Hosni Mubarak may not quit until the autumn but amending a constitution that afforded him such power can begin sooner It is not easy to predict what will happen next in Egypt’s uprising, but if there is to be significant reform in the post-Mubarak era the route will have to go through several far-reaching constitutional and political changes needed to open up a sclerotic system. Talks on Sunday between the vice-president, Omar Suleiman, and opposition figures produced little of substance – though the meeting with Muslim Brotherhood was a symbolic first. Mistrust, however, remains strong: Essam al-Erian, a leading Brotherhood member, has complained that a statement issued after the meeting had not been signed by the attendees. Crucially there is still no sign Mubarak is going to step down before the autumn – a position now tacitly supported by the US, UK and other western governments. The key question is whether change can take place without his departure – the core demand of the protesters in Cairo’s Tahrir Square. Mohamed ElBaradei, the nearest the divided opposition has to a recognised leader, is insisting the president must go, and has called for a ruling council to serve for a year of transition as a caretaker government to prepare new elections. He also wants the constitution abolished and parliament dissolved. Key changes include amending articles 76 and 77, which describe the powers of the presidency and the system for presidential elections that perpetuated Mubarak’s rule for a fifth consecutive term. Article 88 also needs to be amended to restore full judicial supervision of elections. Another must is article 179, controversially amended in 2007 to include an “anti-terrorism” measure that allows arbitrary arrest, searches and wiretapping without warrant and the transfer of civilian court cases to military tribunals. Unlike the emergency law this is not a temporary measure requiring parliamentary approval but a permanent extension of executive power under the constitution. Suleiman’s statement said only that the emergency would be lifted “in accordance with the security situation”. Debate in Egypt, as the Arabist blog put it , centres on how to proceed with either a new constitution or adapting the current one to the new circumstances. One initiative calls on Mubarak to devolve to Suleiman the responsibilities of managing the transitional period, dissolving the Shura (consultative upper) council and People’s Assembly (lower house) and form a committee of legal experts and independent judges to prepare constitutional amendments. But some experts warn that Mubarak’s immediate departure could make it harder to carry out changes. “If he resigns, the situation will be dangerous because we will have a constitutional vacuum, which means that we will have no chance to amend the constitution,” Ibrahim Darwish, a constitutional lawyer at Cairo University, told al-Masry al-Yom newspaper. Opposition supporters are also demanding the release of detainees belonging to the Muslim Brotherhood, the 6 April and 25 January movements and other groups. Other demands are greater freedom for private media, allowing opposition figures to appear in state-run media and abolishing restrictions on domestic and international media. There are calls too for civilian oversight of the police and security forces and a commitment by the army to supervise the transition. But Sherif Younis, another law professor, urged that change in Egypt be looked at in the broadest possible context. “Treating the constitution as sacred at this time is misguided,” he argued. “Surely the constitution is not meaningless; many institutions function, even if superficially, according to this document. What’s missing from the current debate is an honest discussion about the fact that the constitution exists in a wider context where a state of exception prevails and the exercise of political power often trumps the rule of law.” Hosni Mubarak Egypt Middle East Protest Ian Black guardian.co.uk