamist-dominated constituent assembly that is writing a new constitution and which has been criticised by the secular-minded opposition for failing to represent all segments of society.

And he gave the body -- which was due to issue a draft constitution in December -- two extra months to come up with a charter, that will then be put to a referendum.

The declaration is aimed at "cleansing state institutions" and "destroying the infrastructure of the old regime," the president's spokesman said.

A senior official with the Justice and Freedom Party, the Muslim Brotherhood's political arm, said the move was necessary to guarantee the revolution was on course.

"We could not find any legal avenue to pinpoint and prosecute those in the ministry of interior who were responsible for killings," Gehad Haddad told AFP.

He said there had been a string of acquittals of interior ministry officials, evidence was withheld in cases, investigations had been weak and many had not been brought to trial over the killings of hundreds of protesters during and since the uprising - a view that secular protesters would agree with.

"The avenues we are taking are born of necessity, not choice," he said.

Heba Morayef, Egypt Director at Human Rights Watch, welcomed the retrials but criticised aspects of the declaration.

"What's fundamentally problematic and threatens both the rule of law and overall democratic checks and balances is his decision to give his decrees immunity from the judiciary until the constitution is passed," Mr Morayef told AFP.

And while the independence of the judiciary has been in question in the past, "these sledge-hammer tactics only alienate the legal community," she said.

"As a judge, I feel paralysed," one judge at Egypt's State Council told AFP.

Even before the announcement was read out, Islamists had gathered outside the High Court in central Cairo demanding the "cleansing of the judiciary."

Mr Morsi, who hails from the powerful Muslim Brotherhood, is the first president to be elected since Mubarak stepped down. He is also the country's first civilian head of state and the first Islamist to lead the Arab world's most populous country.

Islamists scored a crushing victory in three-stage parliamentary elections held from November last year, with the Muslim Brotherhood, Mr Morsi's former organisation, dominating both houses of parliament.

The Brotherhood has long been the best organised political force in Egypt, and secular activists had expressed fears that it would exploit the turmoil of Mubarak's overthrow to impose its will.

Money quote:

"What's fundamentally problematic and threatens both the rule of law and overall democratic checks and balances is his decision to give his decrees immunity from the judiciary until the constitution is passed," Mr Morayef told AFP.

Yep! A summary decree saying his decisions are not subject to judicial review. Well, that was a nice little run of democracy.

[Tribun]

I find it somewhat ironic that right now Libya, which is still suffering from occassional violent struggles, is better off than Egypt. It makes a sort of twisted sense in that if the people really had to fight and lost many of their own, they're less keen on a repeat performance.

[Pelranius]

How is he going to get the military to play along with this?

[Sidewinder]

How is he going to get the military to play along with this?

Probably the same way the last president did: grant the military significant control over the nation's industry and economy, allowing the generals to swim in money (see the Arab Organization for Industrialization).

[fgalkin2]

I do remember saying something about democracy being impossible in Egypt, but hey.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

[Aaron MkII]

Yeah but IIRC you were pretty racist about it. But hey, congrats on being right. Good job.

[Stark]

Wow, predicting a revolutionary movement would result in a worse situation than previously. What a maverick of political analysis! :V

And tbh just going by that article, it could be WAY worse. No need to wave the 'wow everyone hugely optimistic about this time of political change was pretty naive huh' flag any more than usual.

[Sea Skimmer]

It’s not like the judiciary entirely appointed by the old regime is basking in legitimacy, as shown by its numerous ridiculous verdicts and repeated attempts to disband the elected parliament. The system has and is being abused to prevent a new constitution from being drafted and thus prevent real reform. This could go back into dictatorship, sure, it could also be the only road to real change. I’ll give it the two months and referendum and see what he does afterwards.

[Zinegata]

Yeah, I think the opponents of the regime are way overexaggerating the extent and effect of the powers. It really looks to be more of a way to get the consitutional drafting moving again, since all of Morsy's "dictatorial" powers disappear as soon as the constitution is drafted.

It's basically him going "You either stop fucking around and get back to working on the constitution, or I will end up being your Pharaoh".

[DarkArk]

Morsi has also suspended the right to double jeopardy and has ordered retrials for Mubarak and various other people accused of violence against protestors. I fail to see how that has anything to do with the political deadlock.

