This week, parliament’s Legislative and Constitutional Affairs Committee resumed discussions of changes to the 75-year-old Criminal Procedures Law. The committee held meetings on Sunday, Monday, and Tuesday to discuss the draft 540-article law amid criticism from the Press Syndicate and the Bar Association.

A statement issued by the Bar Association said preparations for the draft law had been inadequate and had not included a comprehensive dialogue in legal circles which would have allowed judges, lawyers, professors of law and concerned civil society organisations to have a say. The statement added that the draft gives excessive powers to police officers and imposes restrictions on lawyers defending clients before courts.

Mahmoud Al-Dawakhli, secretary-general of the association, said when discussion of the draft law started eight months ago the association had expressed reservations over eight articles.

“We wanted the draft law to be balanced in terms of not giving excessive powers to police officers at the expense of lawyers and fair trials,” said Al-Dawakhli, yet the draft allowed police officers to arrest lawyers and included provisions for “disciplinary trials”. 

Head of the Bar Association Abdel-Halim Allam said the majority of lawyers opposed the draft.

“The association has redrafted the eight articles and will send them to parliament’s Legislative and Constitutional Affairs Committee before the law is debated by MPs in plenary session in October,” said Allam. He argued that the eight articles could contravene the constitution which guarantees citizens the right to a fair trial.

After consultations with the committee and Minister of Parliamentary Affairs Mahmoud Fawzi, Article 356 of the draft law was amended to state that lawyers could face a “disciplinary investigation” rather than a “disciplinary trial” if they declined to defend an individual.

According to Allam, the draft does not give lawyers sufficient time to examine the list of charges against defendants.

“For a lawyer to defend an individual, they should be notified of all the charges at least three days ahead of the trial in order to have enough time to prepare a defence,” said Allam.

The current draft gives lawyers one day notice of charges.

Both the Press Syndicate and Bar Association complained that the draft does not go far enough in terms of restricting pretrial detention. It reduces the maximum period of pretrial detention for misdemeanours from six to four months, for felonies from 18 to 12 months, and for crimes that carry the death penalty or life imprisonment from 24 to 18 months.

According to a statement by the Press Syndicate, a separate law regulating pretrial detention is needed “to show that the political authorities believe in change and want to end arbitrary practices that have contributed to deepening the country’s social crisis and created a gap in confidence between the authorities and journalists.”

Mohamed Bassal, head of the Press Syndicate’s Freedoms Committee, said the arbitrary use of pretrial detention in recent years had led to dozens of journalists being held in custody for indefinite periods of time. Under the current law, said Bassal, authorities regularly detain those accused beyond the pretrial detention duration limit.

“The new law should oblige authorities to release people as soon as the pretrial detention period ends. That way, detention becomes a precautionary measure rather than punishment,” said Bassal.

The syndicate’s statement described the Criminal Procedures Law as the backbone of Egypt’s judicial system, and noted that “it must guarantee that citizens face fair trials and can exercise their rights during judicial proceedings.”

Press Syndicate Chairman Khaled Al-Balshi singled out Article 267 of the draft for restricting the freedom of journalists to cover trials. Article 267 prohibits journalists from publishing information about trials without first securing written permission from the presiding judge and Public Prosecution. It also bans journalists from publishing any information about judges, prosecution members, witnesses and defendants during trials involving charges of terrorism.

Mohamed Bassal said Article 267 effectively strips citizens of the right to know about court proceedings.

MP and journalist Mohamed Abdel-Aziz submitted a request to the committee asking that Article 267 be removed from the draft. The request was approved by Minister Fawzi who said there was no need for the article since the reporting of trials is already regulated by the Penal Code and the Media Regulation Law.

At the end of Monday’s discussion, head of the House’s Legislative and Constitutional Affairs Committee Ibrahim Al-Heneidi said he feared the objections raised by the Press Syndicate and the Bar Association would undermine public confidence in the new law and denied “allegations” that the law gives police officers sweeping search and arrest powers.

“The law complies with Article 58 of the constitution which states that police officers can only search, inspect, monitor, or eavesdrop on homes after obtaining a judicial warrant specifying the place, the time and the purpose of their actions.”

Al-Heneidi added that the draft restricts the questioning and investigation of suspects to prosecution authorities and, in line with the 2014 constitution, does not allow the questioning or trial of defendants in the absence of a lawyer.

* A version of this article appears in print in the 5 September, 2024 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly