Egypt’s Judges Step Forward: The Judicial Election Boycott and Egyptian Reform

{
  "authors": [
    "Nathan J. Brown"
  ],
  "type": "other",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "democracy",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "DCG",
  "programs": [
    "Democracy, Conflict, and Governance",
    "Middle East"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "North America",
    "United States",
    "Middle East",
    "Egypt"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Political Reform",
    "Democracy",
    "Economy"
  ]
}

Other

Egypt’s Judges Step Forward: The Judicial Election Boycott and Egyptian Reform

In a startling development this month, the Egyptian Judges Club decided to boycott their constitutionally mandated role of supervising upcoming elections. Is the Egyptian judiciary on a quest to transform Mubarak’s regime? Rather than a bold move toward regime change, this is a calibrated confrontation with narrower aims: to secure judicial reform and support electoral reform.

By Nathan J. Brown

Published on May 25, 2005

In a startling development this month, the Egyptian Judges Club decided to boycott their constitutionally mandated role of supervising upcoming elections. Is the Egyptian judiciary on a quest to transform Mubarak’s regime? In a new Carnegie Endowment Policy Outlook, Arab constitutionalism expert Nathan Brown and Egyptian Judge Hesham Nasr argue that rather than a bold move toward regime change, this is a calibrated confrontation with narrower aims: to secure judicial reform and support electoral reform. Brown and Nasr predict that the likely outcome of this standoff will be a series of regime concessions that, while limited, may nonetheless have significant long-term effects on opening a closed political system.

Click on link above for the full text of this Policy Outlook.

About the Author
Nathan J. Brown is a senior associate in the Democracy and Rule of Law Project at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He is an expert on Arab constitutionalism and has written several books on Arab politics.

About the Author

Nathan J. Brown

Nonresident Senior Fellow, Middle East Program

Nathan J. Brown, a professor of political science and international affairs at George Washington University, is a distinguished scholar and author of nine books on Arab politics and governance, as well as editor of five books.

Recent Work

Commentary
Trump’s Plan for Gaza Is Not Irrelevant. It’s Worse.
- Nathan J. Brown
Commentary
Israel’s Forever Wars
- Nathan J. Brown

Political Reform Democracy Economy North America United States Middle East Egypt

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center

Commentary
Diwan
The United States and Iran Have Agreed to a Two-Week Ceasefire
Spot analysis from Carnegie scholars on events relating to the Middle East and North Africa.
Michael Young
Commentary
Diwan
Iran Rewrites Its War Strategy
In an interview, Hamidreza Azizi discusses how Tehran has adapted in real time to the conflict with the United States and Israel.
Michael Young
Commentary
Diwan
Trump’s Plan for Gaza Is Not Irrelevant. It’s Worse.
The simple conclusion is that the scheme will bring neither peace nor prosperity, but will institutionalize devastation.
Nathan J. Brown
Commentary
Diwan
What Does the Strait of Hormuz’s Closure Mean?
In an interview, Roger Diwan discusses where the global economy may be going in the third week of the U.S.-Israeli war with Iran.
Nur Arafeh
Commentary
Diwan
Tehran’s Easy Targets
In an interview, Andrew Leber discusses the impact the U.S. and Israeli war against Iran is having on Arab Gulf states.
Michael Young

Egypt’s Judges Step Forward: The Judicial Election Boycott and Egyptian Reform

In a startling development this month, the Egyptian Judges Club decided to boycott their constitutionally mandated role of supervising upcoming elections. Is the Egyptian judiciary on a quest to transform Mubarak’s regime? Rather than a bold move toward regime change, this is a calibrated confrontation with narrower aims: to secure judicial reform and support electoral reform.

More Work from Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center