RSSAlle Einträge Tagged With: "Mahdi Akef"

the 500 most influential muslims

John Esposito

Ibrahim Kalin

The publication you have in your hands is the first of what we hope will be anannual series that provides a window into the movers and shakers of the Muslimworld. We have strived to highlight people who are influential as Muslims, thatis, people whose influence is derived from their practice of Islam or from the factthat they are Muslim. We think that this gives valuable insight into the differentways that Muslims impact the world, and also shows the diversity of how peopleare living as Muslims today.Influence is a tricky concept. Its meaning derives from the Latin word influensmeaning to flow-in, pointing to an old astrological idea that unseen forces (like themoon) affect humanity. The figures on this list have the ability to affect humanitytoo. In a variety of different ways each person on this list has influence over thelives of a large number of people on the earth. Der 50 most influential figuresare profiled. Their influence comes from a variety of sources; however they areunified by the fact that they each affect huge swathes of humanity.We have then broken up the 500 leaders into 15 categories—Scholarly, Political,Administrative, Lineage, Preachers, Frauen, Youth, Philanthropy, Development,Science and Technology, Arts and Culture, Medien, Radicals, International IslamicNetworks, and Issues of the Day—to help you understand the different kinds ofways Islam and Muslims impact the world today.Two composite lists show how influence works in different ways: InternationalIslamic Networks shows people who are at the head of important transnationalnetworks of Muslims, and Issues of the Day highlights individuals whoseimportance is due to current issues affecting humanity.

Die Muslimbruderschaft in Pursuit of rechtliche Existenz und geistigen Entwicklung in Ägypten

Manar Hassan


In the wake of the devastating earthquake that trembled the congested capital of Egyptand its neighboring cities in October of 1992, the Private Voluntary Organizations – dominatedby Islamists – managed to considerably lead the relief efforts within hours, leaving theincumbent regime afflicted with its bureaucratic inefficiencies. The government’s ownlimitations in providing the type of crucial operative services at time of mayhem is a mereexample of its declining credibility among the masses. Moreover, its response to this publicembarrassment was even more austere – passing a decree to ban any direct relief efforts by thePVOs therefore forcing all aid to materialize through the government only. But withgovernmental impediments still looming, the regime struggled to meet the needs of the victimsin time which led to riots and posed as a mere reminder of the incessant exasperation thatEgyptians have faced in their recent history. Hence, it became apparent that Mubarak’sattempts to salvage his image in order to corroborate his grip on power had by and largealienated vital forces within Egypt’s civil society.The civil society has, therefore, been a crucial source through which oppositionists –predominantly the Muslim Brotherhood – derive the power of popular appeal. Being one of thelargest and most influential oppositionist organization, the Muslim Brotherhood cuts acrossestranged social structures such as the modern working class, the urban poor, the young, and thenew middle class, which form a support base. Some of the most prominent Brotherhoodmembers themselves pertain to the new middle class and therefore network through al-niqabatal-mihaniyyah (Professional Associations). One example is Dr. Ahmad el-Malt, who was theformer Deputy Supreme Guide to the Brotherhood and also President of the Doctors’ syndicateprior to his death

