Cairo, 6^th August 2008

Egypt

Concern about the use of the Egyptian judiciary to settle scores with opponents and activists

The Arab Center for the Independence of the Judiciary and the Legal Profession (ACIJLP) is extremely concerned by repeated attempts witnessed in Egypt in 2007 to use the Egyptian judiciary to settle scores with, and prosecute, political opponents and activists.

Further increasing this concern is that these attempts, while targeting political activists and opponents, lead to the creation of a general atmosphere which places the Egyptian judiciary - at times by the general public and at others by intellectuals and activists – in a position at odds with the principles of independence and the probity of justice, and which undermines public trust in the Egyptian judiciary.

ACIJLP is concerned by the Egyptian judiciary continually being used to settle political scores with, and prosecute, political opponents and activists, after this was ended in 1996 – when article 3 of the Egyptian Pleadings Law was amended and which restricted the right to raise cases to the public prosecution office and those with an interest in the case, thereby annulling what was known as hesba cases, or politically-motivated cases.

This amendment followed the spread of the use of these cases by Islamic groups against several intellectual such as Nasr Hamed Abo Zeid, and the case concerning the banning of the film the Emigrant. This legislative amendment was made to protect intellectuals from the arbitrary use of hesba cases.

Egypt has not seen Egypt’s judiciary being pushed into intellectual struggles and the settling of scores with opponents and intellectuals since 1996. The use of this type of case began in 2007 with a case against journalist Ibrahim Eissa in the trial popularly-known as the “rumours about the president’s health” case, followed by the case against four editors of independent Egyptian newspapers.

Cases continue to be brought by individuals with no legal standing, in violation of article 3 of the Pleadings Law to include Saed Eddin Ibrahim under claims that he weakened Egypt’s standing, followed by other cases seeking to strip him of his nationality.

ACIJLP is of the opinion that if these cases - previously used in 1995 by individuals belonging to Islamic groups - are such a source of concern to Egyptian society as to push the state to amend article 3 of the Pleadings Law, then it is source of even greater concern that these cases are currently being brought by individuals belonging to the ruling party. This raises doubts about the position of the Egyptian government towards this type of case, which constitutes a clear backwards step in the protection of human rights and general freedoms.

These types of cases, brought in close connection with the Egyptian government, will open the way to attacks on human rights and general freedoms in Egypt in such a way as to encompass state officials themselves through the same means.

ACIJLP believes that the use of the judiciary to settle political battles and intellectual struggles is in violation of article 3 of the Pleadings Law. The Supreme Judicial Council must stop and examine this matter in order to protect the independence and probity of the Egyptian judiciary.