Last Update 23:7
Tuesday, 21 May 2019

Mortada Mansour goes off script during parliament oath recitation, saying '25 Jan not a revolution'

Mansour swore that he would respect the 'articles of the constitution,' but not the 'constitution'

Passant Darwish , Sunday 10 Jan 2016
Mortada Mansour
Screenshot of MP Mortada Mansour while saying the oath in the first parliamentary session on Sunday 10 January, 2016
Views: 3149
Views: 3149

During the first procedural session of the Egyptian parliament, controversial lawyer and MP Mortada Mansour refused to recite the oath in its proper form, provoking the ire of other parliamentarians.

Mansour swore that he would respect the “articles of the constitution,” not he constitution itself.

Earlier in the day, Mansour revealed to Egyptian newspaper El-Masry El-Youm his intention to change the wording of the oath while swearing in.

Mansour explained that he objected to the constitution's preface, which pays tribute to both the 25 January 2011 revolution that ousted president Hosni Mubarak, and the 30 June 2013 revolution that ousted Islamist president Mohamed Morsi.

“25 January was an uprising not a revolution,” Mansour stated, adding that it was "hijacked" by the now-banned Muslim Brotherhood.

“No other constitutions [in the world] have a preface,” Mansour asserted.

Mansour was not asked to repeat the oath in its official version, although another parliamentarian was required to repeat it after making a minor error while reciting it.

Immediately after Mansour's swearing of the oath, the bailiff reminded MPs that “the oath should be read said as is, without deleting or adding any words to it.”

Mansour — chairman of the Zamalek Sporting Club since March 2014 — has been a controversial figure in Egyptian politics since the 1990s, known for filing lawsuits against his critics.

Egypt’s largest legislature to date, this newly-formed parliament has ended a four-year parliamentary hiatus.

The MPs are divided into 448 independents, 120 party-based deputies and 28 presidential appointees.

Short link:


Ahram Online welcomes readers' comments on all issues covered by the site, along with any criticisms and/or corrections. Readers are asked to limit their feedback to a maximum of 1000 characters (roughly 200 words). All comments/criticisms will, however, be subject to the following code
  • We will not publish comments which contain rude or abusive language, libelous statements, slander and personal attacks against any person/s.
  • We will not publish comments which contain racist remarks or any kind of racial or religious incitement against any group of people, in Egypt or outside it.
  • We welcome criticism of our reports and articles but we will not publish personal attacks, slander or fabrications directed against our reporters and contributing writers.
  • We reserve the right to correct, when at all possible, obvious errors in spelling and grammar. However, due to time and staffing constraints such corrections will not be made across the board or on a regular basis.

10-01-2016 04:09pm
He's Right
The man is right. What happened in 2011 wasn't a revolution. It was an uprising provoked by outside powers using the media and facebook to manipulate people's emotions and desires to push them into the streets in an attempt to destabilize Egypt. That is it. Plain & Simple I'm not saying that the demands aren't legitimate, but I am saying that the way that these demands were made and the constant protesting was a way to harm Egypt economically, socially, and politically.
Comment's Title

Sam Enslow
10-01-2016 01:50pm
Above the law?
The laws are not applied to all, even oaths? It is also factually incorrect that other constitutions do not have introductions (preambles). That of the US begins with, 'We the people...'
Comment's Title

© 2010 Ahram Online.