On to the next chapter?

Human rights groups, at home and abroad, were in an uproar over the seven-year sentencing of prominent NGO figure Saadeddin Ibrahim. As the controversy seethes on, the sociology professor's case-file seems far from being closed, reports Nadia Abou El-Magd
Saadeddin Ibrahim
Egyptian, regional and international human rights organisations have said they were disturbed and dismayed by a State Security Court's decision on 21 May to send Saadeddin Ibrahim, a sociology professor at the American University in Cairo (AUC) and NGO activist, to prison for seven years. Editorials in the American press went further, using threatening language to condemn the verdict.
Prosecutor-General Maher Abdel-Wahed denied that Ibrahim or any of his colleagues had been subjected to any "extraordinary measures" and insisted that their trial had been fair.
Ibrahim, 62, who has both Egyptian and American citizenships, is the founder and director of the Ibn Khaldun Centre for Developmental Studies.
Ibrahim was arrested, and the Ibn Khaldun Centre closed, on 30 June. Ibrahim was detained for 40 days before being released on bail. The government charged Ibrahim and 27 others connected to the Ibn Khaldun Centre with several alleged crimes, including accepting foreign funds without government approval. After an earthquake hit Egypt in 1992 and relief aid poured into the country, a military decree banned accepting foreign donations without government permission. The foreign donor in question is the European Union, which provided money to promote political awareness and participation in Egypt's general elections. Other charges included compiling false reports about the status of Copts in Egypt; attempting to embezzle money; and making plans to bribe radio and television officials to broadcast programmes about the Ibn Khaldun Centre.
The trial began last November.
The European Union audit published at the time declared that "there is no misuse of funds."
And two days after the ruling, Gunnar Wiegand, a spokesman for the European Union's Executive Commission, said: "The European Commission is seriously disturbed by this development." He added that "we strongly question the State Security Court's line of judging the financial propriety of the voter education programmes and are very worried to see an Egyptian court finding that EU financial support to promote democracy and human rights constitutes a criminal offence."
Egyptian and Arab human rights groups called for the release of Ibrahim, and said that they were "shocked and deeply disturbed" arguing that the ruling was based on flawed emergency legislation. In a joint statement, six human rights organisations said that they believe that the arrest and trial of Ibrahim and his colleagues were "a continuation of the state's hostile policies against civil institutions in Egypt with the intention of silencing all institutions that try to participate effectively in public action."
The six groups are: The Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies, the Hisham Mubarak Law Centre, the Human Rights Centre for the Assistance of Prisoners, the Egyptian Organisation for Human Rights (EOHR), the Arab Centre for the Independence of the Judiciary and Al Nadim Centre for the Rehabilitation of Victims of Violence.
Attorney Negad El-Borai, a member of the board of trustees of the EOHR, believes that the verdict is a message to Egyptian civil society. "Egypt is no longer a suitable place for NGO and human rights activities," El-Borai told Al-Ahram Weekly. "The government insists on considering and treating human rights organisations as political opposition," he added.
In a separate statement, the Arab Organisation for Human Rights, a regional group which Ibrahim helped found in 1983, said it would assist Ibrahim's lawyers in making preparations for contesting the judgement before the Court of Cassation, which is the only court where rulings of the Supreme State Security Court can be appealed.
Ibrahim's lawyer, Ibrahim Saleh, told the Weekly that he has no plans to submit a petition for clemency to President Mubarak but will take the case to the Court of Cassation. "I am 100 per cent sure that this judgement will be overruled," he said.
The US-based Human Rights Watch and the UK-based Amnesty International condemned the verdict by saying: "We fear that the decision to convict [Ibrahim] had already been made prior to the conclusion of the trial."
Mahfouz El-Ansari, board chairman of the Middle East News Agency (MENA), wrote that if some American circles consider Ibrahim to be "an American hero, for sure he is not an Egyptian hero at all, he is not a hero, period."
According to El-Ansari, there were reports that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon instructed his foreign minister to express Israel's "shock" at the ruling to the Egyptian chargé d'affaires in Tel-Aviv. But Eyellet Yehiav, spokesperson of the Israeli Embassy in Cairo, told the Weekly: "It never happened. PM Sharon has not complained about Saadeddin Ibrahim's judgement or anything to the Egyptians."