The Muslim Brotherhood’s Initiative as a Reform Program

Sayed Mahmoud Al-Qumni
On March 3, 2004, Mr. Mahdi Akef, the leader and guide of the Muslim Brotherhood launched the Brotherhood’s Initiative to Participate in Awaited Democratic Reform, presenting the Brotherhood as a political faction that deems itself competent to participate. The Brotherhood presented itselfnaturallyin the best possible light, which is everyone’s right. And on May 8, 2004, Dr. Essam Aryan, a Brotherhood luminary well known due to his appearances on the local Egyptian satellite station, Dream TV, said this initiative is a comprehensive, complete program for soon converting the Brotherhood into a political party.
Demokratie, in its liberal sense, means rule by the people, legislating laws for themselves according to their conditions. It doesn’t just mean elections. More importantly, and to lay the foundations for elections, democracy is a pluralistic political system that guarantees citizenspublic and private freedoms, especially freedom of expression and opinion. It also guarantees their human rights, especially freedom of religion. These are absolute freedoms, without any limitation or monitoring. The democratic system allows peaceful change of power in society and is based on a separation of powers. The judicial branch, especially, must be totally independent. Democracies adopt the free market economy that is based on competition, and that encourages individual initiatives. Democracies are based on channels of dialgoue and peaceful understanding among citizens. In dealing with local and international conflicts, they avoid military options as much as possible. Along with those who believe in democracy, it confronts the mentality of terrorism and violent fundamentalist dogmatism. Democracies oppose absolutist ideas that claim to own the absolute truth, and defend relativistic and pluralistic principles. By doing so, they provide all religions the right to be active safely, except opinions that aim to confiscate freedoms or impose themselves on other parties by force or violence. So democracies are concerned with freeing religion from the monopoly of one interpretation or one sect.
In summary, democracy is a group of regulatory and legal measures for society that humankind has reached after a long history of conflict to refine authorities where religious figures cannot impose their will. Religious authorities were disengaged from the
authorities of the state, to guarantee the state’s neutrality toward all religions. This is what allows for freedom of religion and opinion, and freedom of worship for all in total freedom and equality. This prevents conflict in the name of religion, which leads to the security of the state and its citizens.

On March 3, 2004, Mr. Mahdi Akef, the leader and guide of the Muslim Brotherhood launched the Brotherhood’s Initiative to Participate in Awaited Democratic Reform, presenting the Brotherhood as a political faction that deems itself competent to participate. The Brotherhood presented itselfnaturallyin the best possible light, which is everyone’s right. And on May 8, 2004, Dr. Essam Aryan, a Brotherhood luminary well known due to his appearances on the local Egyptian satellite station, Dream TV, said this initiative is a comprehensive, complete program for soon converting the Brotherhood into a political party.Democracy, in its liberal sense, means rule by the people, legislating laws for themselves according to their conditions. It doesn’t just mean elections. More importantly, and to lay the foundations for elections, democracy is a pluralistic political system that guarantees citizenspublic and private freedoms, especially freedom of expression and opinion. It also guarantees their human rights, especially freedom of religion. These are absolute freedoms, without any limitation or monitoring. The democratic system allows peaceful change of power in society and is based on a separation of powers. The judicial branch, especially, must be totally independent. Democracies adopt the free market economy that is based on competition, and that encourages individual initiatives. Democracies are based on channels of dialgoue and peaceful understanding among citizens. In dealing with local and international conflicts, they avoid military options as much as possible. Along with those who believe in democracy, it confronts the mentality of terrorism and violent fundamentalist dogmatism. Democracies oppose absolutist ideas that claim to own the absolute truth, and defend relativistic and pluralistic principles. By doing so, they provide all religions the right to be active safely, except opinions that aim to confiscate freedoms or impose themselves on other parties by force or violence. So democracies are concerned with freeing religion from the monopoly of one interpretation or one sect.In summary, democracy is a group of regulatory and legal measures for society that humankind has reached after a long history of conflict to refine authorities where religious figures cannot impose their will. Religious authorities were disengaged from theauthorities of the state, to guarantee the state’s neutrality toward all religions. This is what allows for freedom of religion and opinion, and freedom of worship for all in total freedom and equality. This prevents conflict in the name of religion, which leads to the security of the state and its citizens.

Mahmoud Ezzat in ein umfassendes Interview mit Al Jazeera Ahmed Mansur

Mahmoud Ezzat

Dr. Mahmoud Ezzat, Generalsekretär der Muslimbruderschaft, in a comprehensive interview with Al Jazeera’s Ahmed Mansour ascertained that the Muslim Brotherhood’s elections for Chairman scheduled to be held in the upcoming period by members of the Guidance Bureau is open to everyone who wishes to submit his nomination papers as a candidate.

