Just two days after the endorsement of the controversial protest law, security forces on Tuesday afternoon arrested 52 political activists who were staging a protest outside the Shura Council against a constitutional article allowing civilians to be tried before military courts. The police used water cannons and tear gas to disperse the rally which broke up in a few minutes. A statement issued by the Interior Ministry said the protesters did not inform Qasr Al-Nil police station ahead of the demonstration, as stipulated by the law. According to the statement, the protesters refused to take the step. “The law will be applied to all protesters regardless of their political affiliations,” the statement said. Reacting to the arrest of the protesters, hundreds of angry demonstrators gathered at Talaat Harb Square, criticising the loss of the gains made by two revolutions in the past three years. Police fired tear gas to disperse them, deploying armoured vehicles in the square. The Talaat Harb protesters re-grouped at nearby Sabri Abu Alam Street and set fire to tires in the middle of the street. The police vehicles disappeared from the perimeters of Talaat Harb allowing hundreds of protesters to re-occupy the area, chanting “the Ministry of Interior are thugs”. At least 10 members of the 50-member committee assigned with drafting the constitution suspended their membership until the detained protesters were released. Amr Moussa, head of the 50-member committee, contacted Prime Minister Hazem Al-Beblawi and called for the release of the protesters. Most of the committee members viewed the law as being unconstitutional. On Sunday interim President Adli Mansour -- amid wide opposition from political figures -- approved the protest law which aims at regulating demonstrations and public protests. Human rights activists and a number of political parties denounced the legislation as a reversal of gains achieved following the removal of Hosni Mubarak as president in the popular revolution of 2011. The main target of the law, the Muslim Brotherhood, was most daring in its defiance. It said it not only rejected a law issued by a president it does not recognise but would continue to hold protests on a nearly daily basis, as the group has been doing since the removal of former president Mohamed Morsi on 3 July. The Brotherhood-led National Alliance in Defence of Legitimacy issued a statement on Tuesday calling for large demonstrations to begin immediately and peak on Friday 29 November, all without the permits from the Interior Ministry required under the new law. “The rebellious people have overthrown the law born in the dens of dictatorship and destruction banning demonstrations,” said an alliance statement. “Free men and women have stepped on it with their feet and continue to do so through thousands of events they plan to organise after this cowardly announcement was made by an illegal president and an illegal government that does not represent anyone but themselves…” Following the violent dispersal on 14 August of the Rabaa Al-Adaweya and Nahda sit-ins convened by Morsi's supporters to protest his removal, interim President Mansour declared a state of emergency. Since it ended on 14 November the government has faced pressure by security bodies and hardline opponents of the Brotherhood to provide the Interior Ministry with a legal basis for the continued clampdown on demonstrations. A first draft of the law released a month ago by Prime Minister Hazem Al-Beblawi led to an outcry from human rights groups, revolutionary youth organisations and several political parties, including the Egyptian Social Democratic Party, Dostour, the Popular Alliance and the Popular Trend. The first draft demanded that those seeking to organise demonstrations apply for permission from the Interior Ministry at least a week in advance. It banned sit-ins, created an up to 300 metre protest free cordon around a seemingly arbitrary array of buildings, imposed harsh penalties for defiance or any violations, and allowed the use of lethal force by police. Opponents said post-Mubarak legislation should expand and protect basic freedoms such as the right to assemble and demonstrate peacefully and not attempt to restrict them. Egypt, they argued, already has an arsenal of laws capable of dealing with all eventualities and was not in need of additional restrictive legislation. In response to the outrage caused by the first draft, Al-Beblawi ordered his deputy, Ziad Bahaaeddin, to consult with critics and work on a new draft. Three weeks later the prime minister's office said a redrafted law had been handed to Mansour and was awaiting ratification. Under the constitutional declaration announced by Mansour on 8 July, a week after Morsi's removal, in the absence of an elected parliament the interim president is the only party with the right to issue laws. The new draft was not made public, fuelling concerns that any changes would be cosmetic. Such worries have proved well-founded. While the period to notify the Interior Ministry of any intention to hold a demonstration has been shortened from seven days to three the ministry retains the right to refuse. It must also receive notice of the names of the organisers, the route of the protest, its scheduled beginning and end times, and even details of the slogans that will be chanted. The final draft released by Mansour defined a demonstration as “any gathering of more than 10 individuals”. “Participants in public meetings, rallies or demonstrations are prohibited from violating security and public order, disrupting production or calling for that, disrupting public facilities, preventing citizens from carrying out their rights and businesses, closing roads or disrupting public transportation services, and attacking lives, public and private property or endangering them,” says the law. It also bans protest gatherings in houses of worship. The National Human Rights Council warns the law could be used to break up labour strikes though the right to withdraw labour is expected to be guaranteed in the new constitution and is enshrined in a number of international conventions to which Egypt is a signatory. The new law also allows “the interior minister or assigned police chief, in cases in which the security bodies have received information or evidence before the date set for the demonstration that there could be a threat to peace and security, to… ban the public meeting or demonstration, or postpone it, transfer it to another place, or change its route… Organisers can appeal such decisions in front of the Administrative Court, and a judge must rule on the case immediately.” The law also allows demonstrations to be forcibly dispersed if the “field commander decides a crime has been committed or the peaceful nature of the protest violated”. Hafez Abu Seada, president of the Egyptian Organisation for Human Rights and a member of the National Human Rights Council, says the text of the law has been left deliberately vague to allow security bodies a final say on what constitutes a “threat to peace and security” or a “violation of the peaceful nature of the protest”. The draconian penalties specified by the law, he adds, are “needless” given that the statute books are already filled with legislation intended to tackle the same crimes the new law is claimed to address. The revised law continues to impose a cordon around government buildings and essential facilities though no distance is now specified and it is up to the authorities — police chiefs and, for the first time, governors — to demarcate areas where public demonstrations can take place. Under the new law anyone carrying a weapon during protests can be imprisoned for up to seven years and fined between LE100,000 and LE300,000. Anyone engaging in an act of violence during protests, can be imprisoned for up to two years and a fined between LE50,000 and LE100,000. Wearing a mask during the protest with the aim of committing a crime can be punished with up to one year and a fine ranging between LE30,000 and LE50,000. “This is the Mubarak-era security mentality,” says Zizo Abdu, a member of the 6 April Democratic Front. “Faced with a problem, their response is not to tackle the causes but to issue a law increasing the penalties against anyone who protests their inability to deal with the problem. It is a strategy that has never solved anything and that has failed to prevent people from protesting and demanding their rights.”
