The majority of candidates to the presidency an Egypt have not been spared by campaigns of defamation and character assassination, and the race for the presidential seat has seemed to represent a strong incentive for attacking the reputation of candidates and vilifying them – to such an extent that those who follow up on social media websites cannot find sufficient time to chase after videos and recordings which claim that this or that candidate is a “criminal” and that voting for him would be to commit a crime! In any kind of competition or race, those competing always try to make use of all of their capabilities, qualifications and qualities to achieve victory, as well as to exploit the weaknesses of other competitors to try and take away their chances of winning. This happens in all competitive elections between candidates under laws that forbid character assassination among competitors, and hold accountable those who make accusations damaging to the honor, reputation or social standing of others without providing real evidence to prove them. Those following the events of the Egyptian presidential elections – which started in effect with Egyptians residing abroad voting since last Friday and until next Thursday, and which start in Egypt itself on the 23rd and 24th of this month – find all the laws that keep these elections in check and set their restrictions being “struck against” at the core. It was thus only natural for the situation to reach the extent of committing crimes of character assassination without punishment for those carrying out, inciting or encouraging such crimes. The law had set dates for the start of promotional campaigns for candidates, but they had all, even those who were later excluded from the race, before the date for the start of electoral campaigns, engaged in promoting their candidacies in broad daylight, challenging the restrictions, procedures, decisions and laws that govern the process. The judicial commission supervising the elections seemed powerless to take any measures against any of the candidates to put a stop to this promotional anarchy, and sufficed itself with referring violations to the Office of the General Prosecutor, which could merely fine those who had committed such violations and force them to pay fines which to them do not even represent the price of a single poster like those that have been spread in large sizes on bridges and main streets. The judicial commission has also set the amount of ten million Egyptian Pounds as a limit to electoral campaign spending that should not be exceeded by any candidate, including even the money donated by their supporters, and not a single candidate has respected the spending limit. It is enough to walk one hour back and forth on the Sixth of October Bridge, which connects East Cairo to West Cairo, and look at the giant promotional posters on both sides of it – a single one of which is known to cost no less than 200 thousand Pounds per month – to realize that the amount of ten million was spent by most candidates on this one bridge alone. What then of all the other posters that have been spread in every street and major public square in Egypt, overshadowing movie posters and advertisements for home appliances and cosmetics – not to mention television advertisements, whether paid for by the candidate or donated by satellite television networks in exchange for the candidate's participation in an electoral debate or evening show?! One does not even need to mention the pictures of candidates on walls, which have polluted Egypt as a result of the presidential elections, as the pictures of candidates and their electoral program have been plastered on the walls of homes, mosques, churches, government buildings and street lights, without any consideration for standards of taste and cleanliness. And because the competition has reached its peak, those working for the candidates' campaigns do not suffice themselves with plastering, but have taken to removing the posters of competing candidates, which they usually do not manage to remove entirely, but only in parts. Thus ugliness prevails because of the presidential candidates who promise people prosperity! How can people trust the promises of candidates who have contributed to polluting their country? Or how can segments of the population grant their votes to candidates who have engaged in and spread ugliness? Some candidates answer this question by saying that they had pointed out to their supporters the necessity of respecting the law and not encroaching upon it, as well as of preserving the country and not polluting it, adding that such disfigurement is taking place without their knowledge. It is the same excuse used by every ruler under whom corruption spreads, and who claims that his “entourage” was behind it. On the whole, such a climate has lead to the spread of campaigns of character assassination among candidates, without anyone being held to account or punished. This has made it seem as if the candidates were much more concerned with vilifying one another than with presenting their programs or their intentions of getting the country back on its feet, providing solutions to its problems, healing the illnesses of the past and establishing bases for a better future for Egypt and Egyptians. And if the “potential” President is dealing with his rivals by using means that are unlawful, inappropriate and immoral while he is still far from the presidential seat, what will his reaction be to those who oppose him once he sits on the seat and holds the power?! It is a question I have asked shortly before the elections without finding a reassuring answer for the people who carried out a revolution.
