INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
The International Coalition for Freedoms and Rights (ICFR), a legal and human rights organisation established in November 2013, has been seeking to investigate, document and file the grievious human rights violations in Egypt that have been taking place since the military coup on 3rd of July 2013. The coup saw the killing and incarceration of tens of thousands of Egyptians who opposed the military regime which saw the kidnapping and detention of Egypt’s first democratically-elected civilian President, Mohammed Morsi, the first President following the 25th of January 2011 revolution which toppled then president Hosni Mubarak. In its ongoing effort to understand the human rights situation in Egypt, ICFR sent its fourth delegation on a human rights monitoring mission in Egypt on 11-15th October 2014. The 10person strong delegation was composed of independent lawyers, journalists and human rights experts who were sent to observe the trial of Mohammed Morsi, meet with the families of political and non-political detainees, and to investigate allegations of recent human rights violations. *** Since the removal of Mohammed Morsi, Egypt has witnessed unprecedented violence perpetrated by the security forces and a gross tally of injustices and human rights violations, claimed as “the worst in modern history.” Egypt saw what Kenneth Roth of HRW claimed as “one of the world's largest killings of demonstrators in a single day in recent history” where over 1000 Egyptians according to HRW, and over 2600 according to the anti-coup alliance, were killed in Rabaa Al-Adawiyya square on 14th August 2013. Since the coup, Egypt has also seen the illegal detention and incarceration of over 44,000 pro-democracy men, women and youth, with numerous reported cases of rape and torture of those detained. President Morsi is among those detained since the coup, as he was arrested (kidnapped, according to numerous human rights reports) and held in the Republican Guard complex on the 2nd of July 2013. He currently stands trial at the Police Academy, a heavily fortified security complex on the outskirts of Cairo. International observers have not been given access to Morsi since the high representative of the EU Catherine Ashton visited him on July 30th 2013, followed by an African Union Delegation the following day. Other than Al-Jazeera, there has been very limited coverage of the case in the English-speaking media. Again unprecedented in modern history, in less than 7 months, the Egyptian judiciary sentenced to death 1243 pro-democracy supporters in a grotesque show of barbarity and an escalation in human rights abuses. According to HRW, these mass trials took just hours each and the court prevented defence lawyers from presenting their cases, with many defendants tried in absentia. Leading up to the first anniversary of the Rabaa massacre in August 2014, HRW released a damning report in a 195 page investigation based on interviews with 122 survivors and
1
witnesses in which they incriminate the coup leader for crimes against humanity. HRW called for the most senior security officials and key leaders in the chain of command to be investigated, specifically naming the coup leader, now current President, Abdel Fattah AlSisi; Interior Minister Mohamed Ibrahim; and the head of Special Forces and commander of the Rabaa operation Medhat Menshawy. *** This report summarises the findings of the 4th ICFR delegation’s visit to Egypt from the 11th to 15th October 2014. This visit was made in circumstances where Egypt was seeing “the most dramatic reversal of human rights in Egypt’s modern history” as claimed by the HRW, and under which Egypt has seen substantial deterioration of human rights and the rule of law across all sectors of society with clear impunity, and a continuation and escalation of the violations under the coup regime. Rather than being a comprehensive review of human rights in Egypt, this report merely seeks to bring to light a few serious human rights problems that have been indicated by the persons to whom the delegation spoke. The delegation heard evidence from lawyers, journalists, politicians, doctors, trade unionists, students, adult and child detainees and the families and friends of people killed or detained by the authorities since the military took reigns of power in 2013. The delegation also met with defence lawyers for Mohammed Morsi and families of detainees on hunger strike. *** Terms of Reference and Objectives This delegation was asked to meet with government and non-government officials to assess the state of human rights in Egypt. The delegation agreed that its terms of reference would be as follows: a) To meet with a broad number of people both from the authorities and civil society to assess the state of human rights generally in Egypt; b) To assess whether human rights standards that have been agreed to by Egypt as international human rights law, are being observed.
The delegation’s main objectives were:
To obtain permission to attend the court sessions, particularly the Morsi trial. To obtain information on the general status of human rights in Egypt. To visit the Tora high security prison and the El-Natroun Prison in order to observe the conditions of detention of those held there, particularly political detainees. To meet with families of political detainees and victims of human rights abuses.
2

To meet with a number of Egyptian officials, including the Attorney General, the Assistant Minister of Interior for Prisons and the Assistant Minister of Interior for Human Rights. ***
The Delegation The delegation included Mr Michael Ellman a (retired) solicitor and international human rights consultant from the United Kingdom; Mr Roger Sahota a human rights solicitor from the United Kingdom, Ms Suzanne Adley a human rights lawyer from the United States of America; Mr Benjamin Douglas a lawyer from the United States of America; Mr Doug Bandow a journalist specializing in Foreign affairs and human rights from the United State of America; Mr Isa Gultaslar a barrister specialising in war crimes from Belguim; Mr Veronique Laurent a barrister from Belguim; Mr Vincent Lurquin a barrister specializing in war crimes and human rights from Belguim; Ms Samira Gazzaz a barrister specializing in international law and human rights from Belguim; Mr Simon Monk a cameraman and photographer from the United Kingdom. *** FINDINGS Having informed the relevant authorities of the impending visit and made official requests for the necessary permits and authorisations, the delegates were greeted on their first day by representatives of the Egyptian Ministry of Interior’s Human Rights Department, who informed the delegation that despite the letters sent by ICFR to the Foreign Ministry and other relevant authorities, the requests had not been directed through the correct channels and hence no access was authorised to the courts or prisons as requested.
