As parliament passes the controversial Judicial Authority Law against the will of the judges the heated political climate doesn't look like cooling down any time soon, writes Amira Howeidy Zakaria Abdel-Aziz, president of the Judges' Club -- Egypt's independent and elected body of judges -- stood on a podium under the scorching midday sun last Friday, facing rows of judges and media representatives, waving a book in his hand. "This book, authored by the godfather of Egypt's judges," he said, "explains the importance of an independent judicial authority. We couldn't have done a better job explaining." The author, former vice president of the State Council Tarek El-Bishri, a celebrated figure in political and judicial circles, has been advocating civil disobedience to pressure for political reform throughout the past year. Recently he published an article arguing that the showdown between the judicial and executive authorities is a sign of the regime's "disintegration". Abdel-Aziz, speaking before an emergency general assembly of the Judges' Club, held two days before the ruling National Democratic Party (NDP)-controlled parliament passed the Judicial Authority law drawn up by the Ministry of Justice, said the law fails to meet 20-year-old demands for full judicial independence and enhances the executive's control over the judiciary. Nagi Derballa, deputy chairman of the Judges' Club, characterised the new law as meeting only "one per cent" of what judges had requested in a draft law they produced in 1991 and presented to the Ministry of Justice. Not only did the ministry snub their draft law, but drafted a new one behind their backs, refusing to show it to the Judges' Club until the cabinet approved it last week. The new law includes just two of the judges' demands -- granting budgetary independence from the Ministry of Justice, and de-affiliating the office of the prosecutor-general from the Justice Ministry. Yet the prosecutor-general will remain a presidential appointee, and the law stipulates no conditions for eligibility to the office. Derballa and other judges are now concerned with articles in the new law that aim at penalising dissident judges, and with others that strengthen the minister of justice's hand in forestalling judicial independence. Most significantly, though, the new law ignored the judges' demand to include a reference to the Judges Club. "What we fear most is that this omission means the government will in the future attempt to control and contain the club," Derballa told Al-Ahram Weekly. Particularly alarming, he said, are "malicious" statements made by parliament speaker Fathi Sorour and Minister of State for Parliamentary Affairs Moufid Shehab that the Judges Club is "not part of the judicial authority" and thus should not be included in the law. "What they're actually saying is that the club is like any syndicate or social club," said Derballa, "which deprives it of its independence and places it under government control." The Judges' Club was established in 1939, when Egypt was under British mandate. It is the only independent and elected body representing Egypt's 8000 judges. The club's general assembly refused to apply for registration under a new NGO law in 2003 because it does not view the club as an NGO because its members -Egypt's judges- represent a state authority. This left the club in a unique position, though its independent legal status may not be enough to protect it from future government efforts to control its activities. The Judges Club is the only network for judges that defends the independence of the judiciary and advocates the interests of the judges. "It's our second home," Abdel-Aziz told the Weekly. "If anything or anybody tries to take control of it away from us rest assured it will be over our dead bodies." The Judges' Club has been at the centre of the reform movement since May 2005, when its general assembly demanded full supervision of presidential and parliamentary elections in exchange for their cooperation. They also demanded that the Judicial Authority Law be revamped on the basis of their draft version. Their demands were ignored by the authorities, who went ahead with the elections under partial judicial supervision. The ploy backfired when, in an unprecedented move, several judges spoke out against blatant vote rigging and other illegal practices carried out by the NDP with the security apparatus's backing. As a result two senior judges, Hisham El-Bastawisi and Mahmoud Mekki, were referred to a disciplinary committee. Civil society rallied around the judges, who staged a three-week long sit in at the Judges Club, and the already high pressured political climate threatened to burst. The authorities responded by arresting over 600 pro-democracy activists who attended demonstrations in solidarity with the judges. While Mekki was finally cleared by the disciplinary panel, El-Bastawisi was reprimanded. It was against this backdrop that parliament approved the new law, which has so far met with silence from the judges. Speaking to the Weekly, El-Bishri argued that "their silence shouldn't be viewed as a sign of concession." The way in which the conflict has escalated over the past three months -- one judge was beaten and dragged from the platform by the police -- is, said Bishri, "unprecedented". The unity of the judges and civil society's solidarity with them "should not be underestimated in future battles such as [Gamal Mubarak's] succession efforts". Hossam Eissa, a respected law professor at Ain Shams University went further. The judges, "have demonstrated that they will be the sector that will prevent succession from materialising. They can still expose rigging or malpractises in any future election." The battle, he said, "is far from over." (see p.3)
