You are :
1/6/2002
|
Home »» Annual Report
|
The situation of human rights in Egypt Annual report 2003
|
Contents
The state of emergency in Egypt
an obstacle to political reform and respect for human rights
Introduction
Part one: Legislative developments and court decisions
.
Part two: Human rights violations in 2003
1. The right to life
.
2. The right to freedom and personal security
3. Forced disappearance
4. Treatment of prisoners and detainees
5. The right to a fair trial
6. The right to freedom of opinion and expression
7. The right to peaceful assembly
8. Economic and social rights
9. The right to political participation
10. The right to formation of political parties, associations and unions
11. The rights of Egyptians abroad
12. Discrimination against women
Part three: EOHR fieldwork in 2003
1. Lawyers' Unit fieldwork
2. The Refugee Legal Aid Project
3. Women's Legal Aid Project
Appendix
Cancellation of the state of emergency is a mass demand. Political forces of all denominations are united in their call for the annulment of the Emergency Law which, accompanied by a serious economic crisis, has led to the stagnation of politics in Egypt. The only escape from the current crisis is comprehensive political reform embracing social and political elements. Democratic mechanisms and respect for human rights are an indisputable and essential foundation of good governance, a conclusion which political forces and the government reached simultaneously.
Political parties and human rights groups have adopted a programme of political and constitutional reform while the government and ruling National Democratic Party have announced that a national dialogue will be conducted in order that they, political parties and civil society institutions can reach consensus on the best means of political reform. Civil society institutions agreed on a declaration on democracy and reform at the end of the Alexandria Conference while the Beirut Conference culminated in the "Second Independence" declaration which presents civil society groups' vision of political reform. There is therefore a virtual consensus about the need for political and democratic reform.
The question now facing us is whether we can realise a programme of political and democratic reform in the shadow of the state of emergency. The answer of course is that we cannot, because the Emergency Law is the principal cause of human rights violations in Egypt.
The authorities use the Emergency Law to attack human rights and freedoms protected by the Constitution. It gives the authorities wide and unrestricted powers which they use to abuse citizens' constitutional rights to such an extent that it might be said that the Emergency Law has become the real constitution of Egypt.
50 years of emergency
Egypt first experienced martial law in 1914 during the First World War when in November of that year the British occupation forces imposed martial laws in order to protect British interests and forces stationed in Egypt. These laws were not repealed until the War had ended and, in 1922, the Egyptian authorities issued legislation that sheltered the British government from any civil or criminal liability stemming from the martial laws.
Egypt was free of martial laws for seventeen years until the start of the Second World War when martial laws were again imposed, this time issued by royal decree in implementation of the Friendship and Alliance Agreement signed between Egypt and Britain on the 26th August 1936. Prime Minister Ali Maher was appointed military leader, and governors representing him were installed in the governorates and regions.
A number of Council of Deputies members opposed the speed with which military laws were announced because the country had not been subject to the aggression of the Axis powers. Nonetheless, the military laws remained in force until a few months after the end of the Second World War on the 9th May 1945.
Military laws were announced for the third time in May 1948 when Arab armies, including Egyptian forces, converged on Palestine to counter Israeli attacks on citizens. Law 15 [1922] was amended by Law 73 [1948] which stated that a state of emergency could be announced in order to "guarantee the safety of the Egyptian army in Palestine and protect its lines of communication."
In April 1950, during the tenure of the last Wafd Party cabinet headed by Moustafa al-Nahass military laws were annulled throughout the country except in regions bordering Palestine and in Sinai and Red Sea governorates where it remained for a renewable one year period.
On the 26th January 1952 however, the government again announced the application of military laws throughout the country for the fourth time beginning from that evening, and appointed prime minister al-Nahass military supervisor invested with the exceptional powers under the law. The next Prime Minister, Naguib al-Helaly continued to hold the same position after the Wafd Party's dismissal from office.
When the July 1952 Revolution broke out Egypt was again placed under military rule. The Revolution did not need military rule to realise its objectives after the Revolutionary Leadership Committee gained power. Revolutionary legitimacy took the place of constitutional legitimacy when the civil constitution was abolished in December 1952. The country remained governed by decree and declarations from the Revolutionary Leadership Committee until the 16th January 1956 Constitution was enacted in July of that year.
Two years later President Gamal Abdel Nasser issued Emergency Law 162 [1958] which was implemented for the first time on the 5th June 1967 on the occasion of the Six Day, or Suez War. The state of emergency remained in force until it was cancelled at midnight on the 15th May 1980, thirteen years later - the longest continuous period Egypt had been under emergency rule.
Its lifting was demanded by all classes of society and jurists, particularly after the Camp David Agreement was signed on the 17th September 1978 and the peace accords with Israel signed in March 1979 when the state of emergency lost its reason for existence.
President Anwar Sadat was forced to concede to this mass demand despite his previous announcement that the state of emergency would continue in force until the Israeli forces' scheduled withdraw from the Sinai Peninsula in April 1982 took place.
After the assassination of President Sadat a state of emergency was imposed by the transitional president Dr Soufy Abu Taleb, the former leader of the People's Assembly. The state of emergency continues in force today.
No justification for the imposition of the state of emergency
While the president has the constitutional right to declare a state of emergency where a situation endangering national security develops or an unexpected danger emerges, there exists international consensus that a declaration of a state of emergency can only be justified where national security is imperilled by:
- War
- The threat of war
- Natural disasters
Thankfully, none of these circumstances describe the current situation in Egypt. For many years now the Egyptian government has used terrorism as a pretext for renewing the state of emergency, despite the fact that there has not been a terrorist incident in Egypt since 1997. The government also invokes the events of 11th September 2001 to claim that terrorist activity could spread to Egypt.
This justification is politically and legally untenable, as was the government's use of preparations for the Anglo-American War in Iraq as a justification for renewing the state of emergency early (the state of emergency was scheduled to end in May 2003, but the government presented a decree renewing it for a further three years in February 2003.)
EOHR has consistently emphasised the danger of the Emergency Law and exposed its effects on human rights in Egypt. Some of these effects are the following:
The state of emergency transgresses the legal boundaries of the Emergency Law and, through its attacks on many rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Egyptian Constitution and international human rights instruments, has had a devastating effect on the soul of the Egyptian legal system through its .
Under the Emergency Law the authorities have wide powers to restrict individuals' liberties and Constitutional rights such as the rights to assembly and movement. The police may search people and places and arrest and detain suspects outside the bounds of the requirements of the Criminal Procedures Code.
This is a flagrant violation of the rights and legal guarantees provided by the Egyptian Constitution, in particular article 41 relating to personal freedom, article 42 governing the sanctity of the home, article 50 on freedom of residence and movement and article 45 on freedom of assembly.
It also violates the rights laid down in articles 9, 12 and 21 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which provide the rights to liberty, freedom of movement and peaceful assembly respectively.
Under article 3 of the Emergency Law the military commander has the right to censure letters, newspapers, publications and written materials and may also censure or ban means of expression, propaganda and the media. This infringes the "inviolability of the private life of citizens" as provided for under article 45 of the Constitution as well as its article 49 which provides for freedom of scientific and literary invention.
The Emergency Law empowers the executive authorities to escape the regulations laid down in the Criminal Procedures Code in relation to the arrest of those suspected of having committed a crime listed under the Emergency Law decrees - in contravention of the Egyptian Constitution and the ICCPR. The Supreme Emergency State Security Court tries individuals suspected of violating orders issued by the president.
The president has the power to include military elements in the composition of emergency courts; a district summary state security court be composed of a judge and two armed forces officers while the supreme state security court may be composed of three legal counsellors and two senior officers. This contravenes constitutional and international standards relating to the separation of powers and the independence and immunity of the judiciary as governed by articles 165 - 173 of the Constitution and article 14 of the ICCPR.
