| Egypt's Shura Council |
Egypt’s Shura Council (Upper House of the Parliament) has issued on
Tuesday, 26 March, two controversial laws which have been criticized by the oppositional
forces and also by the specialists as well.
As a result of the current session of Shura Council some amendments have
been made to the elections law. It’s worth mentioning that the previous
elections law issued by the current Shura Council is a subject of appeal before
Egypt’s High Constitutional Court and could be declared unconstitutional.
The second newly approved law is the one regulating the rights and
responsibilities of the protesters and stipulating the terms and conditions of organizing
the protests and marches and also penalties for violating this law. This new
protests’ law is extremely controversial and was already strongly criticized by
the opponents of the ruling Islamist regime. The specialists and also Egypt’s
oppositional and revolutionary forces claim this law includes almost the same
oppressive and draconic measures as it was under Egypt’s ex-President Hosni
Mubarak.
I would like to share here Ahram Online’s article with more details
regarding the issue. The article is written by Gamal Essam El-Din and is
originally poster here.
Egypt's Shura council rubber-stamp two key bills on elections, protest
rights
Opposition figures argued that the protest law is draconian and reminiscent
of policies under Mubarak
Gamal Essam El-Din , Tuesday 26 Mar 2013
The Islamist-dominated Shura Council – Egypt's upper house of
parliament, currently imbued with legislative powers – rushed on Tuesday to
approve, in principle, two controversial government-drafted laws regulating
parliamentary elections and protests.
The first legislation, an amendment of a 1972 law on the People's
Assembly and a 1956 law on the exercise of political rights, was approved in
principle during the morning plenary session of the Council on 26 March.
The draft law was rushed through the Council so fast that the government
failed to attach to it an explanatory note detailing its objectives. Omar
El-Sherif, deputy justice minister, regretted that "the government was forced
to submit new amendments of the election law in a very short time," vowing
that the law would be attached with an explanatory note when it comes up for an
article-by-article debate before the Council.
The draft law, which was approved in principle in a process that took
just an hour and half, did not go down well with representatives of three
liberal-oriented political parties.
Nagi El-Shehabi, chairman of the Generation Party argued that "the
Shura Council should have waited until the High Constitutional Court (HCC)
decided whether the first election law [passed on 21 February] is
constitutional.” El-Shehabi decided to walk out of the session in protest at
justice minister Ahmed Mekki’s refusal to attend the parliamentary debate or
respond to MPs' questions.
Taher Abdel-Mohsen, deputy chairman of the Council's Legislative and
Constitutional Affairs Committee and a leading official of Muslim Brotherhood's
Freedom and Justice Party (FJP), explained that "the government-drafted
election law does not differ much from the law passed by Shura Council on 21
February [which is currently a subject of appeal before the courts]."
"The new law adopted the Constitutional Court's views on three
issues: that anyone who failed to perform military service for national
security reasons be excluded as a candidate in elections; that voting by
Egyptians living abroad in parliamentary elections be placed under full
judicial supervision; and that electoral districts be redrawn in a fair way.”
Chairman of the Shura Council and leading FJP official Ahmed Fahmi
indicated that "the law will be discussed article by article next Monday
and MPs are allowed to propose amendments to its articles until the end of next
Thursday."
The deputies of Muslim Brotherhood's FJP rallied behind the law. FJP's
parliamentary spokesman Essam El-Erian vowed that the law would be referred to
the High Constitutional Court to give its opinion in accordance with Article
177 of the constitution and that the court's opinion and remarks would be fully
respected. "We will not give a chance to political forces who want to
bring the democratic march of this country to a deadlock," warned
El-Erian.
The draft law was also approved by deputies of the ultraconservative
Salafist Nour Party. The party's spokesman Salah Abdel-Maaboud, however, blamed
Fahmi for refusing to refer the 21 February election law back to the High
Constitutional Court. "This would have saved time and made the February
law immune to judicial appeals," said Abdel-Maaboud.
By contrast, the deputies of two Islamist political parties launched
scathing attacks on the High Constitutional Court. Safwat Abdel-Ghani, the
representative of the Islamist Building and Development Party – the political
arm of Al-Gamaa Al-Islamiya - urged deputies "not to give too much weight
to the High Constitutional Court or allow its judges play havoc with political
laws."
Atef Awad, the representative of the Wasat Party – a Brotherhood
splinter group – asserted that "the High Constitutional Court is
politicised and we should not waste time referring laws to it several
times."