In seinem Vortrag Anweisung, um die Show war Hedood (Without Borders) auf Al-Jazeera TV, Ezzat explained that nomination papers generally should not be used for the Muslim Brotherhood’s candidates but rather a complete list of the entire Brotherhood’s 100-member Shura Council is presented to elect the Brotherhood’s Chairman and Guidance Bureau. Er bestritt, dass die Bruderschaft Allgemeine Anleitung des Shura-Rat Allgemeine Führung erlaubt ihm nicht die Freiheit, auf eigene Faust in seine endgültige Entscheidung macht Arbeit. Er zeigte auch, dass der Rat die Befugnis, den Präsidenten rechenschaftspflichtig für Ausfälle zu halten und bei Bedarf zu entlassen ihn zu jeder Zeit.

Er betonte, dass die Bewegung bereit, das ultimative Opfer zu bringen ist, um das Prinzip der Shura Praxis (Konsultation) in den Reihen der, Hinweis darauf, dass die Shura-Rat wird der Vorsitzende gewählt und eine neue Ausrichtung Präsidium im kommenden Jahr.

Er kommentiert die Berichterstattung in den Medien von dem, was wirklich passiert hinter den Kulissen bei der Ausrichtung Bureau, zitiert, dass der Ausschuss die von führenden Persönlichkeiten wie Dr. bestand. Essam El-Erian und eine Reihe der Mitglieder des Präsidiums Guidance für das Drucken des Chairman's Statement in der Woche Einspruch gegen Herrn. Mahdi Akef Wunsch eine Kleinigkeit Meinungsverschiedenheit. Akef erste Amtszeit wird auf Ende Januar 13, 2010 Allerdings hat er vorher angekündigt; er wird noch eine Entscheidung treffen, ob er im Amt für eine zweite Amtszeit als Gruppe allgemeine Anleitung bleiben.

Er fuhr fort, dass die 81-jährige Akef Mitglieder des Präsidiums Guidance zuvor mitgeteilt, dass er zum Rücktritt gedacht und wird nicht für eine zweite Amtszeit. Mitglieder des Präsidiums sofort reagiert und drängte ihn, im Amt bleiben.

In seiner wöchentlichen Meldung, Mahdi Akef vage bezeichnete seine Absichten nicht läuft eine zweite Amtszeit und dankte der Muslimbruderschaft und der Mitglieder des Präsidiums Guidance, die mit ihm gemeinsam die Verantwortung, als ob er sie an seine Abschiedsrede sein soll. Am Sonntag, Oktober 17 den Medien behauptet, dass der Vorsitzende der Bruderschaft hatte seinen Rücktritt angekündigt; aber der Vorsitzende hat wiederholt Vorwürfe Medien, wo er ins Büro kam am nächsten Tag und traf sich mit Mitgliedern vorenthalten. Er gab später eine Erklärung, die Offenlegung der Wahrheit. Media Behauptungen über die Ausrichtung des Präsidiums Unwilligkeit, Dr ernennen. Essam El-Erian sind völlig falsch.

Dr. Mahmoud Ezzat festgestellt, dass die Bewegung ist sehr erfreut, eine Gelegenheit zu bieten, um ihre Mitglieder Meinungen austauschen können, betont, es ist eine Manifestation der Macht mit ihren bestehenden passender Größe und führende Rolle, darauf hinweist, dass Vorsitzender der Muslimbruderschaft sehr erfreut, dies zu tun ist.

Er betonte, dass alle Fragen zurück auf die Ausrichtung der Office kommen für die endgültige Entscheidung, wo ihre Beschlüsse sind verbindlich und zufrieden stellend für alle, ungeachtet der Unterschiede in der Stellungnahme.

“Ich unterschätze nicht, was bereits passiert oder ich würde einfach sagen, es gibt keine Krise, gleichzeitig, Wir sollten nicht Schlag Dinge aus ihrem Kontext, Wir sind entschlossen, das Prinzip der Shura gelten”, fügte er hinzu.