Under article 6 of the Military Orders Law the president may transfer any case to a military court during a state of emergency. This article has been used since 1992 to transfer civilians for trial in military courts.
Under article 9 of the Emergency Law the president may transfer cases involving any crime to emergency state security courts - a violation of article 40(9) of the Constitution which provides for equality between citizens and the associated right of every citizen to appear before a natural judge as guaranteed by article 68 of the Constitution. It is in addition a violation of article 14 of the ICCPR.
In the light of the exceptional powers enjoyed by the executive authorities it is difficult to talk about a democratic society governed by human rights and fundamental freedoms.
Shared group responsibility
Ridding Egypt of the effects of the Emergency Law demands shared collective responsibility. The legislative powers bear responsibility for announcing the immediate abrogation of the law while political and social forces must not only encourage the legislative authorities to put an end to the state of emergency but also work towards repairing the legislative, political and social damage it has caused. Building a future without the state of emergency is a collective task shared by all forces in society.
Finally, we reaffirm that what is demanded is not amendment of the Emergency Law but an end to the state of emergency, which has produced a "culture of emergency" in which society is smothered by emergency legislation and other freedom restricting laws.
If the government is serious about undertaking political and constitutional reform it must restrict declarations of a state of emergency to times of war and real crisis, limit its duration and ensure that its renewal occurs according to strict and precise conditions subject to effective judicial scrutiny. Constitutional legitimacy and ordinary laws must be reinstated because reform and a state of emergency are mutually exclusive.
Hafez Abu Seada
Secretary General
Introduction
EOHR's 14th annual report is published in the midst of dialogue on the necessity of reform in Egypt and the Arab region. Numerous reform initiatives from groups abroad have been proposed, to which the Egyptian Government has responded with the assertion that reform must come from within. However it has failed to put forward its own serious and practical alternative for reform.
Democracy and human rights are inescapable elements of reform. Yet in Egypt they are in the shackles of the Emergency Law which has been in force continuously since 1981 and which, rather than being an exceptional situation has become a means of governance. The EOHR Fieldwork Unit continues to record and investigate human rights violations such as torture in police stations and prisons despite the fact that the Egyptian Constitution and other laws criminalise torture.
A battery of other laws restricts freedoms. Among these are Law 40 on Political Parties [1977], NGO Law 84 [2002], Law 100 [1993] on Trade Unions as amended by Law 5 [1995] and Law 10 on Riotous Assembly [1914]. The authorities continue to contravene the law while citizens remain unaware of democratic values and their human rights.
2003 did however witness numerous positive human rights developments such as; the establishment of the National Council for Human Rights, abolition of the supreme state security court, a draft law proposing the formation of a family court and the granting of nationality to children born to Egyptian women married to foreigners.
The publishing of this report coincided with a presidential decree abolishing imprisonment as a punishment for journalists convicted of publishing crimes. These changes alone are not enough to realise democracy and respect for human rights.
Human rights violations monitored by EOHR unfortunately represent only a small sample of the total number of violations which occur in Egypt.
To monitor these violations EOHR uses the following monitoring techniques:
1. Source of information
- Complaints or information received from individuals or groups directly concerned with the violation in question.
- Media reports and newspaper investigations which the Documentation and Information Unit follow up on.
- Reports published by the foreign media or NGOs abroad about the situation of Egyptians abroad.
2. Information verification and documentation techniques
- Interviewing those who submit complaints and forwarding these complaints to the relevant authorities.
- Dispatching fact-finding missions to interview witnesses, relatives, government officials or any other parties concerned.
- Prison and detention centre visits and interviewing detainees and their families.
- Trial and investigation monitoring
The report is divided into three sections:
The first section: presents and analyses the most important legislative developments, judicial verdicts and human rights events which occurred in 2003.
The second section: is the most important part of the report and include results of EOHR's follow up on individual cases.
The third section: presents, in statistics, EOHR's monitoring, follow up work and activity in raising awareness of human rights and its women and refugee legal aid programmes.
