Egypt and the entire world witnessed yesterday the end of ex-president Hosni Mubarak's unprecedented trial. Mubarak and his ex-minister of interior were given life sentences for their criminal role in the killing of demonstrators during the January 25 revolution. Mubarak's two sons were acquitted of charges concerning illicit gains and financial irregularities. Six of the ex-minister of interior's aides were acquitted for lack of evidence. The verdict announced by Chief Justice Ahmed Refaat led to mixed reactions across the country. The families of the revolution's martyrs, youth movements and a group of political activists declared that Mubarak and his alleged accomplices should have given death sentences. The verdict was praised at home and abroad for deepening the integrity and the independence of the Egyptian judiciary. Everybody, whether they agree with or frown at Chief Justice Ahmed Refaat's ruling, should appreciate the undeniable fact that Mubarak is the first-ever Egyptian ruler, who was overthrown by his people and put on trial while still alive. In other words, Muabrak's trial has put a dramatic end to a centuries-old tradition, in which an oppressive monarch, a sultan, a caliph or an emir would be posthumously put on trial by the historians. The Pharaohs and royal members survived the anger of their people; potential trials were left to historians and analysts. The most severe sentence was limited to image-damaging and harsh criticism regarding a ruler's policies and integrity. Taking the controversies and disputes provoked by the outcome of Mubarak's trial into consideration, the so-called political elite and intelligentsia should bear their responsibility and explain the importance of respecting the supremacy of law and the time-honoured values of the Egyptian judiciary to the Egyptian people. Mubarak's trial and verdict are writing a new chapter in the bright history of Egypt's judiciary. [email protected]