Copt Rami Lakah, an appointed MP and chairman of Our Egypt party,
rejected the law for dividing electoral districts on sectarian lines and for
redrawing those districts according to number of registered voters rather than
on the basis of the size of the population.
Protest law
Also on Tuesday, the Shura Council rushed to approve a new protest law
in principle. The so-called "Protest Right Protection Law" was rammed
through the Council in just one hour. It was rejected by seven liberal
political parties, accusing it of turning Egypt into "a police
state." Non-FJP Islamist political parties also urged that the draft law
be a matter of intense public debate and national dialogue.
In response, Chairman Ahmed Fahmi indicated that deputies would be
allowed to amend the draft protest law's articles without a definite deadline.
The draft law gives the police sweeping powers to disrupt and disperse
street protests. It also stipulates that the interior ministry be notified of
the time and venue of any protest at least 24 hours in advance.
Besides, according to Ezzeddin El-Komi, deputy chairman of Shura
Council's Human Rights Committee and a leading FJP official, the interior
ministry can prohibit any protest gatherings it deems a threat to public order,
and demonstrations must keep a 500 metre cordon between protesters and vital
state institutions.
El-Komi indicated that "these institutions include the headquarters
of the country's main legislative, executive and judicial authorities."
"This draft law isn't different from the ones adopted in democratic
countries which exercise a legal clampdown on saboteurs who infiltrate peaceful
demonstrations and torch state buildings," said El-Komi.
He argued that "the law was not rammed through the Council with the
backdrop of recent violent clashes around the headquarters of Muslim
Brotherhood in Cairo's Mokattam district."
"This bill comes after saboteurs torched several buildings in Cairo
in recent weeks, such as the Egyptian Football Association building and the
Police Club," he said.
El-Komi also indicated that "in implementing this law, police
forces will not be allowed to open fire or live ammunition on protesters."
The bill grants police the right to first use water cannons on protesters, then
teargas and bludgeons to disperse them.
As expected, Brotherhood's FJP deputies rallied behind the bill. Saad
Emara, deputy chairman of the Council's National Security Committee, said
"recent days saw a third wave of violent acts aimed at disrupting state
institutions."
FJP's El-Erian said that "there is a desperate need for this bill
in order to stem the tide of chaos, and we urge police forces to use this
legislation to strike with an iron first against saboteurs and
provocateurs."
Joining forces, deputy interior minister Ali Abdel-Moli commented that
"police forces are being dragged into a war of attrition with armed
protesters and this makes it very hard for the interior ministry to fight
criminal acts."
The draft law, however, was vehemently rejected by most liberal
political parties. Mohamed El-Hanafy, spokesman of the Wafd Party, said
"the bill is rejected because it reflects the regime's failure to find
political solutions for the country and represents a move back to the police
state practices."
Abdel-Shakour El-Sayed, representative of the Egyptian Social Democratic
Party, said "the draft protest law is a step back to the old dark policies
adopted by [former president] Hosni Mubarak." He added that his party can
never approve a law that launches a severe crackdown on peaceful protests.
In the words of Rami Lakah, "I did not believe my eyes when I saw this
law; I thought it was written by Habib El-Adly [Mubarak's notorious interior
minister.] This bill directs a complete assault against liberties and rights of
Egyptians."
Nagi El-Shehabi, chairman of the Generation Party, said "the draft
protest law comes at a very bad time to give opposition the impression that it
was rushed through parliament in reaction to violence in Mokattam and it is
aimed to serve the interests of a certain faction."
El-Shehabi wondered that the bill gives police forces the right to use
teargas, asking "how many millions has the government paid to America in
recent months to import teargas?"
"The draft protest law is against the 25 January revolution and it
reflects the failure of the regime of President Mohamed Morsi to give the
impression that he is a president for all Egyptians rather than for one
political faction," said Hilaslasi Mikhail, representative of the Free
Egyptians Party.
Mikhali raised questions about whether the interior ministry would be
capable of implementing the law. "This law will never bring stability but
will rather lead to fomenting unrest and provoking aggressive reactions from
several forces," he said.
Ihab El-Kharrat, chairman of the Human Rights Committee, also condemned
the legislation.
"The bill was drafted in a very bad way and it gives police forces
sweeping powers to attack protesters without facing judicial scrutiny."
No comments:
Post a Comment