Es war früher bei der nächsten Sitzung des Präsidiums diskutiert, dass die Ausrichtung des Konzerns Shura-Rat das alleinige Recht, die Mitgliedschaft im Präsidium Guidance für jedes Mitglied zu wählen hat, , erklärte er. Dr. Essam sich einig, dass sie nicht geeignet war, ein neues Mitglied in der Bruderschaft Guidance Präsidium ernennt seit der Wahl wurde in der Nähe.

Ezzat erklärt, dass die Episode auf dem Shura-Rat auf Empfehlung der Leitlinien Büro wurde unter häufigen Verhaftungen und Inhaftierungen geführt von der Sicherheit des Staates vorgelegt. Wir bemühen uns schwer, die Shura-Rat einbeziehen, um den nächsten Präsidenten und Mitglieder der Guidance Amt wählen. Es wird erwartet, die ganze Sache geklärt werden, Allah's bereit, vor Januar 13.

Es war in dieser Sitzung durch den Vorsitzenden und die Mitglieder des MB Guidance Präsidium beschließt, ein Schreiben an die Shura-Rat schicken, betont, dass der Termin für diese Wahlen werden spätestens sechs Monate. Es wurde angenommen, dass das Verfahren vor oder während der Wahlen durchgeführt werden, in denen 5 neue Mitglieder gewählt wurden letztes Jahr. Es ist die Shura-Rat die Entscheidung und nicht die MB Guidance Bureau. Folglich, die allgemeine Gruppe Shura-Rat schließlich erreichte ihren einstimmigen Beschluss die Abhaltung von Wahlen so bald wie möglich.

Er betonte, dass die Muslimbrüder, mit der Durchsetzung der Shura wird durch seine internen Regeln organisiert. Verordnungen angenommen und befürwortet werden durch Gesetze der Shura Rat und Änderungen vorbehalten. Die jüngste Änderung im Gange mit einer ihrer Klauseln ist die Dauer der Amtszeit eines Mitglieds der Guidance Amt sieht vor, dass ein Mitglied darf nicht mehr als zwei aufeinander folgende Amtszeiten.

Einige Mitglieder der Guidance Office wurden ihrer Einhaltung vorgeworfen, im Amt zu bleiben für viele Jahre; Dr. Ezzat behauptete, dass häufige Verhaftungen nicht ausschließen Hat man das Executive Bureau uns dazu veranlasst, einen anderen Artikel in der internen Verordnung sieht vor, dass ein Mitglied seine Mitgliedschaft beibehalten, auch wenn er inhaftiert war än. Die Abwesenheit des Herrn arbeiten für das Wohl des Vaterlandes und der erhabenen Mission führte uns auf sie darauf bestehen, die Aufrechterhaltung ihrer Mitgliedschaft. Engineer Khayrat Al-shater wird als zweiter stellvertretender Vorsitzender des MB und Dr. bleiben. Mohammed Ali Bishr Mitglied des Executive Bureau MB. Es wird erwartet, Bishr wird nächsten Monat veröffentlicht werden.

Dr. Mahmoud Ezzat völlig versagt Gerüchte über interne Konflikte innerhalb der oppositionellen Gruppe in Bezug auf Führung, betont, dass die Mechanismen, Regelungen und Bedingungen sind die Weichen für die Bewegung Staats-und Regierungschefs wählen. Er stellte ferner fest, dass Ägypten die geographische Lage und erhebliche moralisches Gewicht innerhalb der muslimischen Welt die Notwendigkeit für die MB Vorsitzender zu sein ägyptischen rechtfertigt.

“Die Guidance Amt prüft derzeit die allgemeine Tendenz der 100-köpfigen Schura-Rat der Bruderschaft im Hinblick auf einen geeigneten Kandidaten nominieren förderfähigen Kosten zu tragen als Vorsitzender”, sagte er.

“Es ist extrem schwer vorherzusagen, wer der nächste Präsident werden, Feststellung, dass 5 Minuten vor der Ernennung von Herrn. Akef als Vorsitzender wusste niemand,, der Stimmzettel nur entschieden, wer würde das neue Anführer sein”, sagte er.