1. Legislative developments and judicial verdicts
Egypt witnessed some positive legislative developments in 2003 such as the establishment of the National Council for Human Rights {NCHR), the annulment of Law 105 [1980] governing High National Security Courts and the abolishment of hard labour. The Administrative Judicial Court held that citizens have the right to hold meetings and peaceful marches and that judicial restriction of these freedoms would be a violation of the freedom of expression.
While welcoming positive developments such as these, EOHR condemns the decision to renew the state of emergency until 2006. In justification of this renewal the Egyptian Government invoked the need to fight terrorism - despite the fact that no acts of terrorism have occurred since the 1997 Luxur massacre - and the impending war on Iraq.
Law 12 [2003] contravenes both the Egyptian Constitution and international treaties ratified by Egypt. It constitutes a blatant attack on the working class, particularly with regard to contracts, dismissal, wages, workers' right to take strike action and their representation on the Supreme Council for Wages.
2. Human rights violations in 2003
The right to life
EOHR monitored eight deaths inside police stations due to torture. This figure is lower than previous years because of the ending of clashes between Islamic groups and the authorities, which were previously the principle source of violations of the right to life. Violations of the right to life together with torture continue to be a common occurrence in Egyptian police stations.
The Egyptian government must address legal shortcomings which encourage torture and other violations and which are exacerbated by the Emergency Law and the Penal and Criminal Codes. It must also honour its obligations under international human rights instruments.
The right to freedom and personal security
The right to freedom and personal security was continuously violated through administrative criminal and political detention and the arbitrary arrest of individuals who are not involved in political activity.
The chapter on the right to freedom and personal security covers:
1. The right to bodily integrity: twenty-two torture cases were monitored.
2. Political detention. Fifty six individuals are still in detention despite having obtained release orders.
3. Criminal detention of individuals who have not been presented to the prosecutor general. There was a perceptible increase in the number of these detainees - some 20,017 complaints about detention were presented in 2003.
4. Increased and routine use of arbitrary arrest during the criminal investigation process. Detainees are frequently tortured and mistreated.
Forced disappearance
Forced disappearance began in the 1990s when violence escalated between extremist Islamist groups and police forces. This was accompanied by illegal arrest and administrative detention of individuals held in illegal or secret places outside the ambit of judicial scrutiny.
Fifty nine individuals forcibly disappeared between 1992 and 2003. While the fate of eighteen of the fifty nine was eventually discovered the remaining forty one remain unaccounted for. In 2003 one case of forcible disappearance was monitored by EOHR, that of Reda Helal, Editor of Al-Ahram newspaper who disappeared in August.
The treatment of prisoners and detainees
Torture, maltreatment, inadequate medical care, deprivation of the rights to education and contact with the outside world are just some of the violations of prisoner rights committed by the Egyptian authorities. EOHR visits prisons and interviews prisoners and their families in order to monitor and confront these violations.
The chapter examines:
1. The spread of torture and maltreatment
2. Inadequate medical care: the report presents fifty five cases where prisoners did not receive required medical treatment.
3. Deprivation of the right to education.
4. Banning of visits and contact with the outside world
The right to fair trial
Violations of the right to a fair trial include:
1. The continued practice of sending civilians for trials before military courts.
2. Despite the annulment of Law 105 and the consequent abolishment of state security courts, exceptional courts continue to exist in the form of emergency state security courts established under the Emergency Law.
These are the most dangerous form of exceptional courts as they deny the right to appeal. Only the President of the Republic has the power to overturn emergency state security court verdicts.
EOHR monitored four supreme emergency state security court trials. Verdicts were given in two of these cases while the other two are still being heard.
A special section of the report deals with the national security prosecution office investigations conducted with 238 defendants who were not sent to appear before a court.
Freedom of opinion and expression
There was no improvement with regard to the right to freedom of expression and opinion. Journalists continue to be arrested and brought before the public prosecution office and newspapers and books confiscated.
The report deals with:
1. The summoning of journalists to the public prosecution office before they are transferred to courts for publishing offences. EOHR monitored four such cases.
