Egypt’s human rights record came under fire from a number of countries as Egypt sat yesterday in Geneva for for its Universal Periodic Review (UPR), a United Nations mechanism by which countries’ human rights records are evaluated and other countries offer recommendations. Egypt was criticized for the prevalence of torture, discrimination, limited freedom of expression, and the emergency law.
The Universal Periodic Review was established in 2006 by the United Nations General Assembly to evaluate countries’ human rights records through deliberations between the country in question, which submits its own report on its human rights record, and other state delegations. The Egyptian delegation was headed by Minister of State for Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Moufid Shehab.
Egypt’s report on its human rights record was compiled by the National Council for Human Rights, an organization established by the government in 2003. The report presented Egypt’s human rights record in a positive light and noted the success of the implementation of the law.
But critical interventions from other state delegations marred Egypt’s self-portrayal as a champion of human rights. Ending the state of the emergency law, in force since 1981 and frequently used to justify arbitrary security practices, was at the heart of the interventions of the French, Spanish, Belgian, German, Austrian, and American delegations.
In its report, Egypt explained that the extension of the emergency law is a response to terrorism threats and is used only under exceptional circumstances. Military tribunals, another aspect of the emergency law, operate with fair trials, according to the Egyptian report. Those tribunals are used in terrorism cases and, more recently, with members of the Muslim Brotherhood, the country’s largest opposition bloc.
Egypt pledged in the report to accelerate working on a replacement for the emergency law, namely a “balanced” anti-terror law. Norway requested that this new law provide for human rights protection.
Torture was a recurring concern for the states on the review panel. France called for the amendment of the definition of torture in the penal code, repeating a pledge made by Egypt in its report. The law currently only defines torture as force used to extract confessions. France and the Czech Republic asked Egypt to join the Torture Protocol and end the death penalty.
The Czech Republic also called for a review of press laws, guaranteeing the protection of journalists and bloggers. Ireland, Germany and Mexico made recommendations pertaining to the amendment of the press laws to provide for more freedom of expression. Israel called for the end of intimidation of journalists and lawyers.
Discrimination was another recurring theme. The Czech Republic asked for ending the criminalization of homosexuals and people living with HIV/AIDS, while France called for lifting Egypt’s reservations on the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women and ending domestic and sexual violence. The Netherlands also called for the amendment of the Personal Status Law to limit discrimination against women.
The Austrian delegation called for strong action against sectarian violence and discrimination on the basis of religion, referencing last month’s shooting in the Upper Egyptian town of Naga Hammadi that left six Copts and one Muslim dead and was widely attributed to sectarian tensions. The American delegation said it welcomed the current State Security trial on this incident and called for an end to impunity for those who commit violence against Christians.
Elimintating discrimination on religious and sexual bases was also at the crux of Canada and Brazil’s interventions, the latter specifying that discrimination against Christians and Bahais should end.
Egypt’s report detailed different rights referenced in the recommendations and ways in which they are upheld through the law. Egypt’s report on itself said that the law ensures political and civil rights, freedom of expression, freedom of religion, personal security, the right to a free trial, and the right to be free of discrimination. The report defended Egypt’s practices in all those areas.
The report also praised Egypt’s allocation for social and economic rights, women’s rights, children’s rights, and physically and mentally challenged people’s rights. In its final three pages, the report admitted challenges to the human rights environment in Egypt such as terrorism, lack of a "rights culture," and persistant economic constraints.
According to Hossam Bahgat, director of the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights who is attending the review in Geneva, and reporting about the meeting’s details on the organization website, “Interventions by Arab countries have clearly been prepared in consultation with the Egyptian government and all recommendations are to continue positive efforts or to take steps in the field of economic and social rights.”
Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui, Amnesty International’s Middle East and North Africa deputy director, who was also present in Geneva, said, “It was a civilized quite open debate, but recommendations were quite vague. What is important now is to see what Egypt’s response will be in tomorrow’s session.”
On Friday, Egypt will announce its position on the different recommendations put forth. “What was disappointing is that economic and social rights did not figure prominently in recommendations, such as people living in slums, which is a highly critical situation,” Sahraoui told Al-Masry Al-Youm.
Besides offering a short constitutional history of Egypt, highlighting liberties, the report chronicled different state instruments that safeguard human rights. The judiciary is cited as the first instrument, followed by different bodies such as the National Council for Human Rights, the National Council for Women, the National Council for Childhood and Motherhood.
“Egypt was extremely legalistic in its approach, but we all know the reality,” said Sahraoui. “The discussion was detached from the reality of human rights in Egypt. But we recognize that Egypt has been making an effort to prepare for the Universal Periodic Review. The most important thing is the implementation of recommendations and the treatment of this experience as the beginning of a process and not the end of it."