Dr. Mahmoud Ezzat schrieben die Medien scheinbare widersprüchliche Berichte über die Anschuldigungen gegen Bemerkungen über die Bruderschaft Top-Führungskräfte die gleichen Widersprüche der medialen Berichterstattung über Spitzenpolitiker, die von der Zeitung.

Dr. Mahmoud Ezzat beleuchten mit Zahlen auf Razzien, die zur Festnahme einiger LED 2696 Mitglieder der Gruppe in 2007, 3674 in 2008 und 5022 in 2009. Dies führte in der Shura-Rat in der Lage ist zu den Sitzungen und Wahlen abzuhalten.

Er betonte auch, dass die Muslimbruderschaft extrem scharf auf die Aufrechterhaltung der nationalen Sicherheit in Ägypten und wird seine’ Interesse an der Erreichung friedlicher Reformen in der Gesellschaft. “Wir sind uns bewusst, dass die Sitzungen des Amtes durch die Ausrichtung der Sicherheit überwacht, obwohl wir nur zu Demokratie ausüben wollen. Tatsächlich, Wir wollen nicht die Feindschaft und Feindseligkeit der anderen auslösen”.

Er betonte auch die Unterschiede innerhalb der Organisation nicht durch Hass oder persönlichen Differenzen, da die menschenwürdige Temperamente durch die erhabenen Lehren des Islam ermutigt, motiviert uns dazu ermutigen Unterschied der Meinungen toleriere. Er fügte hinzu, dass die Geschichte hat bewiesen, dass die Muslimbruderschaft Bewegung hat viel schwieriger Umstände als die bestehende Krise begegnet.

Die Medien haben ein negatives Bild von der Muslimbruderschaft, wo sie am SSI Untersuchungen stützte Informationen projiziert. Es ist zwingend notwendig, dass Journalisten Tatsachen erhalten von der Original-Quellen, wenn sie irgendeine Art von Glaubwürdigkeit haben, sind. In der Tat der Justiz für ungültig erklärt hat alle Vorwürfe berichtet in staatlichen Untersuchung, sagte er.

Dr. Mahmoud Ezzat sei optimistisch, dass die derzeitige politische Krise wird vorübergehen zu behaupten, dass die Ereignisse beweisen wird, dass die Muslimbrüder mit all seinen edlen Sitten, Objektivität, und Üben der Demokratie durchscheinen mit Bravour.