2. Journalists in courts: EOHR reconfirms its commitment to defend the freedom of expression and opinion and condemns any law that attacks these rights. Fifteen journalists appeared in court in 2003.
3. Arrest and harassment of journalists - incidences of which were plentiful in 2003. One prominent case was that of journalist Hamdeen Sabbahy, a member of the People's Assembly. Sabbahy was arrested and assaulted following his involvement in peaceful anti-war protests.
4. Seizure of publication and closure of printing houses.
The right to peaceful assembly:
The right to peaceful assembly continues to be subject to attack by the Egyptian government in the form of the Riotous Assembly Law 10 [1914] as amended by Decree 87 [1967], and the Emergency Law which both impose unjustified restrictions on the exercise of this right.
2003 witnessed violent police excesses against demonstrators protesting against the war in Iraq and the Israeli occupation. Police officers used truncheons, water cannon and tear gas as well as dogs in order to disperse the crowds.
Economic and social rights
This chapter describes EOHR's monitoring of the right to work, to education, to health and to a clean environment.
The right to political participation
A number of violations occurred during the People's Assembly and Shura Council by-elections held to fill seats made vacant either by death or following the expulsion of members due to the military service controversy.
During these by-elections opposition supporters were prevented from voting on the pretext that their names were not clearly marked on the electoral register. Matters reached the point where National Democratic Party candidates distributed gold medals (as happened in Qirqass, Minya) to voters in order to counter voter apathy and none turnout. In Kerdassa and al-Howamdeiya votes were bought for as much as 200 LE.
Similar violations occurred during the student elections. Candidate lists were manipulated and restrictive conditions imposed in order to prevent certain students from standing for elections. The good behaviour requirement for example allows universities to send students for disciplinary action at the start of term in order to bar students it objects to from standing.
The right to form political parties, unions and associations
The Committee for Political Party Affairs' policy of refusing requests to form political parties remained unchanged in 2003. Three parties were denied registration; the Youth Party of Egypt, the Ghad Liberal Social Democratic Party and the Social Constitutional Party.
A total of sixty three parties have been refused registration since the Committee was formed. In addition Law 40 [1977] remains the principal obstacle to the practical enjoyment of the right to form political parties.
Law84 [2002] continues to restrict civil society work while trade unions are also subject to onerous legal restrictions.
The right of Egyptians abroad
Since its formation in 1985 EOHR has taken a particular interest in Egyptians abroad who are subject to violations of their political and economic rights. The report examines violations against Egyptians working in the Gulf and other countries and in a separate section details the situation of Egyptians in Iraq.
Discrimination against women
The report examines violence against women committed in the home or during investigations or detention. It also considers legal provisions such as the Penal Code's provisions on adultery which imposes differing penalties on men and women for the same crime.
The second section describes Nationality Law 26 [1975] which deprives Egyptian women married to foreigners of the right to pass on Egyptian nationality to their children, and the devastating social and economic effects that this has for thousands of Egyptian women and their children.
The third section: EOHR activity
This section presents a statistical analysis of EOHR's activity in 2003 and compares this activity with previous years. It describes:
- Fieldwork: Complaints presented to EOHR, fact-finding missions, trial observation and prison visits.
- Media work: press releases, reports, conferences and seminars.
- Media coverage of EOHR activity
- EOHR participation in international activity: international and regional conferences both in Egypt and abroad.
The Refugee Legal Aid Project
The Project helped 411 refugees to present their cases to the United Nations Refugee Agency and helped 150 others to appeal after being rejected, in addition to organizing weekly lectures to help asylum seekers.
These lectures included between seven - ten refugee-seekers, and the percentage of successful cases reached 85% from different countries. The project also was successful in training tens of volunteers and foreigners through five different programs of training and also appointing Egyptian lawyers as volunteers for a period between three - six months.
The Women's Legal Aid Project
This project, which was launched in 1994, offers legal aid to low-income women by offering free consultation and advice. Some of the cases dealt with by lawyers from the project include ten misdemeanour cases, three civil cases and thirty-five personal law cases.
