The Coptic anger which exploded in the wake of the New Year Eve bombing at the Church of the Saints in Alexandria was fully justified. It is my firm belief that this anger went beyond the direct crime and its horrifying outcome, and extended to cover a long history of blatant discrimination against Copts, marginalisation, and inequality. However, I also reject the destructive, tumultuous, mobbing wrath; there can be no excuse for outlaw fury. Copts need to understand they are not alone in their anger and grief; Egypt in its entirety has proved it is also grieving and wrathful. The Coptic grievance has fused into the national concern, and it is of the utmost importance that this national endorsement should not be lost.

Before a year on the Christmas Eve crime in Nag Hammadi, in which one Muslim passerby and six Copts were killed as they left church after Midnight Mass—Copts celebrate Christmas on 7 January—terrorism reared its ugly face, this time on New Year’s Eve. A year that did not lack for fierce sectarian violence against Copts, 2010 ended with hundreds of worshippers in churches praying for a more clement new year. But in Alexandria’s Church of the Saints, what had started as a joyful, hopeful event ended in a bloodbath as a bomb exploded, claimed the lives of more than 20 and left some 80 wounded.

Last Sunday saw President Mubarak give his inaugural speech before Parliament for the new parliamentary round. Egyptians awaited the speech eagerly since it was expected to offer clear indications on the upcoming legislative agenda and the presidential assignment to the government in the new legislative term. In short, it offered a preview of the bills that would in all probability be placed before Parliament to pass into laws.

Today I proceed with discussing the topic of the new People’s Assembly and the hegemony the ruling National Democratic Party (NDP) holds over it. Whether this hegemony is the result of NDP superiority compared to the other political parties, or of a lopsided political map which the NDP has drawn and worked to put into effect, it is time to figure out an escape from this rigid political scene. Work has to be exerted to achieve a climate conducive to real political pluralism within which other political parties no longer play second fiddle to the NDP, but actively participate and compete.

Al-Ahram, Cairo’s topmost daily paper, which is State-owned, carried on its second page last Monday a column under the title “Copts 2010” by Abdel-Nasser Salama. In highly offensive, aggressive rhetoric which blatantly instigated reader opinion against Copts, the Church, and Pope Shenouda III; the column cited ‘information’ which it claimed for historical fact and which ‘proved’ Copts have been for decades acting in a treacherous manner against their homeland. It takes no effort to detect that the unsubstantiated so-called ‘information’ is entirely groundless; its only base is in the writer’s imagination.

It has been decades now that Copts have suffered marginalisation and exclusion from promotions to high-ranking positions of public office. The countless hours I repeatedly spend scanning official lists—whether those approved by the president or by ministers—of appointments or promotions of public servants invariably end in frustration since the number of Copts on these lists compared to their Muslim counterparts is slight, rare, or non-existent. This inexplicable official stance against Copts was the topic of several articles I wrote, in which I cited in detail the numbers and proportions of Copts on these lists.

Giza governorate officials have vociferously cast the blame for the recent riots in Talbiya and Umraniya on the Copts. The Copts, they said, are fully to blame for violating the terms of the building permit for a social services building and converting part of it into a church. The claim is misleading and embodies an uneven situation embraced by our officials and exploited every time they are in a position to blame.

Visitors to Downtown Cairo these days are bound to notice that the facades of the buildings overlooking the main streets are being given a new coat of paint. The walls are painted in a creamy hue of beige while the wooden elements such as the shutters are painted in dark brown. It is not clear, however, who or what authority is in charge of the task; no sign is there to indicate that information. Some passers-by may vaguely recall a State-sponsored project to conserve the architectural heritage of special districts in Cairo among which, undoubtedly, Downtown Cairo stands out for the large collection of characteristic buildings it houses.

In any election process, the relation between voters and candidates is one of reciprocal interest. Candidates are after the voters’ votes, and voters are after representatives who would adequately represent them, demand their rights and present their grievances and demands to the legislative council concerned. Voters thus expect candidates’ campaigns to address their interests and demands, and to secure full citizenship rights for future generations.

