18

"50 YEARS ARE ENOUGH" end the emergency law now, not tomorrow

The Land Center for Human Rights (LCHR) is issuing its’ new report no. 18 of the civil society series entitled “50 years are enough … the state of emergency must end now, not tomorrow” demanding the resignation of the minister of the interior after using sexual abuse to repress the oppositions and those who demand the circulation of authority, free parties, freedom of protesting and issuing newspapers, the independence of the judiciary and guaranteeing the impartiality of the presidential elections that will be held during the next few months. This report has been issued after the opposition political forces have boycott the plebiscite to modify the text of clause no. 76 of the Egyptian constitution that give citizens the right to choose a President from several candidates, stating that this modification involve hard (impossible) conditions that prevent the political and independent parties from equal competition for this position. We wonder, why can’t there be a maximum limit for implementing the state of emergency that came into force since 1952 till now in Egypt, except for periods that don’t exceed five years? Is it logical that the Egyptian people live in a lasting state of emergency? When will it end? Will our country be in a lasting disaster status, war and threatened by external dangers? We wonder, why isn’t clause no. 77 of the Egyptian constitution modified, as it gives the President the right to nominate himself for presidency for unending continuous periods (rounds)? Shouldn’t this clause be modified to limit the nomination for this position for only two rounds? The report confirms that the safety and protection of our country need to change the ruling philosophy and the country management, if we want citizens to participate in the changing process, we need courageous and hasty steps to cross into a more just and free world, we need to cancel the state of emergency and all of the exceptional laws, we need to guarantee the right in protesting, striking, freedom of establishing associations, parties and unions and practicing their activities without any binds or impediments, we need all that now, not tomorrow. We wonder, how could we continue working with the emergency law during the upcoming elections, then we talk about fair equal and impartial elections open for all parties and candidates, while the government candidates could use the emergency law at any time to arrest or detain the electors, the candidates and their allies. The report undertakes all of these questions and tries to answer them through several sections presented as follows:
The first section of the report is about the present political conditions in Egypt under the emergency laws. After three years of deliberation, 93% of the People’s Council voted to extend the emergency laws until May 2006. The report discusses the history of the emergency laws from July 1952 until its planned expiration in May 2006. The report discusses aspects of the state’s rise to power over the people, disregard for the law, violations of public rights and freedoms for its own benefit, and management of the government by one political party. The emergency laws have strengthened the authority of the state and security forces and stripped the people of their freedoms by expanding the arbitrary detaining processes. According to estimates of the Egyptian Organization for Human Rights in 2001, the number of detainees reached 29,000 people while some international human rights organizations estimated the number to be 70 thousand people in 1997. Amnesty International issued a report in 1992 that revealed that torture has become a regular policy of the Egyptian government. Regarding military proceedings, the authorities indicted 1117 civilians and executed 118 people in 36 cases between 1992 to 2002. Regarding restrictions of freedom of movement and forced eviction, 15 farmers from Kamaheesh village – Monofeya province were imprisoned for three years. Regarding the right of peaceful expression, the emergency law was implemented at seven labor strikes between 1963 and 2002. In addition to this, 17 journalists and publishers were transferred to the military court from 1991 to 1995 and 2000 people were detained during the parliamentary elections in the year 2000.
The second section discusses the history of emergency laws in Egypt, beginning with the implementation of the first emergency laws in Egypt in 1923 by General Maxwell, commander of the invading British forces. It also discusses the emergency laws used after 1952 by Egypt’s new rulers to counteract the democratic movements that demanded free elections. A third of the emergency laws’ legislation, issued by decision No. 162 by the President in 1958, are still enforced now with few modifications.
The emergency laws were modified according to three laws:
- Law No. 37 (1973) stipulated that parliament approval is required to declare a state of emergency.
- Law No. 164 (1981), issued after the Sadat assassination, brought back the grievance system after six months of detention.
- Law No. 50 (1982) modified the grievance period to one month after detention.
The report then discusses the dangers of the emergency laws in light of their criminal procedures in arresting, searching, wiretapping, monitoring of private letters, violating the freedom of work, infringing on personal safety, imposing forced labour, seizing property, evicting people, arresting people randomly for the purpose of collectively disciplining people in villages or neighborhoods, bypassing the law by releasing detainees on paper only, humiliating and torturing citizens and causing them physical disabilities. All of these instances reveal that the emergency law is a very dangerous law.
The third section elaborates on the emergency status and exceptional procedures and presents the concept of the state of emergency when facing an emergency status like war or armed insubordination. In Britain, for example, emergency status lasts six months, while in France it only lasts 12 days unless the parliament chooses to extend it. There are five different situations according to Law No. 162 (1958) in which an emergency can be declared: armed war, threat of war, internal disturbances, public disasters, and the spread of epidemics. It stipulates that the declaration of emergency status must clarify the beginning and ending dates and the geographical area to which the emergency status will apply. In addition to this, the people’s council must agree to specify the emergency status within 15 days of its declaration, and the emergency authority must be put under judiciary supervision that guarantees people their natural rights and freedoms.
The report makes light of the emergency authority’s powers with respect to:
- Restricting the people’s freedoms in meeting, gathering, or passing through certain areas.
- Arresting suspects and putting them in detention with no determined time limit.
- Searching individuals and places without warrant.