The trial of Dr Mohammed Morsi One of the main objectives of the delegates’ visit was to observe the trial proceedings of Dr Mohammed Morsi. Prior to the visit, Dr Morsi had not attended his last two court appearances, and little information was available about the state of his health or the progress of his case. The delegation managed to meet with lawyers involved in the trial acting for other co-defendants in the proceedings. They provided the primary source of information concerning the case. Dr Morsi faces three charges in three different proceedings: 1. Charges connected to the storming of the Etihad Presidential Palace on the 4-6th December 2012; 2. Charges related to a prison break from the Wadi El-Natroun Prison; and 3. Charges related to espionage.
3
The lawyer the delegates spoke to informed them that Dr Morsi believes he is the legitimate President of Egypt and was deposed in an unlawful military coup. They were informed that Dr Morsi refuses to recognise the legality of the proceedings against him and thus will not appoint lawyers to act for him. When he appeared in court in November 2013 he stated that he would not recognise the court claiming that it was a “cover up of a military coup”. He repeated several times that the court “is illegal” and said it was “shameful” that the Egyptian judiciary had been recruited to the army’s cause. The lawyers complained that Dr Morsi has not had any legal or social visits since last November when his privileges were revoked following his outburst in court. When appearing in court, he is presented in a sound proof glass cubicle and is only able to speak when the Judge activates his microphone. He cannot hear what is said in court nor can he readily communicate with anyone else present. To observers who have seen Dr Morsi, they say he appears to be in good health. The Muslim Brotherhood’s lawyers also argued that the trial breached the constitutional article governing cases brought against a president. In light of the limited information available, there is cause for serious concern as to whether the trial procedures adopted in the case of Dr Morsi meet internationally recognised fair trial standards. The delegation felt that that particular attention needed to be drawn to this. Mr Roger Sahota, speaking on behalf of the delegation stated that he “urges the Law Society in conjunction with other national bar associations and interested parties to consider making representations to the Egyptian authorities to allow international observers to monitor the trial and to speak to Dr Morsi to confirm that he remains in good health.”
Allegations of Human Rights Violations and Implications for the Rule of Law Many of the witnesses the delegation heard from were either former members of the Freedom and Justice Party (FJP; political wing of the Muslim Brotherhood), or members of the Muslim Brotherhood (or sympathetic to its aims). The delegation also spoke to a number of individuals who rejected any Islamist beliefs and stated that they were politically opposed to the FJP/Muslim Brotherhood as well as the current military regime. Three accounts which were typical of many of the personal histories that were heard are summarised below (reported by Mr Roger Sahota):
A Professor at Alexandria University who has a PhD and has taught in Japan. In the local elections of 2012, he stood as an independent candidate against the FJP. Two of his children; M (aged 15) and K (aged 23) had been arrested and accused of participating in FJP protests. Neither was involved in the FJP or the Muslim Brotherhood according to their father. They have been incarcerated for many months with their detention extended without trial.
4
A university Student, Ms S was walking home one day and was arrested by police who were looking for individuals who had taken part in a nearby demonstration. The demonstration was on one street and she was on another. She was accused of being a member of the FJP and of carrying scissors and bricks. She claims she was treated roughly upon arrest, and was held for many months on precautionary detention. Her case is still ongoing, but upon her meeting, she was on bail. S and D were the parents of J, a documentary video director with no history of political involvement. He was filming on the day of the Rabaa demonstrations. His parents claim he was targeted by a sniper working for the security services. J captured footage of the sniper before he was shot. On the video, voices can be heard which include an officer giving the order for J to be shot. No one has been prosecuted or arrested for J’s murder while J’s parents’ attempts to secure justice for their son have proven futile.
Other individuals interviewed include:
Representatives of Student Unions who told the delegation of events that unfolded at Rabaa and of police raids on campuses targeting FJP supporters. The delegation was told of students that had been shot, killed or injured during these raids. Many were now in custody awaiting trial while others had been convicted on flimsy evidence and were awaiting appeal. Lawyers representing student activists. One lawyer the delegation spoke to stated that many of his colleagues had been arrested and detained simply because they specialised in this type of work. Having learnt that he was wanted by the police, he moved away from his family home and was forced to practice in another part of the country. Other lawyers told the delegation that one faction within the Egyptian Bar Association supported the government and therefore it had not taken adequate action to defend their own members. Journalists working in pro-Muslim Brotherhood publications were closed by the government. They stated that many of their colleagues were now in prison. Some feared arrest and further persecution. Their pensions were in jeopardy and it was difficult for them to find work. Politicians linked to the FJP: The ICFR delegation was informed that most of the leadership of the FJP, including mid-level leaders, were now in custody. The wife of a senior FJP leader, now in prison, said that her daughter, who was unarmed, had been shot dead by the security agencies at a demonstration. No one has been prosecuted for her murder. A Defence lawyer acting for a FJP politician told the delegation he was arrested and detained for 14 months. During that time he was kept in solitary confinement before his release on bail. He was charged with the same offences as his client.
A common theme that emerged from the witnesses that were spoken to is that of the targeting of political opponents of the current regime. Those arrested who were identified as political detainees were not subject to the normal provisions of the Egyptian criminal code.
5
When a suspect is arrested, the Egyptian criminal code requires that the police present their case to a Judge within a short period of time, often within 24 hours. However, political detainees were often kept in custody for months before they were presented before a court, known as “precautionary detention”, and very often these precautionary detentions are renewed for months. Defence lawyers complained that they weren't allowed to visit their clients and did not have the nature of the charges of their clients disclosed to them. It appears that during their detention, many political detainees are singled out for mistreatment and torture was a common tactic in police investigations. Complaints of mistreatment however, were constantly ignored by the prosecution and the courts. The delegation also looked into the case of Mohamed Soltan, of Egyptian and American Nationality, who is amongst 86 detainees on hunger strike in prisons and police headquarters throughout Egypt, in protest against the unjust detention and terrible conditions. Mohamed Soltan’s family have made it known that his health is in a critical state and that the risk of organ failure is imminent: “To refuse medical treatment to a person in a critical state is not only insensitive and cruel, but also totally illegal.” Mohamed Soltan has been placed in isolation in the Al-Aqrab maximum security jail as a sanction for his hunger strike. According to his lawyer, the prison authorities only take him to the medical unit when he passes out. He is taken back to his cell as soon as he regains consciousness. The delegation, as reported by Samira Gazzaz received a complete file from the Soltan family regarding his critical condition which requires urgent attention. Mohamed Soltan’s life is clearly in danger. It is the position of ICFR and its delegates that the Egyptian authorities must fulfil their International duties and guarantee fair trials, and immediately release Soltan as well as all prisoners who were arrested for merely exercising their rights to freedom of speech and freedom of expression.
Prison Visits The delegation put some of the allegations of mistreatment forward to the Minister for Prisons and was told unequivocally that the authorities believed that no such violations had ever taken place, claiming that any complaints raised would have been investigated by the Public Prosecutor. According to the Minister, there was no discrimination on the basis of gender or religious affiliation in Egyptian prisons and international detainees were allowed contact with their Embassies and received consular assistance. Mr Veronique Laurent, a lawyer among the delegation, suggested the Egyptian Surveillance Committee visit Belgium to observe the status of the prisons, and that the Egyptian Central Council allows the ICFR delegation to visit the Egyptian prisons. The Minister for Prisons answered favourably saying he would be happy to arrange any visits to prisons in order to refute any allegations.
6
Instead of arranging such a visit, the delegation was shown a video presentation documenting the living standards in detention maintained at various prisons under the Egyptian authorities. Since the delegation was denied any access to any Egyptian detention facility, they were unable to investigate the assertions made by the Minister of Prisons. These assertions however are directly contradicted by the accounts gathered from witnesses, having been in the prisons in question. ***
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The accounts and eye-witness testimonies gathered by the delegation during this visit support the HRW findings published in their report, stating: “The Egyptian Authorities have continued to suppress dissent. While focused overwhelmingly on the country’s largest political opposition group, the Muslim Brotherhood, the authorities have also targeted other opposition groups and individuals. By their own figures, the authorities have arrested at least 22,000 people since July 3 rd, many on charges relating to their exercise of basic rights or for full membership in the Muslim Brotherhood, which was declared a terrorist organisation on December 25th 2013.� HRW has called upon the UN Human Rights Council member states to establish a commission of enquiry to investigate all human rights violations resulting from the mass killings. The delegation voiced its support for this recommendation. The delegation also calls upon the Law Society and other national Bar Associations to consider making representations to the relevant Egyptian authorities concerning reports of harassment, arbitrary arrest and detention of lawyers and human rights defenders for simply carrying out their professional duties and/or because of their political beliefs and religious affiliations. The delegation calls for an increased media coverage in every manner to inform the public on the human rights violations committed in Egypt and for the Belgian lawyers who formed part of the ICFR delegation to raise the necessary media attention. The delegation concluded from their visit to Egypt that the picture presented, which is not in any way refuted by the platitudes of government officials, is one of a police state determined to suppress any independent dissent and does not hesitate to use any of its ruthless methods in asserting its dominance and control.
7