It was a scene with serious implications, yet it could have passed quietly if it followed a normal course: a campaign to remove illegal street stalls and execute administrative orders. Instead, it ended in a heated dispute between a District Head—holding the rank of Major General—and the office manager of a Member of Parliament. The District Head slapped the manager; a strange act for a woman to slap a man, which raises numerous questions.
First, why she resort to violence? Does she not possess the legal tools to enforce her decisions? Why wasn't the matter settled through official reports and legal procedures from the beginning?
Then comes the most important question: Where were the regulatory bodies for health and supply?
We saw reports of a lack of refrigerators for goods that require cooling, stolen electricity, and stalls set up without permits. Did the competent authorities perform their role of inspection and follow-up? Or did they only move after the crisis exploded?
Furthermore, why did this happen in Al-Darb Al-Ahmar, while in the Al-Dawahi district of Port Said, for example, the District Head removed illegal stalls and markets without clashes or violence? We saw no brawls there, and the campaign did not turn into a public opinion crisis. There was a violation, and it was removed by the power of the law.
This begs the question:
If this succeeded in Port Said, and certainly in many other districts without issues, why specifically Al-Darb Al-Ahmar? What happened?
I have waited over the past few days for any clarification or explanation. The District Head has been transferred, yet the illegal stalls remain. We want to know what happened.
No one is above the law, and there is no room for "immunity" in the streets or in the daily interests of citizens. Immunity exists only inside Parliament to serve the people through words and opinions.
There are many questions, and the people have the right to know the answers clearly. The investigation must be reopened, and the results must be announced to everyone for the sake of transparency—because transparency uncovers the corruption.




