Human Rights report

incomprehensible suggestion

The Ministry of Justice submitted a proposal to the House of Representatives to add two articles to the law of the Supreme Constitutional Court, and according to the first article in this amendment, the Prime Minister has the right to ask the court to consider the extent of Egypt’s commitment to implementing the decisions of international organizations, courts and foreign arbitral tribunals related to Egypt in accordance with national interests and within the framework of Constitution and law. I did not understand the significance of this amendment, which contradicts the lack of permission to invoke the internal law to stop the decisions of foreign organizations and arbitral tribunals, because any country does not join these organizations and does not accept foreign arbitral tribunals except of its own free will. its interests or its constitution, otherwise it would not have joined it in the first place, and that if there was a way to protest against these decisions, that would be before the organization itself or before another competent international body, such as requesting the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice, and not before a national court.
There is no explanation for this strange request, except that there is a desire to evade a specific international obligation, and I find nothing at this time that the state is trying to evade except its obligations towards human rights and the imposition of a state of emergency on all countries time after time.
Is this a prelude to Egypt’s withdrawal from its international agreements with organizations of which we are members and even founders of some of them?
Gentlemen, getting out of a specific predicament is not to demolish the whole temple, but rather to confront a sincere and acknowledge the mistake and fix it.
From my direct experience and during my lectures to members of the various security services in 2007 and 2008 representing the National Council for Human Rights, I found that many violations of the rights of citizens in these bodies are not carried out by supreme orders or political directives, but rather due to shortcomings in the methods of obtaining information and the failure to use science and forensic medicine in sufficient areas to limit Accusations or shortcomings in the new scientific investigation methods. The matter may be different now, but unfortunately the political leadership bears all the burdens of human rights violations, which, in my opinion, can be avoided by 90 percent.
There is no reason for enforced disappearance, lengthening detention periods, or the use of emergency law, other than the failure to file a real accusation based on facts and knowledge. Otherwise, it would be a defect that the constitution does not allow and the country’s leadership is not satisfied with, and I know that.
I take you back to the report of the National Council for Human Rights in 2009, for which I was responsible, and I hope to re-read it to know that we have been in the same square for a long time, despite our positive movement in other files.

Click here to open the report  Human Rights Report