Egypt: constitutional amendments entrench repression

Egypt: constitutional amendments entrench repression

The Egyptian government should withdraw proposed constitutional amendments that will consolidate authoritarian rule, Human Rights Watch and the ICJ said today.

The amendments will undermine the Egyptian judiciary’s dwindling independence and expand the military’s power to intervene in political life.

On April 16, 2019, Parliament finalized and approved the amendments, which a pro-government bloc proposed in early February. On April 17, the National Election Authority said a public referendum was set for April 19-22. The official draft amendments were only published in the official Gazette on April 18.

The vote takes place amid ongoing mass arrests and a relentless crackdown on fundamental freedoms, including currently targeting those calling for boycotting or rejecting the amendments. Given the ongoing repression, and that political opposition in Egypt has dwindled to a nominal presence, a free and fair vote will be impossible.

“These amendments aim to smother Egyptians’ aspirations to live in dignity and under the rule of law,” said Michael Page, deputy Middle East and North Africa director at Human Rights Watch. “The authorities should immediately halt efforts to pass these amendments by threatening, disappearing, and persecuting peaceful critics and dissidents.”

The 596-seat Parliament, which is dominated by members loyal to President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi and which routinely rubber-stamps government decisions, passed the amendments by a vote of 531 to 22. During Parliament’s “societal dialogue” sessions, few critics were allowed be take part in the discussions about the amendments.

“The amendments are a flagrant assault on the rule of law and independence of the judiciary in Egypt. If adopted, they will effectively place the military above the law and the Constitution and cement the executive’s subordination of judicial and prosecutorial authorities,” said Said Benarbia, ICJ’s MENA Director.

The initial amendments would have allowed al-Sisi to run for two more six-year terms, after his current second term. The final amendments will permit him to run for one additional term and also extends his current term from four to six years, a move that attracted criticism inside Egypt.

The amendments are particularly troubling given the widespread suppression of fundamental freedoms, including freedoms of expression, association, and assembly and the right to political participation, all of which are essential to a free and fair public vote.

A coalition of 10 secular and leftist political parties called for rejecting the amendments. Local news reports say that the public prosecutor is investigating an opposition political figure, Hamdeen Sabbahy, for “instigating chaos” and insulting the state because of his opposition to the amendments.

The authorities have also started aggressive smear campaigns against several activists and award-winning actors, and are exploring the potential prosecution of them following their participation in public advocacy efforts about Egypt’s human rights situation in Washington, DC and European capital cities in March.

In February and March alone, authorities arrested or prosecuted over 160 dissidents or perceived dissidents, according to Egyptian rights lawyers who spoke with Human Rights Watch.

Authorities also briefly arrested another opposition figure, Mamdouh Hamza, a businessman, on February 16, accusing him of “publishing false news” and citing critical posts on his Twitter account. They released him on bail a few hours later. Al-Araby al-Jadeed newspaper said that other opposition figures have received telephoned “threats.”

On April 10, the authorities blocked an independent campaign website, “Batel,” which, in the context of the referendum, could be translated as “void.” Egyptians living abroad started the campaign, inviting Egyptians to register their “No” votes online. Access to the site was blocked in Egypt only hours after its launch, but the campaign still managed to amass tens of thousands of “No” voters in a few days.

The authorities blocked seven other alternative websites that the campaign made to circumvent the efforts to block access in Egypt.

In their efforts to block access to the campaign, the authorities have blocked about 34,000 websites, according to an internet-monitoring website.

Since mid-2017, the authorities have blocked access to hundreds of websites including most of the independent news websites and some for human rights organizations.

The independent news website Mada Masr reported on February 10 that security authorities instructed mainstream media in Egypt not to report on the amendments, and in particular not to give critics any coverage. Mada Masr also reported that, at least since December 2018, meetings between staff from al-Sisi’s office and intelligence officials have been held at the General Intelligence Agency “on a nearly daily basis,” coordinated by al-Sisi’s son Mahmoud, a senior intelligence officer, to push the amendments.

A few days after parliamentarians proposed the amendments, supportive placards, signs, and billboards were erected across the country.

On April 16, Mada Masr, quoting witnesses in East Cairo, reported that security authorities had pressed business owners to post the signs. The government denied imposing fines on those who refused, but the authorities refused to permit opposition protests on March 27, citing “security threats.”