- Surveillance and monitoring of letters, newspapers and press releases before publishing them and subsequently taking away use of printing presses.
- Canceling the licenses of individuals’ weapons and ammunition and confiscating them.
- Evacuating areas and determining the opening and closure times of shops and other places.
According to international law, the implementation of emergency laws is unfounded when:
- A government’s existence is threatened as a result of the political conflict..
- War is declared.
- Labor strikes or protests that aim to achieve social demands are organized.
- Strikes accompanying public elections result from the competition of parties.
- Terrorism activities that do not reach a dangerous level.
The people have certain rights that must be respected including: the right to life, freedom from torture, banning the implementation of criminal laws, the prohibition of slavery and exploitation, freedom from being subordinate to medical or scientific experiments without the said individual’s approval, freedom of thought, expression and religion, the right to have legal representation, the right to have a name, the right to have a nationality, and many more.
The fourth section undertakes a discussion of the rules of detention and the rights of detainees. Detention is considered one of the most dangerous procedures that affect people’s freedoms, as it deprives the detainee from traveling or choosing his residence, isolates him from the outside world, and hinders him from working and taking care of his family. In addition to this, his reputation is affected, which may cause him severe psychological pain or physical harm. International declarations include several principles and regulations regarding the protection of detained individuals:
• Every individual has the right in freedom and personal safety:
- Every individual must be informed of his or her rights when arrested and the reasons for the arrest.
- Every individual deprived of his rights has the right to go to court to take legal action regarding his detention.
- Every victim of an illegal detention or arrest has the right to compensation and humane treatment that is respectful of his dignity.
• In Egyptian national law and the constitution, there are several protections of personal freedoms:
- Litigation is a guaranteed right for all people.
- The right to personal or proxy defense.
- Anyone arrested must be informed of the reasons for the arrest. He or she has the right to contact anyone or appoint an attorney, as the law guarantees the following to detainees:
1. He must be informed in writing of the reasons for his arrest.
2. The assistance of an attorney.
3. The right to contact or inform anyone of this arrest.
4. Treatment with the same protections as in a provisional seizure and has the same rights and advantages.
5. The right to go to court to complain about his or her detention.
The report also presents justifications for detention and the authority entitled to the President or anyone he authorizes according to clause No. 40. The report also provides examples of people who were detained under the emergency law.
The fifth section discusses the guaranteed rights of detainees:
- It is forbidden to practice arbitrary detention against anyone, as he has the right to resort to court regarding this issue.
- The detention area or place must not be hidden away from the detainee’s family or lawyer.
- The detainee must be treated as innocent until proven guilty.
The detainee has the right to resort to court regarding his detention, which is guaranteed according by clause No. 71 of the constitution. The law states that this issue must be settled in a defined period of time or he must be released. The form of this complaint must be presented to the head of the Appellate Court to which the Supreme State Security Court adheres. This court which must examine the complaint within 30 days of detention and settle it within 15 days of presenting it. The Minister of the Interior has the right to object to the decision to release the detainee within 15 days of issuing the decision, then transfer the objection to a new court within 15 days of issuing the objection, then settle the objection within 15 days of being in court. The detainee has the right to demand compensation in case of illegal detention. If the decision for the detention does not fit within the law, it was issued by an unauthorized body or it is simply unjustified. The detainee has the right to go to court and demand compensation for any physical or moral damage to which he was exposed as a result of this decision. The state must bear this compensation, considering it responsible for the actions done by its authorities. The Public Association for Legislation and Advisory Opinion at the state council has decided that detention prevents the detained worker from working during the official times, and therefore his employment status (i.e. his wage or periodical bonus) cannot be changed. If the legal conditions for the detention were provided, as long as the worker was not accused or found guilty of a specific charge, he must not be deprived of any part of his salary during the detention period. Clause No. 71 of the constitution states that the detainee must be informed in writing of the reasons for his detention in order to recognize the justification for his detention in order to present a suitable defense. The same clause states that anyone who faces detention has the right to contact anyone he sees fit to help him, which can be done by telephone, telegram, fax or by the police. Contact is made official when his family or lawyer can visit him in his detention area. Clause No. 2 of the International Antislavery Agreement, ratified by Egypt, confirms the right to humane treatment without any harm or torture while in detention. War, internal instability, nor any other public emergency statuses are allowed to be used as justifications for torture. The international agreements ratified by the Egyptian government guarantee that the levels of the health and medical care in prisons must not be less than that of outside facilities. Other required conditions in the detention areas include cleanliness, space, light, warmth, air, adequate and healthy food, and sports.
The report includes some court rulings that criticized the implementation of the emergency laws, such as: A case of a former minister who was preserved and his residence was limited to his farm in Belbees, as he was accused of cooperating in the excitation of the public, acts of sabotage, trading in weapons and meeting one of the men of revolution, and then a decision was made to his acquittal according to clause no. 5 of the Egyptian constitution. Then after a lot of deliberation and lawsuits, the supreme constitutional court has issued a decision with the unconstitutionality of this clause and the clauses related to it.
The report ends demanding the necessity of canceling the state of emergency and all of the exceptional laws that hinder the progress of our society and the citizen’s rights in participation. At the end of the report, we ask all of the different political forces and those who struggle for human rights and democracy to work together for the cancellation of the emergency law and all of the exceptional laws to achieve freedom, justice and safety for all citizens in Egypt.