[Simon_Jester]

Trying to get rid of, and/or punish, people who are suspected of having shot protestors makes a lot of sense in a revolutionary state. Even a dictator might want to do that.

Rule of law is the best thing a government can have. But if the entire judiciary was appointed by a lifetime dictator you just got done overthrowing... trying to follow the law as if the judiciary was impartial is just plain not going to work.

[DarkArk]

Thing is these people have already been tried, Mubarak to life in prison. So forgive me for not being as optimistic as some of you when a new president of a nation gives himself dictatorial powers, places himself above the rest of the government, and then proceeds to use them immediately on revoking the rights of his former enemies.

[Simon_Jester]

I'm not optimistic. I assume this is another wannabe tyrant, et cetera, et cetera.

What I said was, I suppose... how do I explain? I was thinking about this, and it seems to me that this is a major problem we have a hard time acknowledging when we look at a revolution from the outside. How do you define "rule of law" when the whole point of the revolution was to overthrow the legal regime and replace it with a new system?

We can talk about good government and bad government. It's good if a tyrant is replaced by a decent government that honors the rule of law, bad if they're replaced by another tyrant. But either way, I think that's part of why the transitional phase is so messy and often goes wrong: overthrowing the old government begs the question of what 'rule of law' even means when you're rewriting all the laws.

Most successful revolutions that don't collapse into anarchy or tyranny, that I can think of, are partial revolutions: one institution is overthrown, but others stay in place, and function well enough that things don't totally fall apart. Criminals of the old regime and the revolution can be punished, law and order maintained, and so on, by organizations the public trusts and the elites can live with.

Otherwise, things get a lot uglier, and the success rate for a transition to democracy goes down.

I suppose this is political meandering, but does it seem accurate to you?

[DarkArk]

Makes sense to me. I'm never optimistic about revolutions, precisely for reasons that you've mentioned. Government is always a large part of people's lives, and usually makes up a huge part of the political power structure, and so to completely overthrow the institution is a recipe for chaos. That inevitably benefits the established political groups rather than any new coalition. Ultimately failed democratic revolutions seem to outnumber the successful ones in history; I can't even think of one off the top of my head (I'm sure there have been some though). US and India don't count, since they were colonial revolts trying to establish new government off a system of the old. Even there you had some serious problems.

I'm honestly more surprised that Libya and Tunisia seem to not be headed the way of Islamist demagoguery or totalitarianism rather than Egypt seemingly is.

[weemadando]

What if he turns out to be a wonderful, benevolent dictator? Where are all the usual lovers of fascism on this forum? I see a few already posting... But no one thinks that a brown/Muslim person can be your longed for benevolent dictator?

[Simon_Jester]

So, are you talking about anyone in particular? Or are you just insulting a foggy blur of 'people I don't like?'

[mr friendly guy]

I'm not optimistic. I assume this is another wannabe tyrant, et cetera, et cetera.

What I said was, I suppose... how do I explain? I was thinking about this, and it seems to me that this is a major problem we have a hard time acknowledging when we look at a revolution from the outside. How do you define "rule of law" when the whole point of the revolution was to overthrow the legal regime and replace it with a new system?

I don't know about you, but I think of the term as independence of the judiciary. So the government can't just coerce judges to do what they want and break the laws when its convenient. I tend not to think of the phrase "rule of law" as about the laws themselves.

What if he turns out to be a wonderful, benevolent dictator? Where are all the usual lovers of fascism on this forum? I see a few already posting... But no one thinks that a brown/Muslim person can be your longed for benevolent dictator?

I am curious who are these lovers of fascism? Since you given us a clue that its someone who has already posted in this thread, the options are The Duchess of Zeon, Tribun, Pelranius, Sidewinder, Fgalkin, Aaron, Stark, Sea Skimmer, Zinegata, DarkArk and Simon Jester. I don't count since I posted after you.

[Lord Zentei]

What if he turns out to be a wonderful, benevolent dictator? Where are all the usual lovers of fascism on this forum? I see a few already posting... But no one thinks that a brown/Muslim person can be your longed for benevolent dictator?

Because if people are worried about a wannabe dictator who happens to be brown it is only because he is brown, and for no other reason. As opposed to the ideology/political forces he represents, right?

Question: these "lovers of fascism on this forum" which you refer to - did they express worry when Mubarak (who also happens to be brown) was ousted? And if so, does it make sense that they should be accused of racism for not supporting a wannabe dictator who happens to be brown? And did you also accuse them of not supporting the democratic revolution only because the people involved in it were brown?

[The Duchess of Zeon]

I don't mind unelected governments if they adhere to the rule of law, I see the functioning of the courts system as being more important than democracy to providing positive outcomes in peoples' lives. I.E., a country like Singapore with a functional and established courts system that delivers results in criminal and civil cases that are as largely fair as, say, those of the US, is just as good a government as the US has. I don't think it matters if a country is a democracy, monarchy, or dictatorship, as long as there is respect for the rule of law, which essentially results in low corruption, predictable outcomes for your life (you are not afraid of being dragged away in the night for a crime you don't understand), reputable outcomes to civil disputes, and the promise of order and justice from the criminal system.

Therefore Morsi's actions are especially bad, as they are a firm attack on the courts of Egypt. The courts system may have been involved in the Mubarak era corruption, but in those days it was the best part of the regime, instead of being the target now. Mubarak's regime still did not cross my acceptable boundaries, because the courts were corrupt. But they are still the constitutional-judicial system of the Egyptian state, and they have been behaving in an exceptionally fair fashion, finding their own patrons guilty of numerous crimes and acquitting others for very legitimate reasons. The complaints with this have been primarily some real bloodthirst; people don't want Solomon, they want lynchings like Mussolini in '45. Morsi is abrogating the constitutional norms of the state which should remain in force until a constitutional convention has altered them in favour of rule by decree, and whatever the reason, that is damaging to the health and functioning of the Egyptian state as a place where people can safely live with reasonable expectations about their lives; it was bad enough, but as places like Zimbabwe demonstrate with the progression from Ian Smith to Mugabe, it can always get worse.

Now, the Egyptian court system can be criticized in virtually infinite ways, but some of the justices on it are making tireless efforts to preserve a secular legal system, which the Brotherhood hates. The difference between Morsi and Erdrogan is now very clear--the latter man is willing to respect the norms of the constitutional courts of the secular Ataturk system, which basically preserves Turkey as an intact Republic. And again the difference between Pakistan and Egypt is clear; Pakistan is a dysfunctional basket case which is essentially held together despite the petty back-biting egos of the modern day zamindars of its political parties by the strong Commonwealth judicial tradition, whose introduction to countries which lacked regular court systems is the one thing I'd unambiguously defend as a shining example of a genuinely good result of colonialism. Corruption there may be, but in comparison with the randomized palace justice of the past, it is still a great improvement in virtually every nation on the globe--look at Ghana's measured legal process over the Argentine Libertad despite the two countries being buddy-buddy in the normally capitalist hating Non-Aligned Movement.


In short, I find the idea that Morsi should work with the courts system toward a clear agreement on judicial reform under the new constitution which builds a strong judicial system, while respecting the integrity of the existing system until the new system can be brought into action, and incorporating all salvagable elements of the old system, on the principle that this process of measured and deliberative progress toward responsible rule of law will do much more for creating an environment of safety, security, confidence in free expression and business, than any other action possible, and that he ought to responsibly endure results of the system he does like, and very publicly defend this process, declaring it to be the difference between the old Pharaoh and his own constitutional government-that he will respect the results of the courts as a separate branch of government and work toward their constitutional reform, and never try to undo the courts for his own personal whims.

But he did what come off as the exact opposite of that, even if you can replace "personal whims" with "whims of the Muslim Brotherhood". In long and short, this is a disastrous, confidence-destroying measure which is the exact wrong way to go about dealing with the courts until the new constitution is written, which should be to respect them while working toward a constitution which includes their reform to more ideal standards based on the rule of law.

And, oh: If believing the rule of law is more important than democracy makes me a fascist, then I am proud to be a fascist (if anyone sincerely believes that, I'll let them wallow in their own absurdity).

[Simon_Jester]

Most fascists have no more respect for the one than they have for the other...

