WATANI International
8 May 2011
It goes without saying that a comprehensive process for reformulating Egyptian politics is just around the corner.
The last constitutional amendments have limited presidential terms to a maximum of four years, with candidates eligible to serve no more than two terms, and have stipulated the principles pertaining to presidential candidacy, elections, prerogatives and authorities. Next on the list should be all the aspects concerning the budget of the presidency and the benefits and privileges enjoyed by the occupant of this post. Strict regulations ought to be instituted in order to fulfil two objectives: first, the presidential budget should be sufficient to cover the post’s requirements and obligations. Second and equally important, there should be no place for extravagance or excesses since exaggerated privileges generate financial and political interests that always prove difficult to give up when a president has to leave office.
The laws and regulations governing all the aspects of the presidential institution have, however, yet to be enacted so as to translate the philosophy and spirit of the constitutional amendments into action. This should effectively rein in an institution which has remained for decades sealed off behind an impenetrable screen of secrecy and sovereignty, viewed as too powerful to be subject to investigation or accountability.
Topping the agenda is the separation between the presidential institution and the president. As part of the State apparatus, the former has a legal personality and human resources independent of the occupant of the post. It stands to reason that each president should have his circle of aides and advisors whose presence depend on his being in office. Yet the presidential institution is there to last even as presidents come and go.
In the current context, a plethora of questions await clear answers. Where does the president live? And where does he perform the duties of his office? Since the mid-20th century, there has been neither an official residency nor office for Egypt’s presidents. President Gamal Abdel-Nasser lived in Heliopolis and performed the duties of his office at the headquarters of the Revolutionary Command Council which overlooks the Nile in Gezira, Cairo, before moving his office to the former king’s residence at Qubba Palace. Awar al-Sadat lived in Giza and the riverside resort of al-Qanater al-Khairiya and performed his duties at Abdeen Palace in Cairo. Hosni Mubarak lived in Heliopolis and worked at the nearby al-Orouba Palace, later moving to Sharm al-Sheikh for long stretches of time. Since the 1952 Revolution there has been no official State presidential residence or office.
Issues in relation to the presidential institution have been subject to the whim of the president. None of us knows the magnitude of the financial burdens Egyptian taxpayers had to bear whenever a president decided to change home or office. We found ourselves before an established principle placed on hold for a long time: the man at the top of political power is not just a president. Rather, he is an individual entitled to the absolute right to control the nation’s resources. It looked as though we were before the republic of the president rather than the other way round.
There should be a permanent presidential office and residence if the institution of the presidency is to create its own traditions. Mubarak’s office in Orouba Palace and his adjacent residency—built nearly a decade ago and never used — should not be abandoned. Since they consumed huge financial resources, these two assets should be used as permanent headquarters for future, successive presidents. The presidential institution would then acquire the perpetuity characteristic of the systematic rotation of power.
Egyptians have commonly considered presidential palaces and benefits as part and parcel of the president’s private life that need not be disclosed to the pubic. Now that our political realities have been dramatically changed following the 25 January Revolution, such misconceptions have to be reviewed. Similar to the situation in established democracies, details on Egyptian presidential assets and facilities should be revealed in a transparent way. Indeed, many presidential palaces around the world are open to the public and tourists, while documentaries offer detailed information on presidential palaces and presidential residences.
In this regard, I vividly recall an anecdote depicted in the National Geographic documentary Inside the White House. Barbara Bush, while passing through the main kitchen on one of her regular inspection tours, joked with the butler: “Do you know that I can fire you?” He promptly replied: “Ma’am, here presidents come and go; butlers stay.”