Global Integrity Report

Egypt Home

Facts

Timeline

Notebook

Integrity Scorecard

2007 Assessment

Egypt: Integrity Indicators Scorecard

Egypt: Integrity Scorecard Report > Sub-Category: Rule of Law
Indicators		Score
74	Is there an appeals mechanism for challenging criminal judgments?	83
75	In practice, do judgments in the criminal system follow written law?	75
76	In practice, are judicial decisions enforced by the state?	75
77	Is the judiciary able to act independently?	88
78	Are judges safe when adjudicating corruption cases?	100
79	Do citizens have equal access to the justice system?	79

Indicator and sub-Indicator Details

Is there an appeals mechanism for challenging criminal judgments?

74a: In law, there is a general right of appeal.

Score:

YES

Comments: Appeal is returning the legal dispute to a court of higher level than the one that previously made a decision in the same dispute. Egyptian law makers adopted this principle realizing that this two-phase prosecution is a guarantee for the correctness of the court decisions. So, in Egypt, there is a general right of appeal.

References: Mohamed Anwar Shehata Legal Proceedings and Appeal Methods, University of Cairo, P. 269.

74b: In practice, appeals are resolved within a reasonable time period.

Score:

100

Comments: In practice, ordinary appeals to courts are resolved within 40 days, urgent appeals within 15 days, and appeals to the attorney general in 60 days. These are relatively reasonable time periods.

References: Article 227 of the Egyptian pleading law.

74c: In practice, citizens can use the appeals mechanism at a reasonable cost.

Score:

100

Comments: In practice, citizens can use the appeals mechanism for only 50 pounds (US$9). This is a reasonable cost.

References: Mohamed Anwar Shehata Legal Proceedings and Appeal Methods, University of Cairo, P. 71

In practice, do judgments in the criminal system follow written law?

75: In practice, do judgments in the criminal system follow written law?

Score:

100

Comments:

References: Mohamed Anwar Shehata Legal Proceedings and Appeal Methods, University of Cairo, P. 271

In practice, are judicial decisions enforced by the state?

76: In practice, are judicial decisions enforced by the state?

Score:

100

Comments: In practice, judicial decisions are enforced by the state represented in the judicial decisions by the implementing police, a part of the ministry of the Interior. This authority faces many difficulties in implementing judicial decisions as so many convicted persons are used to escape in the desert and unplanned housing areas. Therefore, thousands of judicial decisions are not applied. Bribery, favoritism and networks of relationship affect the implementation of judicial decisions by this authority. Thus, if a guilty litigant is wealthy enough and of high social rank, he/she is arrested and the judicial decision is applied at once. However, if the guilty is that wealthy person and his/her opponent is a poor man, the judicial decision may wait long times to be implemented, if implemented at all. The judicial decisions implementing police is used to take bribes and work partially in many cases.

References: The Egyptian Constitution, articles 71 and 72.

Is the judiciary able to act independently?

77a: In law, the independence of the judiciary is guaranteed.

Score:

YES

Comments: In law, the independence of the judiciary is guaranteed. The judiciary is represented by different kinds and levels of courts that are required to make their decisions in accordance with written laws. Judges are independent and are not subordinated to anything but the law in their decisions. No other authority is allowed to interfere in lawsuits or the matters of justice.

References: The Egyptian Constitution, articles 165 and 166. Article 107 of law no. 46/1972 organizing judicial authority

77b: In practice, national-level judges are protected from political interference.

Score:

100

Comments: In practice, national-level judges are not adequately protected from political interference. The project submitted by the judges of Egypt to amend law no. 46/1972 for organizing the judicial authority reports several aspects of political and governmental interference in the work of judges. In the project, the judges ask to restrict the role of the minister of Justice to administrative supervision only, from controlling over all courts, judges and the general prosecution, as the case is in the present. They also called for taking the right to moving judges from their courts from the minister of Justice. The subordination of the judicial inspection authority, the general prosecution and the general attorney to the minister of Justice is also rejected in the proposed law by the Judges' Club. The proposed law also emphasized the need for a bylaw of the judicial inspection and the general prosecution. Judges of Egypt also stressed the need for transparent regulations for removing, retiring or moving judges from their courts. They base all these demands on the premise that the minister of Justice is part of the executive branch, and therefore should not have control or authority over judges, who must be independent by law.

References: The project submitted by the judges of Egypt to amend law no. 46/1972 for organizing the judicial authority, and its clarification memorandum, The Judges' Club, Cairo.

77c: In law, there is a transparent and objective system for distributing cases to national-level judges.

Score:

YES

Comments: In law, there is a transparent and objective system for distributing cases to national-level judges as defined in law no. 46/1972. But article 62 of this law gives the minister of Justice the authority to move judges from their courts to do different or additional judicial and legal work. This gives space to the minister of Justice to put the judges he wants in the courts where specific lawsuit will be examined. This authority given to the minister of Justice can be a means for punishing judges of removing them from the judiciary because of their judicial decisions or political positions.

References: Article 62 of law no. 46/1972 for organizing judicial authority.

77d: In law, national-level judges are protected from removal without relevant justification.

