You are :
1/6/2002
|
|
EOHR denounces Presidential Elections Committee's refusal to administrative judiciary's verdict for monitoring the elections
|
5/9/2005
The Egyptian Organization for Human Rights (EOHR) denounces the Presidential Elections Committee's (PEC) rejection of the Administrative Court's judgement giving NGOs the right to monitor the elections.
This refusal amounts to a crime under article 123 of the Penal Code which states that "any public official who uses the powers of his office to stop the implementation of a court verdict or decree issued by a court or official institution will be imprisoned and dismissed from his post. Any public official who deliberately prevents the implementation of a verdict or decree eight days after he has received an official warning will be imprisoned and dismissed from his post where the implementation of the verdict falls within his jurisdiction."
Administrative Court verdicts have immediate effect and are considered final unless overturned by the Supreme Administrative Court.
On 3rd September 2005, the Administrative Judiciary Court (State Council) upheld the right of human rights and civil society organisations to monitor the presidential election process from start to finish, both inside and outside polling stations in order to realise transparency. The case had been brought by five NGOs, (the Arab Organization for Criminal Reform, the Group for Democratic Development, the Center for Democratic Dialogue and the Andalous Centre for the Study of Tolerance and Combating Violence, Egyptian Organization for Human Rights) against the head of the PEC. The case was pleaded by Hafez Abu Saeda (EOHR) and Negad El Borei (the National Campaign for Election Monitoring).
The PEC's stance towards election monitoring is a source of concern given the consensus reached by all political powers (the judiciary, political parties, trade unions and the public) on the necessity and importance of civil society associations undertaking election monitoring - an indicator of fair and free elections which allows all stages of the elections to be carried out transparently before public opinion. This inspires confidence in the electoral process itself as well as the final results, from candidates, the public and voters. In addition, it provides proof of election transparency to the international community.
EOHR calls on the PEC to rethink its stance which has no justification in the law; rather, it violates the Constitution and international instruments. Furthermore, the most recent verdict of the Administrative Judiciary Court established the legal principle that decisions of the committee supervising the elections may be challenged before the administrative judiciary. This principle is in conformity with the provisions of article 68 of the Constitution which states that all decisions may be challenged in court.
Where the PEC maintains its stance EOHR will appoint monitors to act in the polling stations with which they are registered. These individuals will enter the polling stations as voters and monitor as they cast their vote inside the polling station before undertaking full monitoring outside it, including recording the verbal testimony of voters as they leave the polling station. Monitoring will therefore take place both in and outside polling stations.
|
|
|