I'm not optimistic. I assume this is another wannabe tyrant, et cetera, et cetera.

What I said was, I suppose... how do I explain? I was thinking about this, and it seems to me that this is a major problem we have a hard time acknowledging when we look at a revolution from the outside. How do you define "rule of law" when the whole point of the revolution was to overthrow the legal regime and replace it with a new system?

I don't know about you, but I think of the term as independence of the judiciary. So the government can't just coerce judges to do what they want and break the laws when its convenient. I tend not to think of the phrase "rule of law" as about the laws themselves.

OK, works for me.

But it's still an issue a revolution has to deal with. If you just overthrew an absolute monarch to replace him with an elected parliament, can a monarchist judge be relied on to properly enforce laws passed by parliament to prevent the return of the king and his aristocrats? At the heart of it, I think that's why we keep seeing this. It's easy for us to say that the judiciary is trustworthy. Revolutionaries will almost never believe this, although I'm sure they're wrong to think so in many cases.

[Stark]

Its almost as if the post-seizure of power phase of a revolution is one where the former legal system is weakened or entirely suspended and a small group defines a new one. I wonder why revolutions go wrong?

If it was gradual and internal change (for the better or worse) it wouldn't be a revolution.

[Lord Zentei]

Strangely enough, people aren't too happy about these developments:

Cairo (CNN) -- Nearly two years after popular unrest spurred former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak's fall, throngs have taken to Egypt's streets again to call for revolution, this time for the ouster of his successor.

Tents dotted Cairo's Tahrir Square, just as they did during the 2011 uprising, and clashes between protesters and police were reported Friday in the capital, the port city of Alexandria and elsewhere around the North African nation. Opposition leaders say they are firm in their resolve and, in Cairo's landmark square at least, scores could be seen milling about overnight and into Saturday morning.

The focus of their anger: President Mohamed Morsy. On Thursday, he announced that courts could not overturn any decree or law he has issued since taking office in June and, beyond that, in the six months until a new constitution is finalized, his spokesman said on state-run TV. He also fired Egypt's general prosecutor, who has been criticized for the insufficient prosecutions of those suspected in demonstrators' deaths in 2011.

Egypt and Morsy proved 'pivotal' in Gaza cease-fire talks

In a country already without a parliament, that means the former Muslim Brotherhood leader seems to have total executive, legislative and now judicial authority, all as a new constitution is being written.

"It's unprecedented, it's unimaginable, it's more (power) than Mr. Mubarak ever had," Mohamed ElBaradei, a Nobel laureate and head of Egypt's Constitution Party, told CNN. "This is the language of a dictator."

ElBaradei, a one-time head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, estimated there were "millions in the street ... revolting" Friday. Urging "civil disobedience," he and others who unsuccessfully ran for president signaled that they were unified in their opposition to Morsy.

"Endorsing the position of ElBaradei, (former Arab League chief) Amr Moussa and others, I urge all who voted for me to stand with us against the tyranny of the regime," wrote Ahmed Shafik, a former prime minister who received 48% of the vote in this year's presidential run-off, on Twitter.

Despite such opposition, Morsy was defiant and insistent Friday that his actions are in the interests of the Egyptian people.

"I have dedicated myself and my life for democracy and freedom," he told hundreds of supporters outside the presidential palace in Cairo. "The steps I took are meant to achieve political and social stability."

Morsy gives himself new powers, orders retrials in protester deaths

The chair of Egypt's Cabinet, Mohamed Refaa al-Tahtawi, brushed back criticisms that Morsy had made an undemocratic power grab, saying the opposite is true and that Morsy "is not really trying to monopolize power."

"He is trying to have strong pillars for a steady progress toward democracy," al-Tahtawi said. "A dictator would not try to have an elected parliament as soon as possible."

The Cabinet chief added, "I assure you that in the coming days, the opposition will fade away and calm down."

But that sentiment was not shared by everyone.

Mamoun Fandy, a columnist for pan-Arab newspapers Asharq Al-Awsat and Al-Ahram who heads a Washington-based think tank, predicted that the opposition will continue to swell and lead to Morsy's ouster "probably (in) a week."

"These people are united," Fandy told CNN. "The critical mass of Egypt is ... moving away from Morsy."