Published on Ikhwanweb

Abweichende Brothers

Founded in 1928, die Muslimbruderschaft (MB) has never experienced a leadership crisis as serious as that which erupted two weeks ago. As is now well-known, the problem originated with the refusal on the part of the MB’s Guidance Bureau (the organisation’s highest executive body) to accept Essam El-Erian as a member to replace Mohamed Hilal following the latter’s death four weeks ago. It was a clear act of defiance against Supreme Guide Mohamed Mahdi Akef who wanted to promote El-Erian and who maintained that the MB’s internal regulations gave him that right. In response to the refusal Akef has threatened to resign and designated most of his powers to his first deputy, Mohamed Habib.
Of course, the crisis goes much deeper than the question of El-Erian’s promotion. This is not the first time the supreme guide has encountered resistance. The problem is rooted in the way the MB handles its internal disputes and in its reading of the Egyptian political scene as it touches upon the organisation’s image and activities. Although in the course of the past two decades the MB has managed to deal clearly and firmly with internal opposition, disciplining and marginalising dissenters, it has signally failed to benefit from any intellectual and ideological diversity among its ranks. As a consequence, it has forfeited an important political asset which it desperately needs in its confrontations with adversaries.
The tensions in the upper echelons of the MB hierarchy are too sharp to be swept under the carpet in the usual way. The supreme guide has set himself against the will of the conservative wing of the leadership over the promotion of El-Erian, whom he believes deserves a chance to serve on the Guidance Bureau. But regardless of what actions he takes, including the threat to resign, there are unmistakable signs that he will be unable to reign in the conservatives. Since becoming head of the movement in January 2004 Akef has worked hard to maintain smooth relations between the different ideological trends within the MB. Almost always, however, his efforts have come at the expense of the reformists or pragmatists, whether because of the relative weakness of their influence within the organisation compared to the conservatives or because he feared a rift that would render the organisation vulnerable to the regime’s political and security tactics.
That tensions have reached their current pitch is due to the brewing conflict over the succession to the office Akef now holds. In March Akef announced that he did not intend to nominate himself for a new term, which would begin on 13 January. His decision marked the first time in the group’s history that a supreme guide has voluntarily stepped down at the height of his career. All six of his predecessors died while still in office. Akef’s unprecedented and, apparently, unexpected decision, triggered an initially silent power struggle over who would fill his post. Interestingly, the struggle has not been between conservatives and reformists, but rather between hardliners and pragmatists inside the conservative camp.
The current situation is significant for several reasons. Rarely have internal differences bubbled over into public view. This time, however, the main players have been vying ferociously for media attention.
Then there is Akef’s threat, subsequently denied, that he would resign. That Akef should have been driven to such a step reflects the magnitude of the pressures and anger he has faced during his nearly six-year long tenure. Having served as the keel between diverse trends, Akef’s threat must reflect his sense of failure at checking the conservativeshegemony over all the organisation’s bodies and decision-making mechanisms.
That Akef has delegated many of his powers to his first deputy is also unprecedented, as well as being in violation of the group’s internal regulations. Article 6 of the MB’s charter states that the supreme guide can leave his post under three conditionspoor performance of his duties, resignation or death. Since none of these conditions obtains Akef had no right to delegate his responsibilities to his first deputy.
The crisis has thrown into relief a major problem in the MB’s constitutional structure, the lack of an institutionalised arbitrating authority capable of settling disputes between the supreme guide and the Guidance Bureau. It has also demonstrated that many of the group’s internal taboos regarding reverence for, and uncritical obedience to, its leaders have cracked.
The MB leadership will undoubtedly attempt to resolve the crisis as quickly as possible, so that it does not spread through the movement’s rank and file. For this reason, the MB’s General Shura Council will hold elections for the next supreme guide within the next couple of weeks. Even so, it is doubtful that the new leader will enjoy the same level of prestige as his predecessors and will, as a consequence, be hampered in any attempts to maintain equilibrium inside the group. Neither the MB’s Secretary- General Mahmoud Ezzat, or First Deputy to the Supreme Guide Mohamed Habib, the two leading contenders for the post, have the historical legitimacy of Akef, the last of the MB’s founding generation.
But the election of the next supreme guide is not the only problem with which the MB must contend. No less important, or problematic, is the need to elect a new Guidance Bureau. The current bureau was elected in 1995, since which time some members have been added through promotion, as was the case with Mohamed Mursi who became chairman of the political committee in 2004, and others by means of the partial elections in 2008. Comprehensive elections to the bureau should have been held a year ago, following the election of the new MB Shura Council which is responsible for selecting the members of the Guidance Bureau and the supreme guide.
The MB is entering a very delicate phase in its history. Even if MB leaders manage to smooth over the current crisis, its effects will continue to reverberate beneath the surface and, undoubtedly, erupt once again.

Khalil Al-anani

Esam

Founded in 1928, die Muslimbruderschaft (MB) has never experienced a leadership crisis as serious as that which erupted two weeks ago. As is now well-known, the problem originated with the refusal on the part of the MB’s Guidance Bureau (the organisation’s highest executive body) to accept Essam El-Erian as a member to replace Mohamed Hilal following the latter’s death four weeks ago. It was a clear act of defiance against Supreme Guide Mohamed Mahdi Akef who wanted to promote El-Erian and who maintained that the MB’s internal regulations gave him that right. In response to the refusal Akef has threatened to resign and designated most of his powers to his first deputy, Mohamed Habib.

