ho commands the majority in parliament; "Our manifesto believes that the parliamentary system (in the long term) is most suited to the conditions of the country."11
In between these two ideal types, some argue for a middle-of-the-road alternative. The semi-presidential system will empower the parliamentary majority to select a government accountable before it but will entrust the president with some real powers. One idea is to follow the division of power in France during cohabitation where the presidency controls foreign affairs and the cabinet takes charge of domestic policies.
It is my understanding that a form of semi-presidential system is likely to prevail at least in the short run. It would be rather hard to completely depart from the age-long tradition of presidential power perceived as a guarantee for stability. Nevertheless, it will also be difficult to maintain the imperial Pudency with its history of despotism untouched. Even the strong advocates of parliamentary government admit that the sorry state of affairs inherited from 60 years of repressive governments mandate a delay in embarking on full-fledged Westminster type of government. The FJP manifesto, while clearly favoring such an arrangement, maintained "However, the most fitting system for Egypt during this transitory period in the parliamentary-presidential system. "12 In this, there is an agreement between the FJP and its sharp critics. The Egyptian Social Democratic Party manifesto argues for:
Establishing a mixed presidential-parliamentary system as the most fitting for the current affairs of the country. The unrestrained presidential system will reconstruct the concentration of power in an authoritarian presidency, while the parliamentary system under the current conditions might lead to political instability because of the decades of the absence of party and political life.13
Related to this is the discussion of presidential term, which carries political and symbolic significance because presidents tend to accumulate more powers with longevity in office. The 1971 Constitution originally set the term limit at two of six years each. In 1980, Sadat, who was reaching the end of his second term, amended the constitution to remove the term limits. While Sadat did not benefit from this change, Mubarak was elected to unprecedented five terms. There is a general agreement to set a term limit for future presidents. Article 29 of the March Constitutional Proclamation states "The term of the Presidency is 4 Gregorian years starting from the date of the announcement of the result of the elections. " Some have argued that 4 years seem to be too short for the president to fulfill his programs and are advocating lengthening the term to 5 years. Most likely, the incoming constitution will keep the two-term limit as precautionary measure against the emergence of another imperial president.
Another matter related to the presidency is the issue of appointing vicepresidentes). Previous Egyptian Constitutions did not mandate such a position. Article 139 of the 1971 Constitution stated: "The President may appoint one or more vice-presidents, define their mandates and relieve them of their posts." Nasser and Sadat kept the tradition of appointing a vice-president to ensure continuity at the helm. Mubarak, on the other hand, never appointed a vice president during his 30-year reign. Many speculate that the deposed president's decision was due to his fear of the emergence of an alternative threatening power and his effort to pave the way for Gamal Mubarak's presidency. There is a convergence among Egypt's political elite that appointing a vice president is ideal to ensure continuity and stability at the helm. This is reflected in Article 31 of the March Constitutional Declaration which maintains: "The President shall, within at most 60 days of exercising his powers, appoint one or more vice presidents, the responsibilities of whom the President shall determine. In the case that a vice-president is dismissed from office, the president shall appoint a replacement."14
It seem