CAIRO: For many, the moment of Hosni Mubarak's resignation was the successful ending of a long fight for democracy. For others, it was just the beginning. Since February 11, the day Mubarak resigned, Egypt has been governed by the Supreme Council of Armed Forced (SCAF) led by Mohamed Hussein Tantawi, the former Defense Minister under Mubarak. While many people on the streets of Cairo want to leave the responsibility for a transition towards democracy to the military, others warn that relying on the SCAF for a transition towards democracy would inherently threaten the democratic potential of the revolution. An illustrative example of the ongoing violations of human rights in Egypt is the persistent inequality in Egypt's legal system, experts and activists argue. According to Human Rights Watch, more than 5,000 civilians have been tried before military tribunals since February; many of them were arrested during the peaceful protests on Tahrir square. Military trials handle between five and thirty people at a single trial, with each individual case lasting between 20 and 40 Minutes. Defendants before a military trial have no access to a lawyer of their own choosing; in many cases they have no access to a lawyer at all. Moreover, there have been repeated reports of torture and arbitrary arrests by the military police. Ironically, the legal basis for these trials is Egypt's emergency law which has been in place since 1981. It authorizes the president to refer civilians to military trials. However, since power is now effectively in the hands of the military, thousands of civilians have been tried under the military law. Based on the legislative powers accorded to the army by the Constitutional Declaration of February 13, the army can amend the country's penal code. On March 1, the Egyptian army used its powers, adding the crime of ‘thuggery' to the list of crimes that fall under military law. Thuggery is vaguely defined as “displaying force or threatening to use force against a victim with the intention to intimidate him or to cause harm to his property,” a definition which could apply to large groups of the army as well. However, the infringements on human rights are not unchallenged. On the April 15, a conference titled “Against Trials for Civilians before Military Courts” was held in the popular Cairo neighborhood of Imbaba. The conference was attacked by an army officer and resulted in the injury of one person and the arrest of three people, among which a correspondent for the BBC. Rasha Azab is one of the people challenging the trial of civilians before military courts; she filed a case against the army. The military council's defense team responded by describing Azab´s case as an “attempt by inciters to ruin relationships between the people and the army.” Khaled Ali, Azab's lawyer responded: “Yes we incite people, and this should not be an accusation, we are revolutionaries who are trying to voice their concerns, and we should not forget that those inciters are the ones who toppled Mubarak's dictatorship.” The infringements on Human Rights are in sharp contrast with the legal rights that Egypt's former president Mubarak possesses. While thousands of peaceful protesters are tried before military courts, Mubarak enjoys the benefits of a Civilian Court. On the April 22, his detention was postponed for another 15 days due to health problems. Other leading members of the old regime, such as Dr. Ahmad El Sebai, the head of the Forensic Medical Authority responsible for covering up police torture have not been held accountable at all. The institutionalization of infringements on human rights suggests that the trial against Mubarak is only the sacrifice of a pawn while the authoritarian structures of his regime are persistent. BM
