A REVOLUTIONARY air has returned to Egypt, fuelled by frustration at the verdict announced on June 3rd in the trial of the deposed president, Hosni Mubarak, his sons and top security officials. Within hours of the announcement, thousands had returned to Tahrir Square and other public spaces across the country to express their rage. The atmosphere, veterans of the January 2011 uprising noted happily, was like that of those halcyon days of national unity against a tyrant. But can it last, when the country is bitterly divided and heading into a presidential runoff election that pits Mr Mubarak's last prime minister, Ahmed Shafiq, against the Muslim Brotherhood's candidate, Muhammad Morsi?



While Mr Mubarak and his former minister of interior, Habib al-Adly, each received life sentences (less than the death penalty for which many had hoped) for their role in brutally suppressing last year's revolt, six lieutenants of Mr Adly were acquitted. This is hard to understand, particularly as they were in charge of carrying out his orders. The lack of evidence to convict them is probably due mainly to the fact that documents and recordings of their phone conversations conveniently disappeared from the ministry of interior. Mr Mubarak's sons also were acquitted—the public prosecutor inexplicably charged them over a case of fraud that was beyond the statute of limitations. They still face other, fresher charges of financial misconduct. Indeed, the trials are likely to last years longer while all appeals, motions for retrials, and other legal stratagems are used. More than anything, Sunday's verdict highlights how poorly equipped this ordinary court was to deal with an extraordinary trial.



This has left many Egyptians feeling embittered and cheated. One glum joke making the rounds has it that Syria's Bashar al-Assad has agreed to step down if he can be tried in an Egyptian court. This anger could works to Mr Morsi's advantage. He and his Muslim Brethren are hoping to capture the larger portion of the first round vote that went to a moderate Islamist and anti-establishment secularist. For that reason they have moved towards the centre after campaigning largely to their Islamist base. They are offering a power-sharing arrangement with secular forces, with the next cabinet, they envision, to be headed by an independent technocrat and a presidential advisory council. Non-Islamist vice-presidents are another possibility, as well as retrials of all officials involved in the killing of protesters. Anti-regime secularists are making their own demands, and negotiations continue for now.



Mr Shafiq, in the meantime, appears to be moving in the opposite direction. In a speech today, he spent most of time framing the possibility of a Brotherhood victory as a return to the “dark ages” that will bring “chaos”. Puzzlingly, he even accused the group of being part of Mr Mubarak's regime. On the trial's verdict, he is more circumspect, saying he respects the judiciary's independence and points to Mr Mubarak's sentence as a first for the Arab world. He makes his case to the “silent majority”, on behalf of himself and the generals who now rule the country: that the revolution has taken place, and only his government can restore order and prosperity. Since Mr Mubarak is now in jail, it is time to move on rather than experiment, appears to be his argument. The angry protesters in Tahrir Square do not buy it, but perhaps others will.

(Picture credit: AFP)