authoritarianism in MENA

Torture and degrading treatment continue to be systematically practiced against Egyptian citizens

The president and his party undertook a campaign to attack freedom of the press through statements aimed at reducing the relative freedom which is currently allowed and by submitting various complaints to the investigative authorities against journalists and other media professionals. [4] Moreover, representatives of the president’s party in the constituent assembly supported the inclusion within the new constitution of provisions which allow for such repressive practices against the media, including the detention of journalists.

protests have repeatedly been suppressed through excessive use of force

police and the security establishment continue to shirk their legal responsibility to protect political and social protests and have been complicit in crimes of rape and sexual assault against female protestors

a new draft law on civil society associations which would eliminate the already limited margin available for forming associations, especially human rights organizations

National Council for Human Rights (NCHR) lacks independence, as the majority of its members belong to the ruling coalition. Indeed, a number of its members are well-known for their hostility towards human rights, and some of them use sectarian political speech publicly, including language inciting to hatred and violence against both Muslim and non-Muslim religious minorities. Given the NCHR’s current composition and its practices to date, it is clear that the current purpose of the NCHR is to conceal or downplay human rights violations, rather than to expose and condemn them, as well as to enhance the image of the government before the international community. While the NCHR suffered perpetually from a lack of independence under the Mubarak regime, it has now completely lost all semblance of independence and has become an indirect platform for some of its members to publicly incite against human rights

holding an election that is pronounced clean and successful may be of less value to the state than is now apparent. As the year progresses, the public is likely to evaluate the new parliament and government by their ability to address popular concerns

High turnout and good reviews of election day are the foundations of the state’s claim to have a new mandate. But election monitors in Jordan have made the same point time and time again: An election is much more than the casting of ballots, and a successful poll does not equate to the advent of democracy.

monitors were also unanimous in their assessment that the system underpinning the vote falls considerably short of ideal. Their criticism centers on the distorted representation inherent in the election law and the political culture that gerrymandering promotes. Jordan’s voting system boosts the fortunes of candidates whose support base lies in large tribes or localities, while handicapping political parties and unaffiliated candidates who have national agendas. In Jordan’s last five parliamentary elections, most of the seats have gone to such independent or “tribal” candidates. Once elected, the MPs have little ability to shape national policy in any event, since the king appoints all other branches of government.

The incentives created are perverse. Voters may feel pushed to back the candidate who returns home bearing spoils from the treasury, rather than the one who represents their vision for the nation. Indeed, deputies in past assemblies have been lambasted for passing out rewards to supporters while ignoring national issues -- one voter, on election day, derided previous parliaments as “service departments.” Polls have found that large portions of the public see parliamentarians as highly corrupt. It is easy to see how this system becomes self-reinforcing. Voters feel that their vote means little on the national stage, while candidates for office seek to become local patrons while feathering their own nests. The result can be vote buying and coercive campaigning.

the “tribal” bias of the election system boosts turnout, since the groups that benefit directly from the parliamentary spoils system show up to keep the spoils coming

ambient mistrust

According to a July 2012 poll by the International Republican Institute, more Jordanians think the country is going in the wrong direction than the right one and many feel deep discontent with the weak economy and perceived government corruption. The same poll found Jordanians taking a dim view of politicians in general, and parliamentarians in particular, who despite being elected appear less popular than royally appointed officials. And in a September 2012 CSS survey, a big portion of the public said the state's reforms had been insufficient -- though large majorities still said it was better to change the system through political action than through street protest.

There are indications that the new parliament is more representative -- or at least more diverse -- than the old one. Candidates from al-Wasat al-Islami, a centrist Islamist party, came away with 16 seats, a substantial increase in their representation. Leftists also picked up around a dozen seats (depending on who is counting). Whether either of these groups will be credible to the protesters in the streets is an open question: In the past, many leftist and Islamist MPs have been characterized as “safe,” regime-aligned candidates rather than a genuine opposition. Palestinian Jordanians likewise seem to have gained ground, now holding roughly 35 seats as opposed to 20 or so in the last parliament. Women’s representation also increased slightly, with women taking two national list seats and two district seats, in addition to 15 seats from the 10 percent quota they are allotted under the election law.

