The nearly six-week judges-lawyers crisis may be coming to an end, reports Mona El-Nahhas After a heated hearing, the Tanta Appeals Court decided it will issue its verdict in the case of two lawyers convicted of assaulting a senior prosecutor in Tanta, on 5 September. The court said that the lawyers, Ihab Saeieddin and Mustafa Fattouh, convicted of assaulting Bassem Abul-Rous, will be remanded in custody until that date. Earlier last month, Saeieddin and Fattouh received a five-year jail term by a first degree criminal court in Tanta, a ruling which stirred a storm of protest among lawyers for more than a month. Sit-ins and a general work strike were staged in all Egypt's provinces by lawyers. The public sympathised with the two lawyers, viewing the ruling as harsh. The court gave its ruling on the same day as the first hearing was held without hearing the defence. The chairman of the Bar Association Council Hamdi Khalifa said measures taken during the trial conducted by the first degree criminal court were "null and void". However, during this week's trial, the situation had apparently changed for the better. Lawyers said the hearing was positive and would help restore the lawyers-judges relationship. The court panel appeared to sympathise with the demands of the defence team of the two lawyers. For the first time since the beginning of the trial, the prosecution announced that an investigation with Abul-Rous was continuing. Khalifa, who headed the defence team for the lawyers, sought to refer the case to the general prosecution once again to restart investigations. The Bar Association chairman also asked the court panel to halt all hearings until the investigation with Abul-Rous was complete, saying new facts may emerge. Although the court did not respond to Khalifa's request on Sunday, Islamist lawyer Montasser El-Zayat said the court may order a halt to the hearings anytime during the consultation period. Since the crisis erupted, lawyers have been pressing to conduct investigations with Abul- Rous who is said to have instigated the attack on their two colleagues. However, the general prosecution has given no response. In court, Saeieddin stressed that Abul-Rous had admitted his mistake to Ashraf Zahran, a member of the Cairo Judges Club. Sunday's hearing was held amid strict security measures. Streets leading to Tanta Court Complex were cordoned off. Around 30 armoured security trucks surrounded the court. Media men together with lawyers supporting Saeieddin and Fattouh were not allowed in court. Outside the court, around 200 lawyers called for the release of their colleagues on bail and to guarantee a fair trial. Angry shouts continued for two hours. The assembled lawyers hung banners summing up their demands. Ibrahim Elias, a member of the Bar Association Council, hailed the step taken by the prosecution regarding conducting investigations with Abul-Rous. Elias viewed such a step as a "good sign that would indicate a near settlement to the crisis". Elias stated that his syndicate will soon order a halt to all protests, including the six-week-long work stoppage. El-Zayat said harmony between the court panel and the lawyers' defence team prevailed during Sunday's trial. He expected that results would be "very promising if such a positive mood between the two sides of justice continued". The optimistic statements voiced by lawyers following Sunday's hearing have led many to believe that lawyers received promises that their colleagues would be freed at the final 5 September session. "From the very beginning, we called upon both sides to abide by the law which should have the final say," said Rifaat El-Sayed, chairman of the Assiut Judges Club. "This is the only solution to the current problem which erupted between the two partners of justice," El-Sayed noted. "Today, everyone showed a complete respect of the law and its rulings," El-Sayed said, hailing the "reasonable stand" adopted by lawyers during Sunday's trial. According to El-Sayed, the whole issue should be left to the court which should not be pressured while hearing the case. Viewing the matter as an attack on the dignity of the judiciary, judges have been turning down any midway proposals which would affect the trial, insisting that appealing to the law was the only way to reach a settlement.
