The Supreme Administrative Court’s State Commissioners Authority recommended the Muslim Brotherhood be dissolved due to its shaky legal status, according to state-owned Akhbar al-Youm’s website Wednesday.
The body announced its decision in a court report as part of a trial calling for a 1954 law banning the Muslim Brotherhood to be struck from the books.
The lawsuit was originally filed by the late Omar al-Telmesny, the Brotherhood’s former supreme guide. He claimed the Revolutionary Command Council resolution issued in 1954 to dissolve the Muslim Brotherhood was unjust and that the group’s confiscated funds should be given back.
The case was passed to Mohamed Hamed Abul Nasr, also a former Brotherhood supreme guide, and leading member Tawfiq Al-Shawi, who challenged the decision in a case before the Supreme Administrative Court. However, both men also died before any ruling was made.
The report said the Brotherhood does not have the appropriate legal status to demand anything before the courts and should therefore be dissolved.
The same lawsuit had already been thrown out by the Cairo Administrative Court in 1992 due to the group’s questionable legal status. The Administrative Court had also ruled that the Constitution ratified in 1956 protected decisions made by Revolutionary Command Council against legal action.
In addition, the body said the case should be thrown out due to the interruption of litigation, since the original plaintiffs have all passed away, and the fact that the decree is protected by the 1956 Constitution.
In response to the ruling, Abdel Moneim Abdel Maqsoud, the Muslim Brotherhood's lawyer, said the group is registered as a civil association in accordance with current legislation.
He told Al-Masry Al-Youm Wednesday that the report issued by the State Commissioners Authority was “inopportune,” since it was issued on an old case, adding that the group is “legitimate.”
He also speculated on the timing of the report, which comes amid “recent attacks on the Guidance Bureau and at a time when some seek to inflame violence and the target the group.”
He stressed that this case has nothing to do with the cases being ruled on next Tuesday. He also noted “there are judicial rulings confirming the legitimacy of the group,” however, he did not specify any such cases.