Assuring Accountability for the Egyptian Security Sector

Egyptian Police on Trial for Killing Protesters

Egypt’s revolutionary youth recognize the importance of reforming the security sector to the future of Egypt. Their targets have included the police, prisons, State Security, Ministry of Interior and the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF). Yet they have yet to develop an integrated view of the security sector. They do not yet have a clear vision on how the security sector must evolve to meet the needs of the Egyptian people and be accountable to them. Such a vision could be based on the concept of security sector reform (SSR), an idea that developed from the realization by many governments, academics, civil society actors and donors that strengthening law and order and security must be integrated with efforts to promote democratic development.

Attempts to Rein in the Security Sector

Prior to the January 25 revolution, anger against the police and state security had been mounting for decades. Under the emergency law, police abused human rights, tortured suspects and political opponents, and were free to engage in corruption. Some judges followed the dictates of the Ministry of Interior on important cases. Prisons held thousands of political prisoners. State Security was omnipresent, intimidating anyone who could potentially challenge the ruling party. Retired military leaders held major government positions and served as centrally appointed governors for many governorates. The military gained control of large portions of the economy through investments in key sectors. Civil society had no effective power to challenge abuses of these security sector institutions. The media had limited ability to analyze and report on them. The Parliament, captured by the ruling National Democratic Party, was too weak and disinterested to provide effective oversight.

Anger about the population’s treatment by security forces helped inspire activists to organize the first revolutionary demonstrations on Police Day, the day set aside to celebrate the police. Over the next 18 days, police killed perhaps 800 protestors and wounded thousands more. State Security facilitated attacks on protestors by thugs. Many police stations were burned, and prisons attacked. Several days into the demonstrations, the Ministry of Interior, hoping to turn the population against the protestors, removed police from the streets. An ensuing crime wave forced residents to form neighborhood protection committees, in recognition that State Security had turned against the population and that the police were not serving their needs. Since February, the number of police on the streets has not increased to its previous levels, and many police have been reluctant to take steps to control crime. Individual safety has deteriorated significantly.

The Supreme Council of the Armed Forces ordered President Mubarak to give up power on February 11. Protestors welcomed this step, declaring that they had complete trust in the military. In February and March, the military stationed soldiers, tanks and other equipment in sensitive areas. Hundreds of protestors were arrested and tried by military, rather than civilian courts. Some of those arrested complained of torture. Protestors attacked State Security Offices and retrieved files kept on political dissidents. Recognizing the rage of the population over mistreatment by State Security, the Minister of Interior announced the dissolution of the Agency, to be replaced by an organization called National Security, with the sole mandate of addressing terrorism.

Demonstrators and their families grew increasingly frustrated at delays in prosecuting those police identified as killing protestors. In early July, demonstrators were outraged when a judge ordered the release on bail of seven police accused of killing protestors in the town of Suez. Police then used tear gas and force against the family members of those killed, after some of them were excluded from a memorial service. Consequently, activists organized the second phase of the revolution, when hundreds of thousands of people took to the streets to express their displeasure at the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces and the Prime Minister. The SCAF, in turn, vowed not to interfere with trials, in order to protect judicial independence. However, they recognized that justice must be expedited. In mid-July, the Ministry of Interior reshuffled about 4,000 police, including those held responsible for the killing of protestors and those believed to be corrupt. About 500 police generals and 150 senior officers were forced to take early retirement. The Minister declared this reshuffle the largest in Egypt’s history.

Security Sector Reform

Transformation of the security sector is based on the understanding that people need safety and security through services that are accountable to them and protect their human rights. It also recognizes that the state needs to be protected from attack beyond its frontiers, but that military and intelligence services must operate within the rule of law. Safety and security require not only competent police, but also effective prosecutors and independent judges committed to the rule of law. The aim is to reform security forces and services so they have clear and appropriate roles; adequate resources, training and incentives to achieve them; and operate in a manner that is both transparent and accountable to those they serve. Security sector reform also requires empowerment of civil society, the media and Parliament, so that they provide appropriate oversight and demand accountability. Where there are non-state security forces such as militias and thugs, SSR requires their removal or strict control. An effective security sector requires common expectations and effective coordination by elected leaders, security forces and services, civil society and the media. A good reference on security sector reform is “Safety, Security and Accessible Justice,” prepared by United Kingdom Department for International Development in July 2002, http://www.gsdrc.org/docs/open/SSAJ23.pdf.

