08 May 2014

Egypt: Khaled Hamza and four other civilians arbitrarily sentenced by an Egyptian military court

Egy KhaledHamza On 7 May 2014, five Muslim Brotherhood supporters have been sentenced, under fabricated charges, to one year of prison by the Military Supreme Court of Qena. Mr Khaled Hamza, Mr Adel Qatamish, Mr Ali Thabit, Mr Zain Mahmoud and Mr Tariq Ahmed were active members of the Muslim Brotherhood, whose political wing, the Freedom and Justice Party was democratically elected, and whose members are being severely repressed by the military power since the coup of 3 July 2013. More than 1200 Muslim Brotherhood supporters have been sentenced to death penalty after farce mass trials.

The practice of bringing civilians before military courts is a clear violation of international fair trial norms, as it has been demonstrated that these courts are often partial and cannot guarantee civilians the protection civil courts offer. In this sense, several Human Rights mechanisms have rendered decisions criticizing the use of military courts for trying civilians.

In Egypt, the broad wording of article 204 of the Constitution, and of the Code of Military Justice allows civilians to be brought before military courts under certain circumstances. This is especially true for peaceful demonstrators and political opponents that are therefore confronted to a biased judicial system and consequently judged arbitrarily.

Arrest and trial of the five civilians under trumped-up charges
The five aforementioned civilians tried before the Military Court have been arrested by Border guards while they were traveling by car as they were leaving for Sudan. They were tried under trumped-up charges for "carrying ammunitions with the aim of harming national interests" and for "illegally entering a military zone" situated south-west Aswan. The Court sentenced them all to one year of prison.

The recent decisions taken against Muslim Brotherhood supporters in Egypt, lead us to believe that they were arrested for being members of this political group. It is noteworthy that their adherence to this group was emphasized by the authorities when they were arrested. In consequence, they have been tried for having exercised their rights to freedom of expression and their right to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association.

Alkarama believes that decisions rendered by military courts against civilians, regardless of any other consideration, is a violation of international norms related to fair trial and should be banned from Egypt's legislation and Constitution. In this sense, a communication was sent to the UN Special Procedures asking for the release of the five aforementioned, or at least that they be put under the protection of the law.

Moreover, Egyptian authorities should release all people that are arbitrarily detained, and be reminded its obligations under international law to respect the right to freedom of expression and of peaceful assembly.

Egypt - HR Instruments

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)

ICCPR: Ratified on 14.01.1982
Optional Protocol: No

State report: Overdue since 01.11.2004 (4th)
Last concluding observations: 28.11.2002

Convention against Torture (CAT)

CAT: Accessed on 25.06.1986
Optional Protocol: No
Art. 20 (Confidential inquiry): Yes
Art. 22 (Individual communications): No

State report: Due on 25.06.2016 (initially due in 2004)
Last concluding observations: 23.12.2002

International Convention for the Protection of all Persons from Enforced Disappearance (CED)

No

Universal Periodic Review (UPR)

Last review: 02.2010 (1st cycle)
Next review: 2014 (2nd cycle)

National Human Rights Institution (NHRI)

National Council for Human Rights (NCHR) – Status A

Last review: 10.2006
Next review: Deferred