| The Egyptian Organization for Human Rights |
|
Press release The committee for the defense for human rights (CDD)
Emergency
laws oppress the country and the lives of citizens
In a sudden, unexpected move, on the morning of Sunday the 23rd of February 2003, the Egyptian government hastened to present a proposal to the Egyptian parliament suggesting to extend the state of emergency, more than two months before the end of the previous three-year extension which should end on the 31st of May 2003. As usual the majority of the parliament, consistent of members of the ruling National Democratic Party, agreed to the extension on the same day. 30 MPs among whom are independent members and members of El Tagamu'u (the leftist party), El Wafd and the Moslem Brotherhood objected to the extension. The government has thereby ensured the maintenance of the emergency state for another three years, starting from the beginning of next June. This sudden move on part of the government targets to block the campaign launched by the Committee for the Defense of Democracy* (CDD) to put an end to the emergency state. The campaign was successful in collecting thousands of signatures on a petition refusing the renewal of the emergency state, which CDD has planned to submit to parliament on the 9th of March 2003. The government obviously wanted to block the expansion of the campaign and to restrict the anti-emergency-state movement. CDD wishes to stress that the extension of the emergency state will not stop the implementation of its plans, foremost the mobilization of all Egyptian democratic and national groups to establish, protect and ensure a democratic society. The committee believes that there is no choice in front of the active democratic forces in society other than to persist, starting now, in launching a long-term and escalating campaign against the emergency laws, which have ruled the country for about 25 years. The campaign will be a long and tough one, using different means to win back the rights of Egyptian citizens, confiscated for long by the emergency laws.
In its rationalization for the extension the emergency state, the
government continues to use its previous and usual arguments to
legitimize the extension of the emergency laws, saying that they were
meant to control terrorism and drugs. They repeatedly stated that
emergency laws are not used to control freedom of opinion and
expression. The weakness of such arguments are evident in the
government's reluctance to publish accurate statistics regarding the
number of cases processed by high and partial state security emergency
courts in all parts of the country since the enactment of the
emergency laws in October 1981. They also fail to disclose: CDD calls on the government, especially the Ministries of Justice and Interior to disclose those figures to public opinion. Other than the information withheld by the government from public opinion and from parliament, we recognize that the military orders issued by the government of the National Democratic party replies to the claim that emergency laws are used only in cases of terrorism and drug cases. The president of the republic, in his capacity as military ruler, issued decree no. 1 for the year 1981 to refer some crimes to the State Security emergency courts. This decree is still valid until now. The decree involves a long list of crimes that the general prosecution has to refer to state security emergency prosecution, established according to emergency laws. Most of those crimes cannot be described as terrorist or drug crimes. Some of those crimes are the following: calling by word of mouth or by writing or by any other means for the impediment of any provision of the constitution or laws; possession of written material that calls for or favors the previous actions; deliberate dissemination of news, statements, faulty or ill-motivated rumors or agitating news if the objective thereof is to disturb public order, induce fear in people, or causing harm to public interest OR possession or development of publications that contain any of the previous crimes; the many "crimes" associated with the press, public meetings, demonstrations, maintenance of order in educational institutions, laws regulating political parties, laws governing food provisions, price setting and setting profit. The practical implementation of emergency laws has disclosed the reality of those arguments: Emergency laws have restricted the freedom of parties to hold their conferences and popular meetings in an attempt to restrict party activity within their headquarters away from the people. The number of detainees under emergency laws has reached an approximate figure of 16 thousand citizens. The weapon of detention has not been restricted to whom the government calls terrorists and drug dealers, but was extended to all political groups, where the numbers increase with every political or social conflict in the country: during the preparations for parliamentary elections representatives and deputies of opposition candidates are subject to seasonal arrests. In the nineties, during the heated debate over the legislation governing the relationship between landowners and farmers detentions did not only hit the farmers harmed by that legislation but also a number of political activists from different trends, who have expressed their solidarity with those poor farmers. Recently detentions hit a number of citizens protesting the expected American aggression against the Iraqi people and those supporting the struggle of the Palestinians for their legitimate rights to of survival and self determination. As to alleged "terrorists", several of them have been subject to repeated detention since 1993 until now, i.e. for a continuous decade without ever being presented to court to decide regarding their charges.
Under emergency laws:
According to figures of the Egyptian Organization for Human Rights,
during the same period of time: That is, about half a million citizen have been harmed by the emergency laws in nothing close to terrorism or drugs. The emergency laws have become the rule. The exception has become the rule. The social price paid by Egyptian society for such extension is extremely high and unacceptable. The mildest aspect of such a price is the decline in the efficiency of state apparatuses, foremost those supposedly responsible for the implementation of law (the police). Consequently torture is widespread. Also the performance of the government apparatuses has declined and emergency laws continue to intimidate and dehumanize the youth of the nation, continuously threatened of being suspected and arrested. There is hardly an Egyptian youth who has not been maltreated when stopped or questioned by the police. CDD calls on all political, democratic and national groups to join forces in the campaign of the committee to put an end to the state of emergency, especially that such extension lack all constitutional base.
|
