CAIRO: A bid to cancel Article 18 of the draft amendments to the judicial authority law left lawyers and judges at odds amid calls for dialogue between both parties.
Justice Ahmed Mekky, former head of the Alexandria Cassation Court and head of the committee preparing a draft amendment of the Judicial Authority Law condemned lawyers’ calls to cancel Article 18 that would allow a judge to arrest “anyone who disturbs a court session regardless of their immunity.”
Mekky explained that if a lawyer is in a dispute with a judge, he has the right to ask him to step down.
"Judges cannot object. It’s a lawful right and we implement it when necessary. Why don’t lawyers want anyone to hold them accountable?" Mekky said.
"They want to fight and quarrel in court, stand on benches and chant against the eyewitnesses like in Mubarak’s trial and they do not want anyone to ban them," he said.
Lawyers strongly oppose the article, saying it marginalizes their role and has a negative impact on their ability to do their job.
"Judges want to cancel the attorneys’ profession; it is a prevalent culture among them," said Mohamed Al-Damaty, former board member and rapporteur of the liberties committee at the Lawyers’ Syndicate.
Lawyers and judges are two faces of the same coin of justice, he said, adding that they must act accordingly.
"Our strength and weakness affects them and vice versa," he added.
Khaled Abou Kerisha, lawyer and former member of the syndicate board, said judges “should stop neglecting our demands."
According to Abou Kerisha, this will lead to more disputes.
"In the new Egypt, after the revolution, no one can issue a law without dialogue," Abou Kerisha said. "They have been pampered and appeased by the former regime. Even they confessed that they had some corrupt members; they should remove them first."
Mekky said that they have called upon lawyers to present the amendments they consider suitable to allow judges to prevent any disturbance that might affect the witnesses or the litigants.
Al-Damaty said that they have representatives who attend the hearings debate session of the draft law and are recording their objections, adding that nothing is achieved without pressure.
On the other hand, Abou Kerisha said that if judges agree to cancel Article 18, they will prove their good intentions. If not, he said, “We will not hold any dialogue with them.”
Abou Kerisha questioned the judges’ insistence on issuing the new law before the coming parliamentary elections slated for Nov. 28.
"They should wait until the constitution is issued. If the judicial authority law is issued before the constitution it will restrict it," he said.
Meanwhile, Mekky denied that judges are keen on issuing the new law before the elections.
"If they want to delay it for 100 years, so be it. We wanted people to elect the prosecutor general among other demands, so if they don’t want that, it’s their choice," he said.
Lawyers in different governorates including Sharkeya and Badrashin have been protesting against the draft amendments.
"Protests and strikes are acceptable. However, I disagree with closing or storming a court," said Al-Damaty pointing out that this should have been the last card lawyers use if judges insist on ignoring their legitimate demands.
Abou Kerisha said that there is no entity or syndicate that is managing the lawyers’ actions now and that this would have drastic consequences.
However, Al-Damaty said that although there is no syndicate, there are leaders who are efficiently controlling the lawyers’ actions.
Syndicate elections
The interim judicial committee supervising the elections of the board of the Lawyers’ Syndicate recently postponed the syndicate elections indefinitely. The former board was dissolved after the January uprising.
Lawyers often tie the postponement of the elections to their objection to the draft judiciary law, seeing it as a way to pressure them to let the law pass.
"We don’t really know, but the entire case seems intertwined," Al-Damaty said.
Abou Kerisha agreed saying that although he cannot be sure of the intentions of the committee, lawyers can easily connect the two scenarios.
A number of lawyers called for holding an extraordinary general assembly of 5,000 lawyers next Sunday at the Lawyers’ Syndicate "in response to the refusal of the judicial committee supervising the syndicate to set a date for the elections and to fight the draft of the judicial authority law," said a statement published by the official news outlet of the syndicate.
"We don’t want judicial supervision over our elections; we are capable of monitoring it ourselves. Yet, the law says that the committee should call for a general assembly to set a date for the elections," Al-Damaty said.
Mekky said that although he has no connection to the Lawyers’ Syndicate elections, he believes there is no link between its postponement and the conflicts surrounding the judicial authority law.
"The committee said it would postpone the elections because the members’ lists are inaccurate and this is common," he said.
He added that he is against judicial supervision over any syndicate elections. "Such elections belong to those who work in the profession and supervising them would exhaust the judiciary for no reason," Mekky said.
