Ben Ali and Mubarak, the brought down dictators in
Tunisia and Egypt, were in the same situation. Both had legitimacy and were
internationally recognized. According to the applicable law at that time, they
had the power. They never wanted to admit that they didn’t have enough
authority to run the country. They had to learn that progressively during the
uprisings. If you look at their speeches when people went to the street, you
will see that there were three moments. At a first time they gave order to
people to go home, saying that they will not admit any disorder. At a second
time they started to make concessions saying that there are foreign forces manipulating
the crowd and they promise to make reforms in the perspective of more democracy
and more freedom. But it was not enough because they were still talking in the
name of the power they had not in the name of any real authority. It was
difficult for them to admit, that the people who had the authority of the
street regained the power. When they pushed the two presidents to step down people
showed that their authority was stronger than the official power and they are
the ones who decide. Hence the third moment when the two presidents say that
they finally understand the people’s will and they literally leave the power.
What
is happening with the new islamist transitional government in Egypt, is again
the same confusion between institutional power and moral and effective
authority. For President Morsi, the legitimacy he got through the democratic
process makes that he wants full power. He doesn’t understand that he still
doesn’t have enough authority. He thinks that the strength he is given from the
legitimacy allows him to legitimately use force against the people. But there are
two kinds of power. The one relies on means of repression and violence of the
State to grant the institutional legitimacy; the other has a moral legitimacy
which can be translated in a real and effective authority and hence a stable
governance. The first can be seen in the behavior of the police officers hiding
behind their uniforms, the latter is incarnated by the committees coordinating
the security of the crowd without any ‘official legitimacy’, except the one of
the street.
In
Egypt, but also in Tunisia, people developed a high adverse sentiment against
all kinds of confusion between Power and Authority. The best example of this
confusion is the declaration of the martial law in some regions of the two
countries as last resort to control a rebel population. Governments think that the legitimacy they
got thanks to democratic process bringing them to power, gives them
automatically an absolute tutorship and authority on the people. In fact they
got the power as a set of institutions, and the uprising of the people means
that they still don’t have enough moral authority. They can conquer the power
following the rules of democracy, but to really govern, they need to deserve
the authority.
At
this moment of transition, the people obviously don’t have enough trust in the
still young and yet very arrogant government.
People will not admit any agenda neither any policy as far as the
politics are not able to make a distinction between the power of the State and
the effective political authority, and that even when they have the first one,
this doesn’t mean that they automatically have the second. They should learn
not to shout in face of those who brought them to the power. They should learn
how to listen to people instead of only give orders so that they settle down
and stay in line. The little stories I witnessed show that a uniform doesn’t
make you a police agent of order. It gives you the official status but it
doesn’t enable you automatically to maintain it.
People
have authority and can decide when the politicians can run the State and get
the power and when they have to leave it and give it back. The one who will
acknowledge and respect this will be able to really govern with peace and
effectiveness.
Full story : http://www.eutopiainstitute.org/