The al-Mashhad website also published a leaked memo from judges of the State Council, the body that contains the Supreme Administrative Court, to the Parliament, which said that the amendments “demolish judicial independence.” The State Council’s deputy chief justice, Judge Samir Yousef, later confirmed that he drafted the memo.

In July 2013, then-defense minister al-Sisi led the forcible removal of Egypt’s first freely elected president, Mohamed Morsy. Al-Sisi was officially elected president in 2014 and re-elected in 2018, after his government arrested or intimidated all of the other potential candidates.

Al-Sisi has presided over a government that has committed widespread and systematic human rights violations, including mass killings of protesters, arbitrary arrests, enforced disappearances, extrajudicial killings of detainees, and torture and other ill-treatment in detention. Some of these crimes most likely constitute crimes against humanity.

The nationwide crackdown first targeted al-Sisi’s Islamist opponents but quickly expanded to include political dissidents, human rights lawyers and defenders, journalists, artists, gay men, lesbians, transsexuals, and virtually anyone expressing the mildest critical views. Government security forces, including the army, violate human rights with almost total impunity.

Since April 2017, the government has imposed a state of emergency, which has been used to justify undermining judicial independence, and used abusive counterterrorism and media laws to suppress fundamental freedoms.

President al-Sisi has apparently long opposed many of the human rights guarantees in the current constitution, saying in September 2015 that “the Constitution was written with good intentions. But countries cannot be built with good intentions.” The parliament speaker, Ali Abd al-Aal, said that a new constitution should be drafted in 5 or 10 years. Critics say this will happen when al-Sisi nears the end of his third and final term.

In an April 17 news conference, Judge Lasheen Ibrahim, the head of the National Elections Authority, called on Egyptians to vote and said that amending the constitution was justified because “it has to fit the [society’s] situation.”

“Egypt’s autocracy is shifting into overdrive to re-establish the ‘President-for-Life’ model, beloved by dictators in the region and despised by their citizens,” Page said. “But it’s a model that recent experience in Egypt and neighboring countries has demonstrated is not built to last.”

Egypt-Constitutional amendments-news-press release-2019-ENG (PDF, press release, Arabic)

For more information, please contact:
In Berlin, for Human Rights Watch, Amr Magdi (English, Arabic): +1-646-659-8020 (mobile); or magdia@hrw.org. Twitter: @ganobi
In New York, for Human Rights Watch, Michael Page (English): +1-617-453-8063 (mobile); or pagem@hrw.org. Twitter: @MichaelARPage
In Geneva, for the International Commission of Jurists, Said Benarbia: 0041798783546; or said.benarbia@icj.org

For more information about the abusive amendments, please read:

Egypt Constitutional Amendments: Unaccountable Military, Unchecked President and a Subordinated Judiciary

Egypt-Constitutional amendments-advocacy-analysis brief-2019-ENG (PDF, English)

Egypt-Constitutional amendments-advocacy-analysis brief-2019-ARA (PDF, Arabic)

Libya: all parties to the conflict must abide by international law and ensure civilian protection

Libya: all parties to the conflict must abide by international law and ensure civilian protection

Today, the ICJ called on the parties to the conflict in Libya to comply with their obligations under international humanitarian law (IHL) and international human rights law to protect affected people, particularly the civilian population.

The ICJ also called on the UN Security Council to urge the parties to respect international law.

The gravity of hostilities led UNSMIL to postpone the UN-sponsored Libyan National Conference aimed at finding a solution to the ongoing political deadlock late yesterday. The Conference was planned to commence on 14 April in Ghadames.

“The postponement of the political dialogue is a major setback for peace and the rule of law in Libya, and for the Libyan population,” said Kate Vigneswaran, the ICJ’s Senior Legal Advisor for the Middle East and North Africa Programme.

“Civilians taking no part in the fighting have already suffered the brunt of hostilities between the warring parties in Libya. Those who remain, including the thousands of migrants held in arbitrary detention, are at grave risk,” she added.

IHL requires parties to the conflict to respect the principles of distinction and proportionality and take precautionary measures to avoid, or in any event minimize, incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians and damage to civilian objects.