Tensions were brewing days before the president's moves; protesters have been in Tahrir Square since Monday.

Egypt's Morsy: 'Imperial' president or step forward for revolution?

The anger had been directed at Morsy and the Islamist movement of which he is a member. The Muslim Brotherhood was banned under Mubarak but has since risen exponentially in stature. There has also been growing turmoil about the constitutional panel, pitting conservatives who want Egypt to be governed by Islam's Sharia law against moderates and liberals pushing for it to ensure basic freedoms, such as for women. And after his recent moves, judges throughout Egypt have gone on strike, according to ElBaradei.

On Friday in Tahrir Square, thousands had Morsy in mind as they chanted, "Leave, leave," and "The people want to topple the regime."

Nearby, in front of Egypt's parliament building, thousands of protesters threw rocks as police used their vehicles and tear gas to keep the crowd contained.

The top floor of an eight-story apartment building caught on fire Friday night, a blaze protesters blamed on a police tear gas canister tossed at demonstrators who were on top of the building earlier in the day.

About 215 kilometers (130 miles) north in Alexandria, protesters on Friday stormed the headquarters of the Muslim Brotherhood's political wing and set it on fire, said Ahmed Sobea, a spokesman for the Freedom and Justice Party.

Protest turns violent in Cairo

Calling for calm and dialogue, the U.S. State Department expressed concern Friday about the developments, saying, "One of the aspirations of the revolution was to ensure that power would not be overly concentrated in the hands of any one person or institution."

Dozens of protesters have been arrested, with cameras installed in Tahrir Square and on side street to determine the identities of those attacking security forces, said Interior Minister Ahmed Gamal El Din.

Dr. Khaled al-Khatib, from Egypt's health ministry, reported at least 140 injuries nationwide in the unrest, including 37 in Port Said and 36 in Cairo, according to state-run EGYNews. Al-Khatib said there were no deaths, which differs from an earlier report Friday from Health Ministry spokesman Mohamed Sultan of at least one death.

ElBaradei said one young man is "critically dead" after being shot in the head, with more than 300 people getting treatment at area hospitals because of tear gas.

"My worry ... is that the while situation will turn ugly, will turn violent if Morsy doesn't rescind (his) decisions (and) engage in dialogue with the rest of the country," ElBaradei said, adding he had met with Morsy a week ago and felt blindsided by his moves.

iReport: Thousands clash in Tahrir Square

When a revolution tries to change too much too fast, problems for it will arise. Any revolution must perforce strive to accommodate existing factions, or they'll fail to support the new regime, just as they failed to support the old.

[Stark]

Accommodating a disparate group of factions which united solely to topple a previous leader is hardly always a good idea. Its almost like all those revolutions where leaders cynically turned their back on stated ideals or allowed their allies to exhaust themselves were following a predictable pattern or something. There's a reason its so common for countries to fall into cycles of revolutionary chaos or dictatorship. I'm not surprised people who feel cut out of the inner circle would react this way, especially right after a revolution they supported.

And seriously the only way to make a government seem less legitimate is to have the United States of We Export Revolution To Suit Ourselves clucking their tongues over it. I guess the State Department just wants to keep rolling the revolution die until they get a six or something.

[Pelranius]

If push comes to shove, I think the Egyptian military will tell Morsi to leave even faster than they dumped Mubarak.

I imagine the Chinese will keep on investing in Egypt though.

[Lord Zentei]

Accommodating a disparate group of factions which united solely to topple a previous leader is hardly always a good idea. Its almost like all those revolutions where leaders cynically turned their back on stated ideals or allowed their allies to exhaust themselves were following a predictable pattern or something. There's a reason its so common for countries to fall into cycles of revolutionary chaos or dictatorship. I'm not surprised people who feel cut out of the inner circle would react this way, especially right after a revolution they supported.

That's true, that was the reason I made a nuanced statement like "changing too much too fast"; by accommodating existing factions, I didn't mean that they should mollycoddle them to the extent that the old guard did. But consider that Morsi has made an enemy first of the army, now the judiciary and the moderate and liberal members of the revolution. The latter of which are claiming that he's now got more powers than Mubarak did. He really can't afford to piss too many people off.