Last week saw candidates lining up for the upcoming elections for the People’s Assembly (PA), the lower house of Egypt’s Parliament. In a few days the candidate lists should be completed and all candidates, whether partisan or independent, should be set to campaign for Egyptians’ votes. Balloting is scheduled for the 28th of this month.

In the Egyptian housing domain, private capital usually prefers to invest in high end housing where the profits are high and the return on investment quick. In a few cases investors may opt for housing for the middle class, but the poorer classes have to depend on the State for their housing. Affordable housing for the needy requires special urban and economic planning which involves State subsidy or long-term financing only possible through the State.

The sectarian hostilities which broke out last month in the wake of the war of words between Islamic and Coptic scholars had the resounding effect of alerting—and alarming—Egyptians to the deplorable quagmire the homeland is steadily sinking into where Islamic Coptic relations are concerned. The pile-up of disturbing sectarian incidents and bitterness has long been placed on hold on all levels—the

I applaud the Supreme Judiciary Council’s (SJC) recent decision to ban reporting on or broadcast of court proceedings on any media channel. The SJC also banned the disclosure of details of investigations and trials before a ruling is issued. The initiative is an attempt to rebuild public confidence in the fairness of the Egyptian judiciary, an issue which has too long been placed on hold. It also serves to avoid any mix-up inflicted upon public opinion because of the divergent views of the media regarding a trial.

With his typical wisdom Pope Shenouda III extinguished the flames of sectarianism which flared last month in the wake of the bitter verbal exchange between the Islamic scholar and lawyer Mohamed Selim al-Awa and Secretary-General of the Holy Synod of the Coptic Church Anba Bishoi. The media capitalised on the incident and, what began as a war of words, threatened to turn into full-scale sectarian

I am in no way opposed to exposing corruption or reforming whatever aftermath it may bring. But I am opposed to trifling with the stability of the community or jeopardising economic development. Given the slow and stumbling political reform, economic reform remains our only chance to rescue the needy and underprivileged, and give them hope for a better tomorrow.

Sameh Mahrous, a journalist with the State-owned daily al-Gomhouriya, came to me carrying a complaint so bitter it is almost impossible to believe. But worse, it documents—thus makes it imperative to believe—a level of appalling official irresponsibility. Mr Mahrous has raised his complaint to the Interior Minister Habib al-Adly and prosecutor-general Abdel-Meguid Mahmoud, demanding justice.

With the upcoming parliamentary elections approaching, and coverage of all that pertains to it occupying a sizeable portion of media coverage, I thought of checking my voting card in preparation. Not surprisingly, years of use had left their mark on the paper, hand written card. Let me remind the reader that in Egypt voting cards are issued in paper form and are hand written, which makes them difficult to read owing to normal handwriting flaws and because of the predictable erosion with the passage of time.

The year 2010 has seen Egypt celebrate three strongholds of progress and development in its modern history. It has been 50 years since the first spark which marked the beginning of the construction of the Aswan High Dam; 50 years on the establishment of the first Egyptian national TV channel; and 50 years since the erection of the Cairo stadium. All three national projects have positively affected the life of Egyptians in an irrevocable manner. Precisely for this reason, it is time to assess what each has achieved in terms of ameliorating the life of Egyptians. While the first two projects have had their fair share of appraisal by the media, I intend to focus on the third project.

I harbour no sympathy for the calls to reopen the file of constitutional amendments. It would disrespect the Constitution, which was amended as late as 2007, to reconsider it every now and then for no urgent reason. If some politicians and pundits have aspirations to introduce fundamental changes to the

Wit November only a few weeks away, competition among candidates who will then be running for the People’s Assembly (PA)—the lower house of Egypt’s parliament—is rapidly heating up. Once the running candidates are officially approved, they will be scrambling to familiarise voters in their constituencies with their respective electoral platforms, in a bid to win. The contest is expected to be a fierce one, and not without its hazards.

Dr Ahmed Fathy Sorour has been Speaker of the People’s Assembly (PA)—the lower house of Egypt’s parliament—for some two decades today. Throughout this extended period he has succeeded in winning the general respect of Egyptians for what was seen as his objectivity and impartiality, as well as his utmost decency in tongue and pen. He took care never to take sides with the government or the ruling National Democratic Party (NDP); his only loyalty appeared to be for the Constitution, law and regulations.