You are :
1/6/2002
|
Home »» Reports
|
Your Excellency, Mr.
President Mohamed Hosni Mubarak
President of the Republic
|
12/4/2006
The Egyptian Organization for Human Rights attaches a petition to this letter, asking stopping the renewal of the state of emergency after it ends on May 31st 2006.
We confirm to you that the emergency law is an obstacle on the road to political and democratic reform in Egypt, and also the People's Assembly issued a counter terrorism law, number 97/1992, which with the Penal Code and Criminal Procedures law are enough to face any threat to the security of Egypt.
Mr. President, we are aware of the responsibilities the Egyptian government is carrying in order to preserve the security and stability as conditions for the development of the political, economic and social life. However, preserving the security is not under any condition enough to justify the systematic breaching of human rights.
In this concern we present to Your Excellency the recommendations drafted by the International Commission for Jurists for the states and governments, regarding the counter terrorism laws, and the necessity of respecting human rights, which is considered a new law for countering terrorism.
We also hope that the government shall process a dialogue including the political parties, trade unions and the civil society in order to discuss any amendments or suggestions regarding the law that will be drafted to the People's Assembly entitled, "Countering terrorism", confirming that the law comes consistent with the principals and standards of human rights.
With all due respect
Secretary General
Hafez Abu Seeda
Lawyer
End the state of emergency now
before tomorrow
Ending the state of emergency became a popular demand in Egypt. All societal and political powers and trends demand the ending of the state of emergency.
The politically freezed state that hits the Egyptian society with the economic crisis fed and grew such a demand. Such changes shall not be overlooked without a comprehensive political reform aiming principally to moving the Egyptian society and all of its political and social powers towards a comprehensive political and economic reform, especially that it became evident that the good ruling can only find its roots in democracy and respect for human rights. Such a conclusion was reached by both of the political activists and the government. On one side, the political parties and the human rights organizations adopted a program for political and constitutional reform.
Also the civil society institutions at Alexandria conference adopted a declaration for democracy and political reform. Also a second independent declaration of was issued from the human rights organizations at Beirut, which included the vision of the political reform organizations. Thus, there is a national consensus about the necessity of a political and democratic reform. And in the first report of the National Council for Human Rights the abolishment of the state of emergency was stated.
The question now is how can the political and democratic reform programs be achieved in the presence of the state of emergency? Of course that is not possible, as the emergency law is the main source of all breaches to human rights in Egypt.
The emergency law is the tool used by the executive authority to assault the public rights and freedoms provided by the Egyptian Constitution as long as the state of emergency prevails. As it will be shown later, it posses wide and absolute authorities to the executive authority that stands a main obstacle against the citizens' guarantees for constitutional rights, and it may be said that the law of emergency is the real constitution of the nation.
EOHR since its establishment on 1985 recorded systematic breaches accompanying the usage of the emergency law, and it revealed its grave effect on the human rights in Egypt. That can be shown as follows:
First: The state of emergency, in its legal context, exceeded the law of emergency, and it negatively affected the soul of the legislative structure of Egypt which became biased towards being strict and ignoring many rights and freedoms provided by the Egyptian Constitution and the human rights international instruments. According to the emergency law the executive authority has wide authorities related to restricting the freedoms of individuals and their constitutional rights, like restricting the right of individuals to peaceful assembly, transportation, residence, arresting suspects according to the likes and dislikes of the security forces, detention and inspecting persons and places without reference from the law or the Penal Code rules. Which is considered a huge breach to the rights and safeguards provided by the Egyptian Constitution in its 41st article related to the personal freedoms, and Article 42 related to the Houses, Article 50 related to residence and transportation, Article 54 related to the right to peaceful assembly. Also ignoring the rights and safeguards included in the International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights, in Article 9 related to personal freedom and Article 12 related to right to transportation, Article 21 related to the peaceful assembly.
Breaches didn't stop short at facing the terrorism offences and narcotics as the government say, but also reached ordinary citizens in their daily lives. The arrest at ambushes with detention and inspection is stipulated by the emergency law, and also banning peaceful assembly.
Second: The military ruler or whomever he delegates, according to Article 3 of the emergency law, take control over the media, press, news, printed materials and breaches all rights to free expression before publishing the materials expressing opinions, stopping or hindering the issuance. Also the private lives of citizens are subjected to breaches, by reading their letters, messages and phone conversations, stipulated in Article 45 of the Constitution. Also breaches to the rights of free opinion and expression stipulated in Article 48 of the Constitution happens, and the right to scientific and literature research provided in Article 49. such authority also breaches Articles 17 and 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Third: The emergency law provides a large margin of freedom to the executive authority, without being restricted to the conditions mentioned in the Criminal Procedures Law concerning the arrest of suspects, as arresting those breaching the orders issued by the emergency law and related to crimes determined in this context can be instant, in contradiction with the rules of the Constitution and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, stipulated by the emergency law that established exceptional courts to take offences breaching the Penal Code or the challenging the decisions, which are Partial and High State Security Court, and allowing the involvement of the military in the formation of such courts, as the President has the right to form a Partial State Security District formed of one or two armed forces officers, and to form a High State Security Court of three judges and two officers of the leading officers, which is considered a huge breach to the constitutional and international standards for the check and balances between the three authorities and fulfilling the independence and immunity of the judiciary stipulated in Articles from 165 to 173 of the Constitution, and Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
The President can also refer to the State Security Courts, according to Article 9 of the emergency law, to which the public law is consistent, which is considered a direct breach to the Article no. 40 of the Constitution, stipulating the principal of "Equality among citizens", and what is derived from it concerning the right of each citizen to refer to his natural judge, confirmed in Article 68 of the Constitution. This is also a breach to Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Fourth: The Emergency law grants the executive authority legislative powers, as it stipulates in its articles 5 and 6 that the military ruler or his delegate may issue military orders that are to be considered laws out of the range of the legislative authority. The military orders since the start of the state of emergency to the moment reached hundreds of orders that went as far as the civil activities, like building on agricultural land, collecting funds and closing stores, beside many other activities. Some of these orders even went as far as establishing offences and penalties for those who contradict such orders.
No doubt that according to the Constitution, the President can impose the state of emergency in order to face a grave danger that needs exceptional procedures in order to promote the national security and to face grave dangers. International law experts agreed that the cases in which the state of emergency shall be imposed at do not exceed the cases in which the nation is in danger, and these three cases are:
1- State of war.
2- Threatening of war.
3- Natural disasters.
Such elements are not present at the time being, and we sincerely wish that they shall never be present.
The mentioned above confirms that carrying on working by the state of emergency ignores all Constitutional safeguards to rights and freedoms, and restricts the political and democratic reform. A problem which will find its solution in the abolishment of the state of emergency now before tomorrow.
|
|
|
|
