The executive regulations of Law 84, the highly controversial NGOs Law, are finally out. Mariz Tadros gauges the reactions A fortnight ago, there was excitement in the air when Amina El-Guindy, the minister of social affairs, announced a press conference on the release of executive regulations related to NGO Law 84. Law 84 replaces Law 153, which was deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Constitutional Court in June 2000. At the conference, El-Guindy distributed a press release on the executive regulations. However, the relevant documents were conspicuously absent, making it rather difficult for journalists to ask questions. The executive regulations were officially released this week. At the press conference, El-Guindy announced that the executive regulations reflect "the Egyptian government's commitment to supporting voluntary civic work and removing any ambiguity or vagueness which some may have suffered in interpreting the law's articles." The executive regulations, El-Guindy affirmed, clearly guarantees the freedom to engage in all kinds of activities aimed at social development and explicitly mentions human rights. NGO activists interviewed by Al-Ahram Weekly, however, expressed reservations about the executive regulations. Hafez Abu Seda, secretary-general of the Egyptian Organisation for Human Rights (EOHR) said, "the executive regulations are a question of procedure, while the legislation is in the law itself, thus the executive regulations cannot overrule the government's power as laid down in the law." Abu Seda said that the way the law is implemented will rest largely on the goodwill of the government, which cannot always be depended upon. Most human rights activists agree that the executive regulations' definition of "restriction of engagement in political activity" is a positive development, with the definition of "political activity" being reduced in scope to mean advancing the interests of a political party and participation in election campaigns using NGO personnel or funds. Nasser Amin at the Arab Centre for the Independence of the Judiciary and the Legal Profession, believes that this definition will not inhibit NGOs from engaging in advocacy work. Nevertheless, he fears that prohibiting NGOs from "fighting for the rights of those engaged in a certain profession, sometimes against the will of employers" could be interpreted widely and negatively. "Our centre concerns itself with violations committed against lawyers and judges. It might be that a low level civil servant interprets that as taking the side of the legal profession, causing obstacles to our registration. This actually happened in the implementation of the last executive regulations, in which the Arab Lawyers' Union faced difficulties registering until a minister personally intervened." Mohamed El-Naggar, a human rights activist, argued that there are some positive clarifications, notably in resolving conflicts between the Ministry of Social Affairs (MOSA) and NGOs. However, should a dispute actually erupt, any two from four parties has to attend: a judge, an administrative representative, a representative from the Federation of NGOs, and an NGO representative. The executive regulations specify that it is crucial for the NGO to be one of the two attending parties, thus, increasing the NGO's representation. On the other hand, he conceded, the restrictions imposed by the law are still articulated in sufficiently loose terms so as to enable the ministry to apply them arbitrarily. One example is the ministry's right to liquidate an NGO at will, "Section 3 of Article 92 states that an NGO can be liquidated if it commits 'a grave violation against the law, public order or public morality'. What exactly is meant by this? How will this be applied?" asked El-Naggar. The executive regulations also give MOSA sweeping powers to collectively punish an NGO for mistakes committed by individuals. If the NGO board violates the law, the NGO is closed down rather than replacing the responsible individuals. El-Naggar also expressed reservations about Article 55 of the executive regulations, on account of its restrictive nature. Article 55 prohibits an NGO from joining a network except with MOSA's prior permission. MOSA requires NGOs to give them 60 days to approve the joining of any network. "First of all, it means that if NGOs are gathering at an international conference, and they decide to form a network, Egyptian NGOs cannot be founding members because they have to wait for the ministry's approval. Second, the executive regulations do not stipulate the criteria for accepting or rejecting an NGO's application to join a network. It is really at the mercy of the civil servant at the ministry to decide." He added that the executive regulations deny NGOs the right to protest or demand a reconsideration of their application for joining a network or seeking foreign funding. A MOSA decision is final. There are also discrepancies between what the executive regulations are claimed to be and what they offer in reality. For example, while the press release states that registration will be by notification, this is not the case. One of the NGO activists' main demands was that they are able to notify MOSA of their establishment, and if the latter has any reservation, it can take them to court. According to the executive regulations, the ministry has the right to reject an NGO's application for registration, if the NGO objects, it can take the matter to court. NGOs have eight months to apply for registration or face liquidation. "I believe human rights organisations will apply for registration because we have to work within the law, however, this does not stop us fighting against it," said Abu Seda. He also asserted that a committee for the defence of civil society will be formed to look into the legal obstacles facing NGOs during and after registration, and ultimately, to work to prove that the law is unconstitutional.