“The parties must ensure that not only civilians but civilian objects are protected, and that measures are taken to ensure they don’t become collateral casualties,” said Kate Vigneswaran.

“International actors should continue to push for a political solution to the situation in Libya based on the rule of law and incorporating human rights protections to avoid further suffering,” she added.

On April 7, the UN Security Council reportedly discussed the situation in Libya but could not find the necessary consensus to issue an official statement.

According to the AFP, the Russian Federation blocked a statement that would have called on Field Marshall Khalifa Haftar, head of the House of Representatives backed Libyan National Army, to stop military operations, on all the parties to de-escalate and for “those who undermine Libya’s peace and security to be held to account.”

“The Security Council should adopt a resolution calling for the protection of civilians and accountability for serious violations of international human rights and humanitarian law. Member States should desist from exercising their veto powers to block resolutions intended to ensure compliance with international law,” said Vigneswaran.

Reportedly, at least 27 people have been killed, including two doctors and two other civilians, 80 have been injured, and more than 2,800 persons have been displaced as a result of the fighting. The only functioning airport in Tripoli (above photo), the hub of the fighting, was closed Monday after being hit by an airstrike by the Libyan National Army (LNA).

Read this article in Arabic

Contact:

Kate Vigneswaran, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser, t: +31624894664, e: kate.vigneswaran(a)icj.org

League of Arab States must address human rights accountability at Summit

League of Arab States must address human rights accountability at Summit

As leaders gather for the League of Arab States (LAS) Summit beginning on 31 March 2019 in Tunis, the ICJ called on them to place human rights and accountability for violations at the forefront of their agenda.

In particular, the ICJ urged the Summit to take immediate steps to revise the Statute of the Arab Court of Human Rights in line with international standards to allow access by victims of human rights violations in the region to such a Court.

“We’ve been witnessing a spike in gross human rights violations across the Arab region, including in extrajudicial executions, enforced disappearances, arbitrary detentions, and torture and other ill-treatment,” said Said Benarbia, the ICJ’s MENA Programme Director.

“The region is in dire need of a credible and independent judicial mechanism to provide justice for human rights violations, the overwhelming majority of which presently go unaddressed,” he added.

The ICJ called on external participants to prioritize human rights in their discussions with League member States at the Summit.

Expected attendees include United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, the European Union High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Federica Mogherini, the Head of the African Union Commission Moussa Faki Mahamat, and the Secretary General of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation Yousef bin Abdul Al-Othaimeen.

Many States in the region are plagued by widespread and systematic violations.

These range from torture, enforced disappearance and arbitrary detentions in Egypt, attacks against human rights defenders and journalists in Saudi Arabia, including the high profile enforced disappearance and killing of Saudi journalist Jamal Khasshogi, as well as the judicial harassment of human rights defenders and political activists throughout the region.

Civilian populations have borne the brunt of violations and crimes through military operations by governments and armed groups in Yemen, Syria and Libya, and in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

“International leaders mustn’t sit back and follow the agendas of rights-violating States at this Summit, which will no doubt be directed towards further entrenchment of their authoritarian regimes at the expense of victims,” said Benarbia.

“Instead, they should urge LAS members States to ensure accountability for human rights violations in the region, including by revising and then making operational the Statute of the Arab Court,” he added.

The ICJ said that the process of revision should only be done with the participation of a wide range of stakeholders, civil society, judges, academics, bar associations, and victims of violations.

Contact:

 Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41-22-979-3817; e: said.benarbia(a)icj.org

Background

The Statute of the Arab Court of Human Rights, which aims to establish a regional human rights court for Arab States, was approved by the LAS Ministerial Council on 7 September 2014, but is yet to come into force.

The ICJ and others have identified significant flaws in the Statute, highlighted in the 2014 ICJ report. The report notes that the Statute does not allow victims themselves to submit complaints directly to the Court, making access to justice an illusion. In addition, the Statute does not provide for sufficient guarantees to ensure judicial independence and impartiality; does not provide adequate protective measures for petitioners, their representatives or witnesses; and fails to require the Court to interpret the Arab Charter in line with international human rights obligations.

