Bad faith regardless

Submitted by J. Gilbert (United States), Aug 19, 2013 at 13:58

Whether or not he won the election based on democratic rules, one thing became clear soon afterwards: that it would be the last real or fair election Egyptians would experience for a long time to come.

Exactly a year ago Morsi steamrolled over the concept of an Arab Spring or a budding democracy by unilaterally nullifying parts of their constitution. He declared his own power over it, first by forcing the immediate ouster of most of its key military leaders and replacing them with his own select Islamist supporters, drawing the line: "We go on to new horizons, with new generations, with new blood that has long been awaited."

That new power was followed a few months later by his assuming reign over the courts. The NY Times wrote a few months later, "Seldom in history has a postrevolutionary leader amassed so much personal power only to relinquish it swiftly." Morsi granted himself extra-legal powers by decree, including "power to take all necessary measures and procedures" against any future threats to the "revolution." So even if the election was considered fair by democratic standards, the actions of that new regime immediately following it, implies it was done in bad faith, with the intent to actually be the final election for a long time.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".