Judges Club demands right to review law to ensure judicial independence
CAIRO: Egypt’s judges have stood firm in their objection to the parliament-proposed draft of the judicial law, even though the parliament has reportedly amended the law “to suit the judges’ demands, as stated by head of parliament Fathi Sorour.
“The regime is trying to create a law that only acts as a substitute for the judges’ proposal and demands, says Mahmoud Mekki, deputy to the cassation court and member of the Judges Club. Mekki is one of two judges who received a disciplinary hearing for blowing the whistle on violations and breaches during last year’s presidential elections and leaking information to the press concerning what they had described as “acts of fraud.
“Instead of fulfilling the judges’ demands, they play around them, Mekki tells The Daily Star Egypt. “There is malice; [and] their intentions towards the judges are crystal clear.
In its emergency general assembly Friday, attended by some 500 judges, the Judges Club said it would only approve a law that has been reviewed by representatives of the Judges Club; one that guarantees judicial independence from the executive and that gives judges full supervision over the next presidential and local elections.
The meeting came after a series of protests and sit-ins in opposition to the law. On Thursday, around 300 pro-democracy judges voiced their demands at a sit-in inside the club’s downtown headquarters, which was surrounded by truckloads of riot police.
The law, approved by parliament and backed by the government, has some positive aspects, a representative of the Judges Club told the press. Nevertheless, it undermines the judges’ authorities and their independence.
The proposed draft law sustains the Justice Ministry’s and the Supreme Judicial Council’s authorities over judicial inquisition, and the recruitment, promotion and supervision of judges, an aspect that the Judges Club vehemently disputes. The law also maintains the government’s authority in appointing the general prosecutor and the chairman of the Supreme Judicial Council, another aspect that the judges say gives the government full control over the judiciary.
“The Judges Club should also remain under the sole control of its own self-elected general assembly, answering to no other entity, says Mekki. “The new law does not secure this, and in turn suggests that interference and meddling in the club’s internal affairs could possibly occur.
According to Mekki, the Judges Club has presented an outline of their demands, along with a proposal for a new judicial law to parliament. Members of the Judges Club had met with upper house head Sorour to explain the club’s views, says Mekki, “but our proposal was totally ignored. What the parliament did was think of a law that would stand in the way of judges whereby they can go around their demands.
Mekki is not optimistic. The judge believes that the government will secure the law despite the protests and that the parliament will eventually pass it.
“That is their plan; they will do what they want to do [and] from our side, we will also hold on to our demands, says Mekki. “It is our duty to answer to lies, to call for a national conference, where all the national forces are present, and explain what it means to have judicial independence, to explain citizens’ rights and show people where the law [proposed by parliament] fails.
“That’s all what we have now in our hands: to raise our voices in unison and protest.