MENA-Arab Court HR-News-2019-ARA (full story in Arabic, PDF)

 

ICJ and Adalah submission to the Universal Periodic Review of Egypt

ICJ and Adalah submission to the Universal Periodic Review of Egypt

Today, the ICJ and Adalah for Rights and Freedoms (Adalah) filed a submission to the Human Rights Council’s Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review in advance of its review of Egypt’s human rights record in November 2019.

 In their submission, the ICJ and Adalah drew the the attention of the Working Group on the UPR to the following concerns:

  • arbitrary arrests and detentions and systematic use of pre-trial detention;
  • the systematic use of torture, ill-treatment and enforced disappearance;
  • the imposition of death penalty following unfair trials; and
  • the politicization of the judiciary and the use of courts as a tool of repression.

The ICJ and Adalah called on the Working Group and the Council to urge the Egyptian authorities to :

  1. End the practice of holding detainees incommunicado;
  2. End all other forms of arbitrary detention;
  • Comprehensively reform the pre-trial detention framework, including by ensuring that resort to it is exceptional, and that such detention may be ordered only when it is determined on the basis of evidence that it is necessary, proportionate and reasonable in the circumstances of the individual case;
  1. Ensure that pre-trial detention is not mandatory for all individuals charged with a particular category of felony or misdemeanor, or based on the potential sentences for the offences alleged;
  2. Ratify the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (CED);
  3. Enact a crime of enforced disappearance in the Egyptian Criminal Code consistent with article 2 of the CED;
  • Amend article 126 of the Criminal Code with a view to enacting a crime of torture consistent with article 1 of the CAT;
  • Accept independent monitoring of detention facilities by allowing independent observers immediate access to detainees and prisoners, and to that end, accede to the Optional Protocol to the CAT;
  1. Implement all the recommendations of the CAT following its article 20 inquiry;
  2. Amend Egyptian law and abolish the use of the death penalty;
  3. Pending abolition, implement an immediate moratorium on all executions and on the imposition of capital punishment, including in cases of involving intentional killings;
  • Pending abolition, ensure that proceedings in death penalty cases conform to the highest standards of judicial independence, competence and impartiality, and strictly comply with all fair trial rights;
  • Pending abolition, ensure that the right to appeal in death penalty cases include review of both the factual and the legal aspects of the case by a higher ordinary, independent and impartial tribunal;
  • Pending abolition, provide for the right of individuals convicted in death penalty cases to seek a pardon, commutation of sentence or clemency.
  1. Ensure that all convictions in death penalty cases that followed unfair trails are quashed;
  • End Executive interference in judicial affairs;
  • Limit the jurisdiction of military courts to trials of military personnel only for breaches of military discipline; and
  • Abolish Emergency State Security Courts.

Egypt-Adalah_ICJ UPR-Advocacy-Non Legal Submissions-2019-ENG (full text of submission, in PDF)

ICJ hails renewal of UN expert on counter-terrorism and human rights

ICJ hails renewal of UN expert on counter-terrorism and human rights

The ICJ today strongly welcomed the renewal of the key UN expert on counter-terrorism and human rights, on terms that maintain the mandate’s independence, integrity and its essential focus on human rights.

The renewal of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, was enacted by a resolution adopted by consensus at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.

To acheive this successful outcome, Mexico (which leads the resolution) and other States had to defend the text of the resolution against attempts by Egypt and other States to insert language aimed at diluting, distorting or distracting the mandate from its current focus on preventing and responding to violations of human rights and on securing respect, protection and fulfilment of the human rights of victims of terrorism.

The Special Rapporteur delivers thematic reports to the Human Rights Council, carries out visits to countries, and acts on individual complaints. In the overall counter-terrorism architecture of the UN, the Special Rapporteur is also the only person with an exclusive independent mandate to remind States of their human rights obligations while countering terrorism, to advise them how to do so, and to draw public attention when they do not. So any dilution of the mandate would have also put the integrity and efficacy of the overall UN counter-terrorism strategy and architecture at risk.

Following the adoption of the mandate renewal resolution by the Council, the ICJ and other organisations expressed its deep appreciation for Mexico’s efforts, together with the strong support of numerous other States, to secure the future of the mandate.

The resolution text is available here: https://undocs.org/A/HRC/RES/40/16

Additional background is here.

Translate »