In Egypt, the security sector requires reform desperately. With support from international donors, military leaders, police and prosecutors have been trained on human rights and anti-corruption. Such training is far from sufficient. The country requires a major transformation of the culture and institutions of the police and intelligence services, as well as clarification of the roles of the military and the prosecutors. In addition, judges need to be protected from interventions from security services and the executive branch. The military has had difficulty playing its temporary role of leading the government overtly. After elections, it will have an opportunity to focus more on national defense. However, it should remove itself from all aspects of governance, including withdrawing retired military leaders from high government positions. Ideally, it should also give up control of its economic investments, which enables it to operate without civilian control. The new Parliament must gain an understanding of what to expect from the security sector, how to use the budget as a tool to control it, and how to use its capacity to summon officials to provide close oversight. The media requires improved investigative journalism skills. Civil society organizations also need to be clear about what they expect from the security sector. They should organize a movement to promote the sector’s reform and sustain efforts to monitor its transformation.

Initiating Security Sector Reform in Egypt

With each institution requiring so much attention, it is difficult to determine where to start. Revolutionary youth and political party and civil society leaders are in a good position to initiate the process, although implementation will require close coordination with elected leaders and each service. All of these actors need to develop a deep understanding of security sector reform. To facilitate dialogue, Egyptian research institutes, with help from retired security sector officials, should undertake analyses of each service. Each analysis should focus on the service’s current and desired role, culture, leadership, information system, inspection, incentive structure and customer service. In addition, it should assess the service’s coordination, transparency, accountability, and commitment to the rule of law and human rights. Such studies will enable those outside the government to raise questions and identify issues that must be addressed by elected leaders and the services themselves. Further, these assessments will provide the basis for oversight by civil society, the media and Parliament as the process of security sector reform continues.

One methodology for a Security Sector Reform assessment is provided by USAID in its “Interagency Security Sector Assessment Framework,”October 2010, www.afcea.org/events/nps/11/documents/ISSAFFinal_001.pdf. Egyptian researchers have made some initial efforts to assess the security sector in the post-revolutionary period. (See“Egyptian Security Sector Reforms,” Mohamed Kadry Said and Noha Bakr, January 2011, http://arab-reform.net/IMG/pdf/Egypt_Security_Sector_Reforms-M-Said_and_Noha_Bakr_Eng.pdf) and “Reforming the Egyptian Security Services,” Tewfick Aclimandos, June 2011, http://www.arab-reform.net/IMG/pdf/Security_Sector_Reform_Tewfick_Aclimandos.pdf.

Security sector reform will not take place overnight in Egypt. However, common awareness of the objectives and required process will keep the issue alive for the many years that will be required for these transformations to occur. The benefits to Egyptian citizens and civilian leaders will be evident early on, while security sector personnel will gradually become more comfortable with their new roles.

Rick Gold

cross-posted in Post-Revolutionary Egypt

Moving toward free and fair elections in Egypt

In an environment where elections are valued and voters have confidence in election authorities, it still is a challenge for governments to carry out free and fair elections. In Egypt, since Gamal Abdul Nasser took power in 1954 and abolished political parties, elections have never been a fair competition for power. Until 2005, the Constitution required the President to be approved in a single candidate referendum.  The first multi-party presidential elections took place that year. In presidential, parliamentary and local elections, Mubarak's National Democratic Party (NDP) prevented viable candidates from registering, restricted their financing, controlled media coverage, restricted campaigning, and used state resources to influence voting. NDP candidates at risk of losing employed thugs to attack supporters of their opponents. In voting stations, NDP officials stuffed ballot boxes, manipulated vote counts and "lost" ballot boxes transported to central facilities.

In 2005 and 2006, the Elections Commission opposed international monitoring and severely limited monitoring of polling stations by Egyptian civil society. Nevertheless, donors, including USAID, funded thousands of civil society monitors. USAID even funded unofficial international monitoring missions organized by the National Democratic Institute and the International Republican Institute. While some of the monitors were prevented from entering polling stations, the combined monitoring operation provided a clear picture of widespread fraud and election abuses.  I experienced vote selling first-hand. As a USAID employee, I joined a group of Embassy employees monitoring the parliamentary elections.  At one station, a woman leaving the polls came up to me and asked for the money she was promised in return for voting NDP.