According to El-Ansari, the American media "should have first explained to their readers the reasons why they imposed an information blackout on what is taking place in the Palestinian territories and the war unleashed by one side, using all kinds of weapons, against an unarmed people."
Mohamed El-Sayed Said, deputy director of the Al-Ahram Centre for Political and Strategic Studies, said that "any statement that contains an allusion to America and Israel is now used to condemn Saadeddin [Ibrahim] and to promote the government." He argued that the government is using the West's declared support for Ibrahim as a "proof of its nationalism and independence." But he added: "Why do they have to prove that at the expense of justice?" Said considered the whole affair "a tragedy but it is not the end of life."
A spokesman of the US State Department said on 21 May that the United States government is deeply troubled by the outcome of the trial. A spokesman for the US Embassy in Cairo added: "We have some concerns about the process that resulted in this sentence. While the embassy declines to comment on the specifics of the court's sentencing of Dr Saadeddin Ibrahim, we have consistently stated our concern that the rule of law be respected in this case and that the outcome of the trial bring credit to Egypt's judicial system. The embassy shares the concern of those in the international community who question the conviction of an internationally-recognised advocate of civil society and democratic reform in the region."
For the American press, however, the ruling seemed an occasion for a virulent campaign, which local supporters of Ibrahim believe to be motivated much more by the Egyptian government's position vis-a-vis Israel than any real concern for democracy and human rights in the country.
The Washington Post wondered in an editorial entitled An Insult from Cairo why Egypt "thought it was worth delivering this slap in the face to a superpower ally that has backed this government for 20 years." The editorial urged the American administration and Congress to prove to Egypt that the jailing of Ibrahim would be reflected on the $2 billion a year in aid.
"It is hard to avoid the conclusion that Mr Ibrahim was selectively prosecuted for political reasons," said a New York Times editorial entitled Injustice in Egypt.
Columnist Thomas Friedman, also writing in the New York Times, considered the trial to be a "sham" and a "travesty," which is "tarnishing Egypt's image." In his article entitled Tarnished Pyramids, Friedman wrote that if the Egyptian government "is ashamed of him [Ibrahim] because he 'tarnished' their image, every American should be proud of him, because he burnishes ours."
A spokesman for the American Embassy said: "As we do in the case of any American imprisoned anywhere in the world, we are seeking regular consular visits to Dr Ibrahim and we remain in close contact with Dr Ibrahim's family."
Barbara Ibrahim, Ibrahim's wife, Randa, his daughter, and Ahmed, his brother, visited him at Torah prison last Friday after obtaining an exceptional permission from the prosecutor. The rule is that visits are permissible only after one month has passed since the handing down of the ruling. According to Barbra Ibrahim, "He is still in a state of shock and sadness for the lack of deliberation before issuing the sentence. But his spirits are strong and he is prepared to pursue his rights by challenging the judgement in the Court of Cassation."
She quoted Ibrahim as saying that conditions in his prison are "very proper." Although he looked rested, "his nervous condition deteriorated," she said. Ibrahim expressed concern about the rest of his colleagues and their families, she said.
On the fierce editorials in the Western press supporting him, Ibrahim said that "they don't make me happy, but we didn't bring this on Egypt; it was done by the government."
"I don't think we've seen the last chapter of this story yet," said Barbra Ibrahim. "We are witnessing the chapter before last."
Recommend this page
Related stories:
Seven years 24 - 30 May 2001
Presumptions of guilt and innocence 10 - 16 May 2001
Case for the defence 19 - 25 April 2001
The state versus Ibrahim 22 - 28 February 2001
Who's who at Ibrahim's trial 25 - 31 January 2001
Prosecution case under fire 18 - 24 January 2001
As long as it's fair 23 - 29 November 2000
NGO case un-closed 28 Sep. - 4 Oct. 2000
Free at last 17 - 23 August 2000
Waiting on the facts 10 - 16 August 2000
Piling up the charges 20 - 26 July 2000
Prominent NGO figure arrested 6 - 12 July 2000
© Copyright Al-Ahram Weekly. All rights reserved
Send a letter to the Editor