Dina Shehata
In recent months, with pressures on
the Egyptian government to reform growing, elements of Egyptian civil society
have seized the moment to advance longstanding agendas. Among the most
surprising and significant groups to press their advantage were judges. On May
13 the Judges Club of Egypt convened an emergency general assembly, in which
the more than 1,500 judges in attendance presented the Mubarak
regime with an ultimatum. The judges made their supervision—required by the
constitution—of upcoming presidential and parliamentary elections subject to
two conditions. The first was adopting, before the end of the legislative
session in June, a draft law prepared by the Judges Club guaranteeing the
independence of the judiciary, while the second was
amending the political participation law to ensure full judicial supervision of
the electoral process. While judges supervised what went on inside polling places
during the 2000 parliamentary elections, heavy-handed measures by the Ministry
of Interior outside led to irregularities in a number of districts.
The Judges Club had been lobbying the
Egyptian government for nearly 15 years to pass a law freeing the judiciary
from financial and administrative control by the Ministry of Justice. The draft
law allocates to the judiciary an independent budget and gives the Supreme
Judicial Council (made up of senior judges) rather than the Ministry (part of
the executive branch) the right to appoint, supervise, and discipline judges. On
March 20, the Judges Club presented its draft to parliament and demanded that
it be ratified before the end of the current legislative session in June. Meanwhile
the Ministry of Justice drafted an alternative law, which ignored the principal
demands of the Judges Club, thus precipitating the standoff between the Judges
Club and the government.
Similarly, and in light of their
experience in supervising the 2000 elections, the judges demanded that the
political participation law be amended to restrict the role of the executive,
especially the Ministry of the Interior, in the electoral process and to
guarantee full judicial supervision as stipulated by the constitution. The
draft law presented by the government to the legislative committee of
parliament, however, failed to meet these requirements. Especially problematic
from the judges' point of view was the proposed composition of the electoral
commission, which the judges had insisted be fully composed of senior judges
chosen by the judiciary. The government's draft law, by contrast, stipulates
that the commission be composed of three judges chosen by the Supreme Judicial
Council, one representative each from the Ministries of Interior and Justice,
and five non-partisan figures—two of them former judges and three public
figures chosen by the upper house of parliament (dominated by the ruling
National Democratic Party).
In response to the judges' challenge,
the regime initially adopted a divide-and-rule strategy. At the behest of the
Ministry of Justice, the Supreme Judicial Council issued a declaration to
counter the Judges Club, insisting that it was the only body authorized to
speak on behalf of the judiciary and affirming judges' unconditional commitment
to supervise upcoming elections. The government-controlled mass media
highlighted the positions of loyalist judges and there were reports in
opposition newspapers that the Minister of Justice invited individual judges to
sign statements pledging their participation in electoral supervision. The
Minister of Justice also succeeded in securing the allegiance of the State
Council Judges Club, which is separate from the Judges Club of Egypt and has a
membership of 1,100 judges. In return, the Minister of Justice offered State
Council judges one million Egyptian pounds (approximately $150,000) in annual
support for their club, increased the number of monitors from the State Council
from 320 to 1,100 judges, allocated new buildings and rest houses for State
Council judges, and offered administrative jobs at the Ministry of Justice to
family members of State Council judges.
Many feared that these
divide-and-rule strategies would pit judges against one another and thereby
weaken and corrupt the judiciary, the only state institution that retains some
credibility with the Egyptian public. The Judges Club has held fast, however,
and announced it would hold a second emergency meeting on June 17 to reaffirm
its position. In response, the government appears to be acceding to the judges'
demands. The Minister of Justice announced after a meeting with the board of
the Judges Club that the government accepts the draft law prepared by the Club.
The government also promised to take the propositions of the Judges Club
regarding the Political Participation Law more seriously. If the government
keeps these promises, a compromise between the government and the judges is
likely to ensue, allowing the judiciary to secure greater independence while
giving the government's declared commitment to reform greater credibility.
Dina Shehata is a researcher at the Al
Arab Reform
Bulletin
June 2005