In efforts to address severe criticism of the electoral process, the Constitution was amended in 2007 to establish the High Elections Commission as an independent and judge-led election management body (Article 88). It has independent legal status and an independent budget. In the 2010 parliamentary elections, it recognized that abuses took place in many electoral districts, but declared the elections were run properly and reflected the will of the people. It condemned those monitoring groups and media who gave the impression that abuses were widespread and systemic. Many Egyptians believe the Commission cannot avoid bias. Four of the Commission's eleven positions are public figures selected by the Parliament, both houses of which have been controlled by the NDP.

Cynicism about the election process led Egyptians to insist that judges monitor the polling stations and receive complaints. A Supreme Constitutional Court ruling in 2000 required judges to monitor all polling stations in three rounds of voting. In most cases, judges have carried out their responsibilities seriously. However, a 2007 constitutional amendment (Article 88) prevented judges from covering all polling stations by requiring that elections take place in one day. Egypt has only enough judges to oversee a third of the polls in one day, and the remainder must be overseen by Ministry of Interior employees, in whom citizens have little confidence. Removal of Article 88 was one of the major objectives of the pro-democracy movement.

Even when judges are monitoring polling stations, their authority is restricted to the inside of the stations. They have no jurisdiction over abuses by security personnel and party officials outside of the stations, including vote-buying, establishing barriers to entrance and improper campaigning.

Citizens who wish to vote must present their voter card or present some form of photo identification and verify that they are registered at the polling station. One obstacle to voting is gaining an identification card.  Millions of citizens, particularly women and the poor, have either not attempted to get IDs or have faced obstacles in doing so.  They also are unable to register to vote for most of the year. Voter registration is only possible during a few months of the year. Consequently, many citizens are disenfranchised.

The seriousness of the Military Commission's commitment to democratic reform will be demonstrated by its support for revising Article 88 and other Constitutional provisions that prevent free and fair elections.  The Commission intends to submit the changes proposed by the Constitutional Review Committee for public debate and then for approval in a referendum.  I am confident that citizens will be much more engaged in this process than they were for the Constitutional referendums organized under President Mubarak, which were met by voter apathy.

I am less confident, however that Egypt will be ready to hold free and fair elections within the six month time limit set by the Military Commission. The challenges are enormous, requiring reform of the Ministry of Interior, attacks on systemic corruption and a change in the mentality of thousands of government officials.  Civil society must be vigilant in holding election administrators accountable.  It is certain, however, that the courage and commitment of those who overthrew Mubarak will serve them well in moving towards free and fair elections over the next few years.

Rick Gold

From Post-Revolutionary Egypt

Revolutionary thoughts

This past week has been an incredible time to watch the news. To see a wave of revolution begin to sweep across the Middle East is a rare peek into the process of humanity’s yearning for the better things in life, beginning with the very most basic freedoms a culture can ask for.

It has been a pleasure to see the Egyptian people take their lives, their fortunes and their national honor into their hands and demand redress of a repressive government, asking relief from a government that fails to protect its people from economic ruin caused by wealthy corporations, backs the torture of prisoners, jails opponents without trial and protects the wealthy elite from the vagaries of economic cycles, forcing the poor to live without a safety net… wait … hold on, something sounds familiar about that.

No, could it be? Is it possible?

Man, I’ve been wondering why the Republicans have been so silent about this wave of revolutions. Usually they are so quick to note the similarity between popular revolutions and our own, but this time they have been so quiet. Usually, they praise the courage and bravery of the protesters as they bring down an oppressive government, but strangely, this time, they have not.

Could it be they have noted that the characteristics of the Egyptian government are just a little too close to the new Republican values this time? Think about it. Protection of the wealthy, laws that favor the wealthy elite and their businesses, failure to protect the poor, if not outright exploitation of them. A failure of the Republicans to condemn torture and the unending, indefinite nature of the detainment of the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay without trial. Sound familiar? It should be, these are the hallmarks of many of the dictatorships in the Middle East, and finally, the Tunisians, the Egyptians, the Sudanese, the Syrians and others are beginning to bestir themselves to bring down these nasty men of little honor.