Of course, the crisis goes much deeper than the question of El-Erian’s promotion. This is not the first time the supreme guide has encountered resistance. The problem is rooted in the way the MB handles its internal disputes and in its reading of the Egyptian political scene as it touches upon the organisation’s image and activities. Although in the course of the past two decades the MB has managed to deal clearly and firmly with internal opposition, disciplining and marginalising dissenters, it has signally failed to benefit from any intellectual and ideological diversity among its ranks. As a consequence, it has forfeited an important political asset which it desperately needs in its confrontations with adversaries.

The tensions in the upper echelons of the MB hierarchy are too sharp to be swept under the carpet in the usual way. The supreme guide has set himself against the will of the conservative wing of the leadership over the promotion of El-Erian, whom he believes deserves a chance to serve on the Guidance Bureau. But regardless of what actions he takes, including the threat to resign, there are unmistakable signs that he will be unable to reign in the conservatives. Since becoming head of the movement in January 2004 Akef has worked hard to maintain smooth relations between the different ideological trends within the MB. Almost always, however, his efforts have come at the expense of the reformists or pragmatists, whether because of the relative weakness of their influence within the organisation compared to the conservatives or because he feared a rift that would render the organisation vulnerable to the regime’s political and security tactics.

That tensions have reached their current pitch is due to the brewing conflict over the succession to the office Akef now holds. In March Akef announced that he did not intend to nominate himself for a new term, which would begin on 13 January. His decision marked the first time in the group’s history that a supreme guide has voluntarily stepped down at the height of his career. All six of his predecessors died while still in office. Akef’s unprecedented and, apparently, unexpected decision, triggered an initially silent power struggle over who would fill his post. Interestingly, the struggle has not been between conservatives and reformists, but rather between hardliners and pragmatists inside the conservative camp.

The current situation is significant for several reasons. Rarely have internal differences bubbled over into public view. This time, however, the main players have been vying ferociously for media attention.

Then there is Akef’s threat, subsequently denied, that he would resign. That Akef should have been driven to such a step reflects the magnitude of the pressures and anger he has faced during his nearly six-year long tenure. Having served as the keel between diverse trends, Akef’s threat must reflect his sense of failure at checking the conservativeshegemony over all the organisation’s bodies and decision-making mechanisms.

That Akef has delegated many of his powers to his first deputy is also unprecedented, as well as being in violation of the group’s internal regulations. Article 6 of the MB’s charter states that the supreme guide can leave his post under three conditionspoor performance of his duties, resignation or death. Since none of these conditions obtains Akef had no right to delegate his responsibilities to his first deputy.

The crisis has thrown into relief a major problem in the MB’s constitutional structure, the lack of an institutionalised arbitrating authority capable of settling disputes between the supreme guide and the Guidance Bureau. It has also demonstrated that many of the group’s internal taboos regarding reverence for, and uncritical obedience to, its leaders have cracked.

The MB leadership will undoubtedly attempt to resolve the crisis as quickly as possible, so that it does not spread through the movement’s rank and file. For this reason, the MB’s General Shura Council will hold elections for the next supreme guide within the next couple of weeks. Even so, it is doubtful that the new leader will enjoy the same level of prestige as his predecessors and will, as a consequence, be hampered in any attempts to maintain equilibrium inside the group. Neither the MB’s Secretary- General Mahmoud Ezzat, or First Deputy to the Supreme Guide Mohamed Habib, the two leading contenders for the post, have the historical legitimacy of Akef, the last of the MB’s founding generation.

But the election of the next supreme guide is not the only problem with which the MB must contend. No less important, or problematic, is the need to elect a new Guidance Bureau. The current bureau was elected in 1995, since which time some members have been added through promotion, as was the case with Mohamed Mursi who became chairman of the political committee in 2004, and others by means of the partial elections in 2008. Comprehensive elections to the bureau should have been held a year ago, following the election of the new MB Shura Council which is responsible for selecting the members of the Guidance Bureau and the supreme guide.

The MB is entering a very delicate phase in its history. Even if MB leaders manage to smooth over the current crisis, its effects will continue to reverberate beneath the surface and, undoubtedly, erupt once again.

Published On Al-ahram Weekly