Part One
Legislative developments and court decisions
Part One
Legislative developments and court decisions
1. Legislation
Renewal of the state of emergency and continued application of the Emergency Law
On the 23rd of February 2003, the People's Assembly approved the President's decision (40 [2003]) to prolong the state of emergency for a further three years beginning from June 2003 and ending on the 31st May 2006. This is the eleventh time that the People's Assembly has renewed the state of emergency, which was first announced in 1981 and which has now continuously been in force for 23 years. The request to renew the state of emergency was presented to the People's Assembly in February, in advance of its scheduled date (May 2003), the government using preparations for the Anglo-American war in Iraq as a pretext for its renewal.
The uninterrupted application of Emergency Law 162 [1958] has been one of EOHR's continuous concerns since the publication of its first report fourteen years ago. The Emergency Law has almost become a second constitution in Egypt, allowing the authorities to commit human rights' violations with impunity and marginalise the Constitution and the law.
In addition to creating an atmosphere hostile to human rights, the continued application of the state of emergency violates international human rights instruments ratified by Egypt.
Worryingly, announcements of a state of emergency are not subject to effective scrutiny or challenge because the state of emergency has almost become the preserve of the ruling elite.
Exacerbating this is the absence of effective parliamentary scrutiny of justifications posited by the government for the renewal of the state of emergency; this is largely due to the fact that the President, who announces a state of emergency, is leader of the National Democratic Party (NDP) which enjoys a parliamentary majority.
The Emergency Law has for many years been used to suffocate basic rights and freedoms, and has become a tool of governance rather than an exceptional situation.
Violations stemming from the application of the Emergency Law include:
-
" The power to impose restrictions on freedoms of assembly, movement and residence. Article 3 of the Emergency Law gives the authorities the right to search people and places and arrest and detain suspects or those who are considered to pose a threat to security without having to apply the legal guarantees provided by the Criminal Procedures Code (Emergency Law, Article 3).
This power constitutes a serious violation of Constitutional rights and legal guarantees such as those relating to personal freedom (article 41), sanctity of the home (article 44), freedom of movement and residence (article 50) and freedom of assembly (article 54). In addition these powers breach international human rights instruments ratified by Egypt.
- The power to establish exceptional courts during the state of emergency, such as the State Security Summary Court and the Supreme Emergency State Security Court which have jurisdiction to hear violations of presidential decrees (article 7[1)]). Under article 7[4] military personnel may be included in the court, a grave violation of constitutional and international standards concerned with the separation of powers and the independence and immunity of the judiciary (articles 165-173 of the Constitution and article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)).
Under article 9 of the Emergency Law, the President has the power to transfer cases from ordinary courts to the Supreme Emergency State Security Court, a breach of article 40 of the Constitution which provides for the principal of citizen equality, and article 68, which gives citizens the right to trial before a natural judge.
- Article 13 of the Emergency Law grants the president the authority to shelve appeals before they are presented to court and release suspects on bail before their case is presented to the Emergency State Security Court. Article 12 deprives suspects of the right to appeal against Emergency State Security Court verdicts - a serious violation of article 14 of the ICCPR - and provides that Emergency State Security Court decisions do not become final until they have received the ratification of the President. This is unjustifiable interference in the work of the judicial authority and a breach of the principal of the separation of powers.
It places courts' decisions in the hands of those who administer the Emergency Law, a concept repugnant to the most basic concepts of justice.
- Upon the declaration of a state of emergency the President may transfer cases to military courts (article 16, Military Courts Code), a breach of the Constitution, ICCPR and international standards concerned with the independence of the judiciary. It violates the right of defendants to appear before a natural judge in an ordinary court.
The Egyptian Government's resolute prolongation of the Emergency Law in the face of staunch criticism has made the Emergency Law a mode of governance rather than a tool to deal with exceptional threats to national security. This is evidenced in:
1. The use of the Emergency Law and other laws restricting political and civil freedoms to block effective participation in public affairs.