If Parliament is unable to make serious progress toward improving the economy, an item which usually tops the list of the public’s grievances, that will also have consequences. The first challenge the new deputies will face, the yearly budget, will be doubly critical, establishing both the MPs’ economic credentials and their ability to have a serious debate

What the state has won is time, which it may use to carry out a reform program, to appease its core constituents or to do a bit of both. In the past, Jordan’s electoral exercises have generally been preludes to consolidations of regime power. But history is not destiny. The state may travel down the path of reform it has laid out, toward parliamentary government and constitutional monarchy, even at the cost of upsetting its traditional clients. Or it may attempt to delay reform again, using the same bait-and-switch it has employed for decades

The unfolding disaster in neighboring Syria will likely keep security high on the local agenda; on the other hand, the state faces another moment of potential crisis, as sometime early in 2013, probably April, conditions of Jordan's IMF loan agreements will require the state to engage in another round of subsidy removal like the one that triggered the November 2012 unrest

Saleh Abdel Maqsoud

In an interview with The National on Monday, the veteran Muslim Brotherhood1 journalist insisted that he had transformed the ministry's small empire of state-run television channels and radio stations from being a mouthpiece for the president into an honest broker and non-partisan "voice of the people".

"Of course there is a conspiracy," he said in his office at the Maspero building on the Nile in downtown Cairo. "All you have to do is turn on the television and watch some of the private channels. They call a few dozen protesters a 'demonstration'. They call for toppling the regime." "Some powers don't want to use the democratic tools, the ballot box," he said. "They want to use violence and rally protesters."

Meanwhile, privately owned media organisations controlled by more secular Egyptians intimate that the Brotherhood is secretly infiltrating all branches of the state in a bid to force conservative values on Egypt's 84 million people

The main rule for his presenters and journalists was to accept the president as a legitimately elected leader and not call for his resignation. "But we interview people who say the president should resign," he said. "We don't censor. All views are welcome."

His claim "is simply laughable and can be refuted with 15 minutes of exposure to a newscast or commentary show", said Adel Iskandar, a visiting scholar at Georgetown University in Washington and an expert on Arab media. "For the most part, the news and political component of state media remains predominantly government public relations as it has always been … In three years, the institution basically switched bosses from Mubarak to the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces to the Brotherhood."

For decades, the red lines for journalists were clear. Criticising Mubarak's policies was permissible in Egypt before the 2011 uprising that ended his reign, but few dared to directly condemn the president. After the uprising, the rules all but vanished, leaving a host of divisive commentators from across the political spectrum to regularly accuse their rivals of secret plots.

"The nobility in the Egyptian media has disappeared. No one knows what to trust because it feels like everyone has an agenda, including Islamist shows, secular shows and the state media."

Egypt had no independent regulator for the media. Such an institution could create a legal framework for the media and establish a code of conduct, but the dissolution of the parliament last summer has put new laws on hold.

Egypt normally buys strategically to ensure that it has wheat stocks equal to at least six months' consumption in its silos. It relies heavily on imports to feed its 84 million people; half of the wheat they consume is imported."This is lower than they historically have carried in the past," a European trader said, commenting on the new figures. Shipments expected from the United States in the coming weeks will help maintain the current levels, the trader added."However, I think Egypt's private buyers or GASC need to buy an additional 800,000 to 1 million tonnes of wheat for shipment before the end of May when their local crop becomes readily available, to keep an adequate level of stocks."

weak Egyptian pound has pushed up the cost of wheat imports paid for in dollars

Though economics professor Mohsen Hassen echoed Zarouk’s assertion that increasing fuel prices will negatively affect consumers, he said the government’s decision was justified in order to salvage the country’s economy. Hassen told Tunisia Live that the budget deficit grew by 12.6% since the revolution; in 2012, alone it rose by 6.6%. “It is extremely dangerous that the deficit keeps growing,” Hassen said. “That’s why better management of subsidies funding is crucial.” Goods are generally subsidized in order to preserve consumer purchasing power, especially for citizens with low incomes. “Only 12% of the poor are benefiting from the fund…” he stated, adding that a larger proportion of Tunisians with high incomes are the ones gaining the most from subsidies. “Subsidies are serving those who don’t need them most,” Hassen said. “That’s the dilemma that was unveiled by the revolution thanks to transparency in statistics.”

The government has often accused bakeries of selling subsidised flour on to the black market rather than using it to produce bread. "Some bakery owners are calling strikes and sit-ins in hopes of seeing the new system fail, so that the old system – which allowed them to sell large amounts of flour on the black market – would be maintained," Nasser El-Farrash, advisor to the supply minister, said recently.

The Egyptian government has traditionally kept local bread prices down by both importing and purchasing massive amounts of locally-produced wheat and supplying state-sponsored bakeries with flour to produce needed quantities of bread.  Local bread prices have remained unchanged since the 1980s due to a policy of frequent government intervention to stabilise subsidised bread prices. Until now, the local price for a loaf of bread remains about 5 piastres.