Score:

YES

Comments: In law, national-level judges are protected from removal without relevant justification. The judiciary is represented by different kinds and levels of courts that are required to make their decisions in accordance with written laws. Judges are independent and are not subordinated to anything but the law in their decisions. No other authority is allowed to interfere in lawsuits or matters of justice.

References: The Egyptian Constitution, articles 165 and 166.

Are judges safe when adjudicating corruption cases?

78a: In practice, in the last year, no judges have been physically harmed because of adjudicating corruption cases.

Score:

YES

Comments: In practice, in the last year, no judges have been physically harmed because of adjudicating corruption cases.

References: The archive of the Egyptian state-owned, party and independent newspapers, 2007

78b: In practice, in the last year, no judges have been killed because of adjudicating corruption cases.

Score:

YES

$Scoring Criteria :: YES: A YES score is earned if there were no documented cases of judges being killed related to their involvement in a corruption case during the study period. YES is a positive score. NO: A NO score is earned if there were any documented cases where a judge was killed because of his/her participation in a corruption trial. The relationship between a mysterious death and a judge\'s involvement in a case may not be clear, however the burden of proof here is low. If it is a reasonable assumption that a judge was killed in relation to his or her work on corruption issues, then the indicator is scored as a NO. Corruption is defined broadly to include any abuses of power, not just the passing of bribes.$

Comments: In practice, in the last year, no judges have been killed because of adjudicating corruption cases.

References: The archive of the Egyptian state-owned, party and independent newspapers, 2007.

Do citizens have equal access to the justice system?

79a: In practice, judicial decisions are not affected by racial or ethnic bias.

Score:

100

Comments: In practice, judicial decisions are not affected by racial or ethnic bias. In rare cases judicial decisions may be affected by the religious believes of the judges, especially those belonging to the Muslim Brothers Group wanting to apply Islamic law. Example of these rare cases is the one against the intellectual Nasr Hamed Abo-Zeid, whom the court divorced from his wife because of being convicted of defection. The Egyptian Constitution and all judiciary laws do not take racial or ethnic differences in consideration. The Egyptian Constitution (article 40) states that all citizens are equal irrespective of race, origin, language, religion or ideology.

References: The Egyptian Constitution, article 40

79b: In practice, women have full access to the judicial system.

Score:

100

Comments: In practice, women have full access to the judicial system. But there is little discrimination according to sex in criminal and inheritance. Despite the fact that women are equal to men in the constitution and most laws, they do not benefit from this equality in the public arena for two reasons. First there is still much discrimination against women. Second, women themselves do not exert to benefit from this equality in fields such as political participation, education and illiteracy eradication.

References: Dr. Nadia Ramsees Farag, The Egyptian Woman: The Legal And Social Status The Arab Institute for Human Rights, P. 254.

79c: In law, the state provides legal counsel for defendants in criminal cases who cannot afford it.

Score:

YES

Comments: In law, according to article 69 of the Egyptian Constitution, defense is guaranteed to all defendants. in criminal cases, the state provides legal counselling for defendants who cannot afford it.

References: The Egyptian Constitution, article 69.

79d: In practice, the state provides adequate legal counsel for defendants in criminal cases who cannot afford it.

Score:

100

Comments: In practice, according to article 69 of the Egyptian Constitution, defense is guaranteed to all defendants. In criminal cases, the state provides legal counselling for defendants who cannot afford it. But the low level of the appointed lawyers turns this into a routine practice, not an application of a basic human right.

References: The Egyptian Constitution, article 69

79e: In practice, citizens earning the median yearly income can afford to bring a legal suit.

Score:

100

Comments: In modern legal and judicial systems free of charge, the judiciary is guaranteed, as it is dealt with as a public service. This means that salaries of judges are paid from the state treasury and not collected from litigants. However, this principle does not mean that litigants must not pay any fees or dues when they want to bring a legal suit. The state takes fees from litigants from which it pays the salaries of judges and regulates the judiciary system. Law no. 90/1944 and its amendments organize the fees and dues in the civil cases, law no. 91/1944 and its amendments organize the fees and dues in the personal cases, and law no. 1/1948 organizes the fees and dues in the money guardianship cases. Egyptian laws take the free of charge principle of judiciary in consideration. Judiciary fees are also affected by the level of the court.

References: Naser Amin, The Egyptian Judicial System, Amin publishing co., Cairo, P. 14.

79f: In practice, a typical small retail business can afford to bring a legal suit.

Score:

100

Comments: In practice, a typical small retail business can afford to bring a legal suit, as fees are less than 100 pounds (US$18). However, the problem may be the costly fees of lawyers.

References: Law no. 90/1944 concerning the fees of the civil companies.

79g: In practice, all citizens have access to a court of law, regardless of geographic location.

Score:

100

Comments: In practice, all citizens have access to a court of law, regardless of geographic location, at least in the first two levels: elementary and appeals courts. Those two courts are often existent in local district or cities and towns. As for the higher-level courts, namely the Court of Cassation, the Supreme Constitutional Court and the Supreme Administrative Court, citizens may face difficulty in accessing them because there is only one court of each of these types in the capital, Cairo.

References: Naser Amin, The Egyptian Judicial System, Amin publishing co., Cairo, PP. 65, 111, 135.