2. Suppression of peaceful political opposition through the application of its provisions.
3. Absence of justifications previously invoked by the Government to prolong the state of emergency such as the need for counter-terrorism measures. There have been no terrorist activities since the 1997 Luxur massacre. The events of September 11th 2001 have been used as an excuse to renew the state of emergency which cannot be justified politically or legally.
The lack of justifications for renewal of the Emergency Law and the absence of scrutiny of decisions to prolong it have meant that only its negative aspects remain to blight democracy in Egypt. For these reasons EOHR renews its calls for an end to the state of emergency and a return to constitutional legitimacy as a fundamental step towards respect for human rights and democratic change.
Amendment of the Criminal Procedures Code
Law 95 [2003] replaced Law 105 [1980] on the establishment of State Security Courts and amended certain provisions of the Penal and Criminal Procedures Codes. Article 5 of Law 95 [2003] added an article to the Criminal Procedures Code granting members of the Public Prosecutor Office the powers of the inquiry judge described in the Penal Code.
The Law also gives the Public Prosecutor Office powers of the Misdemeanours Appeal Court provided for under article 143 of the Criminal Procedures Code. EOHR considers these additional powers a restriction on the right to a fair trial. Three powers (Investigation, accusation and arraignment) are now concentrated in the office of the Public Prosecution Office.
The Public Prosecutor also has jurisdiction in pre-trial detention according to which individuals can be detained for a period up to six months without judicial supervision or the right to compensation.
The Unified Labour Law
Many of the Unified Labour Law 12's [2003] 257 articles are unconstitutional and violate international instruments ratified by Egypt. Problems in the Law include:
1. Under article 4 three groups are not subject to its provisions; security forces members, his family members and his domestic servants.
2. The National Council for Wages and its competencies and structure under article 34. The main criticisms of this National Council are the following:
Workers constitute only 25% of the total number of Council members, despite their being the main reason for its establishment.
The vast majority of Council membership has not been clearly defined, but left vague and elastic under article 34. It states that 50% of Council members will be granted membership according to their profession and experience without defining the nature of this experience or which professions qualify for membership.
The legislator grants Council chairmanship to the Minister of Planning without giving a clear reason why and without defining his powers. This indicates the Council's lack of independence, which will as a result fail to satisfy the ambitions of the Egyptian working class.
3. Working hours are increased to eight hours per day at a time when there is a global trend towards reduction of working hours while guarding workers' rights.
4. The Law abolishes the right of workers to paid sick leave. Article 54 of its predecessor Labour Law 137 [1981 provided workers with this right.
5. The Law is markedly geared towards employers' interests granting them the right to amend conditions of employment, reduce salaries and end employment contracts without having to provide a valid reason. Article 69 gives employers the right to dismiss employees if they commit a serious mistake, and provides examples of nine cases which would constitute a serious mistake.
Positive Developments
2003 witnessed numerous positive legislative developments. While welcoming these developments, EOHR reaffirms the continuing need to amend other laws in order to bring them in line with international human rights standards. Presented below are legislative amendments which have had a positive impact on human rights in Egypt.
Abolishment of state security courts
Law 95 [2003] replaced Law 105 [1980] on the establishment of state security courts. Article 1 of Law 95 provides: "Law 105 [1980] on the establishment of state security courts is repealed and the jurisdiction of these courts will pass to the courts described in the Criminal Procedures Code".
The powers of these courts are thus restored to the ordinary courts. The positive effect of this amendment is limited in the shadow of the continuing state of emergency and emergency state security courts. These exceptional courts lack the guarantees of a fair trial and pose a serious threat to rights and freedoms in the following ways:
1. Emergency state security courts are single instance courts whose decisions defendants are denied the right to appeal.
2. Its verdicts receive the ratification of a military judge and become final once they receive this ratification.
3. Verdicts are not subject to the scrutiny of the Court of Cassation.
4. The cases presented to these courts are divided into two categories; criminal or misdemeanour, according to Penal Code provisions.
