It is natural for the controversy surrounding the decision of Egyptian President Muhammad Morsi to reinstate the People's Assembly to escalate, despite the fact that the Constitutional Court ruled the Assembly to be unconstitutional. Any decision at this point could be right or wrong, while the arena is now open before the constitutional experts, to once again return to the limelight. Yet it is certain that they will not agree and that they will put forward conflicting arguments confirming the soundness or the falseness of the decision. What is important is that the politicians and those opposing the decision will definitely resort to the judiciary to annul it, and if a verdict is issued, Egypt would have entered yet another transitional phase! A couple of months ago, Morsi was one of 12 candidates vying for the presidential seat. Nonetheless, he was the most likely to win since he belonged to a strong and deeply-rooted organization and enjoyed capabilities exceeding those of his opponents. Then a month ago, the light focused only on Morsi and his competitor Ahmed Shafik in the runoff, before focusing on Morsi alone, ten days ago, when all the lenses turned toward him to follow his statements and actions, sometimes even to detect his mistakes and negative facets, or promote his qualities and positive facets. This is all due to the fact that he is the first Egyptian president following the revolution. It is also natural for the Islamist factions to support the decision to reinstate parliament, since they have a majority in it, and for the callers for the civil state or those who were not pleased with the assembly's performance ever since the election of its members to oppose it. This is a new battle to be added to the battles between the Muslim Brotherhood and some journalists and media personalities. In truth, such battles have been violently raging since the collapse of Mubarak's regime, reflecting the mistakes of certain parties on the political arena following the revolution - without them realizing that they committed mistakes or without them wanting to recognize these mistakes. The battle - in appearance - is an attack to which Morsi is being subjected for various reasons, in the face of a campaign launched against some media persons and journalists by MB or Salafi sides and figures, demanding that the media be cleansed of them. Nonetheless, some of us are aware of the fact that the campaign is due to political reasons, seeing how it is taking place between diverging parties at the level of their ideologies or interests, i.e. between those supporting the new president among the Islamists and some of their allies from the other movements, and his opponents who carry ideas and positions going against those of the Islamic movement. In reality, the old crisis emerged when some journalists mixed their profession with their political positions, personal opinions or ideological tendencies. This eliminated the distance that should exist between a journalist and a political activist, and between a media person and a revolutionary. On the other hand, the state's control over the media for many decades pushed some outlets to constantly the state's protection or to use it as a stepping stone. This entire situation led to a major intertwinement between politics and the media, and the latter became no longer a mere tool used by the politicians. The well-financed media thus became in control over politics to a wide extent, forcing political and even sovereign sides to adopt a decision or preventing them from undertaking an action, a measure or behavior. And because the situation in the post-revolution phase has not yet settled down and has been fluctuating in favor of the interests of the various political factions, the positions of the active powers on the arena vis-à-vis the authority, i.e. the military council, throughout a year and a half have been also vacillating up and down. Hence, it sometimes points upward toward escalation, criticisms and attacks, and downward at others toward truce, support and blessing. And in the presence of those powers - even before them - some media outlets went in line with their interests and made choices, whether with or against. What is worse is that the political forces supporting the revolution pushed journalists and media persons to work outside the context of norms and conventions. Hence, they used to cheer this or that journalist whenever he fabricated a report or put forward an opinion in his article or show serving their interests. But whenever his interests went against those of the forces, the two parties go back to using all available means of character assassination and political liquidation. Yes, the revolution left a state of hatred toward the former regime, especially following the exposure of its corruption and the uncovering by the people of what remained concealed for three decades. However, the overbidding vis-à-vis the revolution, the trading with freedom and the wish to harass the symbols of Mubarak's regime, were also among the reasons behind the disregarding of professional mistakes committed by the media, thus allowing some political powers to promote false information about a former minister or an important official in the disbanded National Party, while celebrating whoever issued them and deterring whoever tries to correct or clarify the information. Consequently, lies, hypocrisy and fabrications were no longer crimes punished by law, except for the side or person affected by them. We have reached the point where there is no longer any separation between information and opinions; reports and political pamphlets; or the citizens' right to know and the misleading and duping of the citizens. At this level, the media reactions to the reinstatement of the People's Assembly prove that the situation is unchanged. This is an endless transitional phase.
