Consultative and Representative?

Some reflections on the newly-formed "Coptic Consultative Council"

The scene of Coptic rights initiatives and organisations has become increasingly vibrant in the last decade, and even more so after the revolution. At the same time, it has been weakened by a strong tendency of fragmentation. Almost all of the groups or self-proclaimed organisations were dependent on a single leadership figure, typically a senior political activist or lawyer, who had managed to rally a group of friends and - in the better cases - a circle of young volunteers around a common project. Rivalries between senior activists were strong, and it was not uncommon to hear them belittle each other's achievements in private and in public.
Even more surprising is the current initiative of Coptic activists to form a "Coptic Consulative Council", with would help Coptic activists coordinate their efforts, speak with a single voice on crucial issues, and thereby improve their chances of influencing government policies. The crucial questions that need to be posed in this context are:

1. Who does the council really represent?
2. What is its relationship with the Coptic Orthodox Church?
3. Will it actually be able to formulate a united position on crucial issues like the new constitution?

A look at the participants reveals that the council is indeed broadly representative of the spectrum of Coptic activism. It was endorsed by the well-known Coptic rights lawyers Nagib Gibra'il and Mamduh Nakhla, as well as lesser known activists like Hani Elgezery, altogether between 10 and 20 activists groups, according to different reports. Many of these groups were only founded after the revolution and have not really made a name for themselves, so it remains to be seen how much substance they add to the project. Quite significant is the inclusion of successful Coptic politicians from the liberal and centre-left spectrum: Margueritte Azer (Wafd Party) and Emad Gad (Egyptian Social Democratic Party), two of the very few elected Coptic MPs in the (dissolved) 2011/12 people's assembly.

Also interesting is the participation of Kamal Zakhir, who was the leading figure of the "Lay Copts" movement, a group of Coptic intellectuals who publicly criticised clerical authoritarianism and discussed internal reforms within the Coptic Orthodox Church in the late 2000s. They were pretty isolated at the time, accused of "airing the dirty laundry" of the community and showing disrespect for Pope Shenouda III. If the council was trying to curry the favour of any of the church leaders, people like Zakhir would probably have been excluded. The participants seem to agree that the Church leadership should not play any political role, and that laypeople should represent the general interests of the community on an independent basis.

The only important group that does not participate seems to be the Maspero Youth Movement. There are probably two reasons for this: Firstly, young activists are impatient with the piecemeal approach of the older generation and feel that organisation conferences and drawing up petitions is a waste of time. They want more direct action. Secondly, young activists don't want to be patronised by the older generation, that's why they started up their own initiatives in the first place. They want to remain independent in their course of action, even if there is no substantial disagreement as to the aims of the movement.

The crucial question will be if the council really manages to inspire some sort of discipline in its participants, whether it can perpetuate its activities and consolidate its membership.



In the Egyptian press:
http://www1.youm7.com/News.asp?NewsID=754850&
http://www1.youm7.com/News.asp?NewsID=756986&SecID=12