5. The court is composed of one misdemeanour judge and three felony judges.
In the light of this, the abolishment of state security courts established under Law 105 [1980] does not dramatically alter the structure and procedure of the criminal court system or enhance defendants' legal guarantees or their right to appeal to the Court of Cassation. State security courts were specialized in specific crimes concerned with threats to state security from within Egypt or abroad, and crimes concerned with misuse of public funds.
Abolishment of hard labour
Law 95 [2003] abolished hard labour penalty from the Penal Code and other laws and replaced it with life imprisonment or a heavy prison sentence. Hard labour in its original form of stone breaking in mountains in reality stopped many years ago, having been replaced with craft making, but this is nonetheless an important step in the process of ridding legislation of inhumane punishments.
Prison legislation and regulations must now be reviewed, solitary confinement abolished and penal philosophy changed so that the aim of imprisonment is made rehabilitation rather than punishment.
Establishment of the National Council for Human Rights
On the 19th June 2003 the National Council for Human Rights (NCHR) was established under Law 94 [2003]. Subsidiary to the Shura Council for three years following a decree issued pursuant to Law 94, the NCHR aims to reinforce, develop and protect human rights, anchor human rights values, raise consciousness of them and insure that they are respected in practice.
Law 94 gives the NCHR legal personality, makes its headquarters in Cairo and allows the establishment of branches in other governorates. The NCHR enjoys full independence in performing its tasks and activities.
The NCHR will put into place a national programme of action for the reinforcement, development, study and protection of human rights and will issue an annual report detailing its activities and recommendations. This report will be presented to the President and the heads of the Peoples' and Shura Assemblies.
The NCHR consists of the following seven permanent committees:
1. The Civil and Political Rights Committee.
2. The Social Rights Committee
3. The Economic Rights Committee
4. The Cultural Rights Committee
5. The Legislative Affairs Committee
6. The International Relations Committee
7. The Complaints Committee
The NCHR has the right to establish other permanent committees where two thirds of its members vote in favour of this.
EOHR assessments of the role of the NCHR in the light of UN recommendations concerning national human rights bodies made the following main points:
At the beginning of the report, EOHR noted that since 1978 the UN has issued numerous resolutions concerned with the establishment of national institutions for the protection of human rights. These resolutions affirmed the necessity of a national institution possessing the following features in order to be able to play an effective role:
1. It should be specialised in the protection of human rights.
2. It should have the widest jurisdiction possible which should be enshrined in legislation.
3. Its suggestions and recommendations should be presented on a consultative basis to the government, parliament or other concerned bodies.
4. It should study legislation and laws for compatibility with fundamental human rights principles and make recommendations where the national legislation is found wanting. The government must be encouraged to ratify international human rights instruments where it has not done so.
5. Reports about the state of human rights should be periodically issued.
6. The government's attention must be drawn to human rights violations and suggestions and recommendations about how to put an end to these violations put forward.
A criticism of the NCHR is that it is subsidiary to the Shura Council, which may compromise its independence. We should perhaps wait until the NCHR starts its activities before passing judgement, especially given that civil society groups, including EOHR, have long called for the establishment of such an institution.
Administrative Judicial Court decisions
On the 4th February 2003 the Administrative Judicial Court issued a verdict in case 57/7741 brought by Dr. Abdel Mohsen Hammoda on behalf of the Engineers' Union, against the Prime Minister, Interior Minister, Media Minister, Head of Cairo Security, Head of State Security Investigation Office and the Governor of Cairo. In December 2002 Dr. Hammoda requested that the decision of Cairo Security Division to ban a public march from downtown Cairo to the American Embassy be quashed.
After reviewing court documents, the Court found that citizens' freedom to assemble and stage marches would lose its value if the legislator restricted it with laws preventing the exercise of this right or if the executive authorities interfered with it for unjustified reasons. The Court transferred the case to the State Delegates Committee for a legal opinion.
|
|
|
|