Please, don’t get me wrong. I am familiar with the requirements of realpolitic and the need of our government to secure our supply of life-giving oil. I know that in the past it has been necessary to be pals with some of the scum of the earth in order to feed our need for energy. Even today, in the midst of this new wave of uprisings, we still need to treat them with kid gloves, lest some of our current crop of scum dictators friends, get the idea that they might be next to get tossed under the bus.

Sometimes, yes, diplomacy means having to hold your nose when shaking hands.

If only politics at home weren’t beginning to have the same scent… er, flavor.

It is interesting that it is the middle east where people have finally woken up to the nasty nature of a political elite that favor the wealthy over everybody else, exploit the poor and deny human rights to opponents before the American people. We are so smug about our superior, modern progressive values that we have been blind to the conversion of an old trusted political party into something that Lincoln would never have recognized, much less accepted.

There was a time when the Republicans honored the values that made this country great. When they did not twist those values into something unrecognizable to the Founders they profess to worship so highly. But now, they not only twist those values, they twist history, intertwining lies with the truth in teaching our youth about the founding of this country, building the basic blocks of theocracy and oligarchic dictatorship while wrapping themselves in a flag that should stand for something else.

We live in dangerous times, when men like Rush Limbaugh can laugh at the attacks of an endangered dictator upon the free press - until reporters of his chosen network of propaganda become targets. When men like Glenn Beck can twist the current events in Egypt into a sinister plot to overthrow western civilization, and his audience not only does not turn him off, but listens, I begin to wonder about the applicability of the old Chinese curse, “May you live in interesting times”!

The now famous quote from Sinclair Lewis, 'When Fascism Comes to This Country, It Will Be Wrapped in the Flag Carrying a Cross', is as apropos as ever today, and should be taught in every classroom in the country - right after evolutionary biology and modern physics!

Think again about the protesters in Cairo and every other Egyptian city. They have lived with such a regime for the last fifty-eight years, from Nassar to Mubarak. Civilian puppets bobbing on the strings of a military dictatorship with oligarchic characteristics. Today, they have participated in a massive protest, one the military has tried to hide from view by a coordinated attack on the free press.

Is that the future of this country? Is that what you want your children or grandchildren to live under? Is it possible that the freedoms we have taken for granted could be so easily swept away that it could take a second American revolution to correct the situation?

I know, it sounds so alarmist, so… kooky. Kind of like flying saucers, you know?

But it could happen, and it will, unless the American people can begin to see the illogic of backing a party that professes to honor the principles of individual liberty while backing the use of the power of the State to push one specific religious viewpoint. A party that refuses to condemn torture or indefinite detainment and warrantless surveillance of the American public.

All tools of dictators. Totalitarian governments. Theocracies. Oligarchies.

Nasty words, aren’t they? Conjuring pictures of concentration camps, middle of the night arrests and summary executions.

What can we do? Can we do anything?

Of course we can. We can spread the truth.

Fight for science education in the schools. Fight against religious indoctrination in public schools and the diversion of public school funds into religious schools through innocuous sounding voucher programs.

Every time you hear someone say this country was founded as a Christian nation, set them straight. Loudly and vociferously.

Fight the current trend to post the ten commandments or say prayers at city or county council meetings.

Fight for progressive ideals that protect the poor and control and restrain the wealthy elite.

Above all, if you are part of the silently non-religious that keep quiet because of a fear of being exposed to the majority, SPEAK OUT and make yourself known! It is ONLY through banding together to oppose the use of religion to make this country into a religious oligarchy that we can protect our descendants from having to live under a regime that would curb our freedoms and turn this country into the kind of place that millions have come here to avoid!

Two hundred and thirty four years ago, our forefathers did what no people had ever done before - they fought a king for their freedom and won! It took them over eight long years, but finally, they prevailed.

This week, the Egyptians are fighting for their own freedom. I hope I can honor their sacrifices in actually paying attention to their actions.

So let us take their example, take the lessons of history to heart and do what the Republicans have twisted into their own message - let’s take our country back!