More than one month has passed since the Nag Hammadi crime. The culprits are being tried in court. The numerous studies, analyses, and expert opinions published on the crime have been unanimous in condemning the hate-laden prevalent climate which led to it, and in demanding prompt action—on the part of the State legislative and executive institutions, as well as those of the civil society—to counter it. It is eminently obvious, however, that all such demands are being at best sidelined through official declarations to the effect that there is no problem whatsoever on the sectarian scene, or at worst absolutely ignored despite the potentially perilous situation.Rifaat al-Saïd, head of the leftist Tagammu political party, wrote: “The prevalent official laxity which turns a blind eye to all forms of existing religious discrimination allows many to believe that discrimination is the correct norm. As we look on, in the peak of alarm and anxiety that worse is yet to come, we find others who claim that there is no problem whatsoever and, consequently, no need for any action against imaginary problems. To suggest otherwise is to stir sedition and harm our national unity. But it goes without saying that, unless we admit to the wrongs done and attempt to put them right, the calm which appears to reign is no more than the calm which precedes the storm.”
The scene is indeed alarming, and the authorities’ reluctance to tackle the problem is totally inconsistent with the potential peril. The official silence on the matters is contradictory to the confirmation uttered behind closed doors that reform is on the way. This in itself gives rise to fears that there are misgivings against making the intention for reform public. If this was, for any reason, justified previously, it can no longer be wise especially in the wake of an almost unanimous call for reform following the Nag Hammadi incident.
Not one report or article published in the wake of the Nag Hammadi incident, not one silent or vociferous demonstration, but that called for the passage of a unified law for building places of worship. The National Council for Human Rights—a State-affiliated entity—confirmed, in its report on the incident, the urgency of passing a unified law for building places of worship. So, what was the official reaction? I am sorry to say that this was no more than the declaration by Religious Endowments Minister Hamdi Zaqzouq, in his meeting with the delegation of the U.S Commission for International Religious Freedom that the relevant bill will be discussed by Parliament next year. Even worse than the official procrastination or sidelining of the bill so obvious in Dr Zaqzouq’s message was the fact that it was not relayed to Egyptians to calm their fears but was voiced for the benefit of the Americans who allegedly “never cease to intervene in our domestic affairs”.
From July 2008 till November 2009, Watani conducted its own poll on the law among 58 MPs, the People’s Assembly and 26 of the Shura Council. Some 37 MPs (60.35 per cent of the participants) came from the ruling National Democratic Party (NDP), two from the leftist Tagammu, four from the liberal Wafd, one from the liberal Ghadd , one form conservative al-Ahrar, one from the Free Social Constitutional Party (FSCP), one from the Greens, one from the liberal Geel, seven independents, and three who belong to the Islamic current.
Some 35 MPs approved the passage of the law according to that drafted with the Parliament’s Proposals Committee. Among these 23 came from the NDP, two from Tagammu, three from Wafd, one from Ghadd, one from the FSCM, one from Geel, and four independents.
Some 17 MPs (29.3 per cent) approved passing the bill with a few reservations. Ten belonged to the NDP, one to the Greens, three independents, and three to the Islamic current.
Two MPs (3.45 per cent), one from the NDP and one from the Wafd, were reluctant to give their opinion.
Four MPs (6.95 per cent), three from the NDP and one Green, rejected the bill.The conclusion is that 89.65 per cent of those polled approved the passage of the bill. This agrees well with the widespread public approval. The official reluctance to comply, then, is unforgivable.
