312/05 : INTERIGHTS and the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights /
Egypt1
Summary of Facts
1. The complaint is filed by the International Centre for [the Legal Protection of] Human Rights
2
(INTERIGHTS) , and the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights pursuant to Articles 55 and Article
56 of the African Charter.
2. The authors allege that the victim under the present communication is a religious training Egyptian
graduate of Al-Azhar University in Cairo, Egypt, who continuously sought to challenge the legality of
th
his arrest after being arrested from his home on 18 of May 2003 without being given [any] reason but
due to presumably his unpublished religious researches refuting the often held opinions of the ‘duty of
Muslims to kill converts from Islam to other religions’ and ‘prohibition on Muslim women marrying nonMuslim men’ which was distributed widely. Despite his several appeals and official complaints and the
repeated release orders of the Emergency Court, the victim [is still] in prison. They further alleged that
[the] Applicant has been made subject to assaults and harassments consequent to his arrest, and his
complaints to get protection and investigation proved futile.
3. The authors submit that the Applicant’s rights have been violated under
Articles 2, 5, 6, 7(1)(d), 8 and 9(2) of the [African] Charter as he was discriminated against in his
enjoyment of Charter rights on the basis of his religious beliefs; inhumanely detained and denied the
protection and respect of the right to dignity; arbitrarily arrested and detained and denied effective
judicial remedy; and arbitrarily restricted to exercise his freedom to express his religious thoughts.
4. It is further alleged that the violations of the applicant’s rights have been made possible by the
Respondent State’s State of Emergency which the African Commission has had, on a number of
occasions, the opportunity of to consider and emphasis[es] that the Charter does not permit States to
derogate from their responsibilities during states of emergency, and that this is “an expression of the
principle that the restriction of human rights is not a solution to national difficulties”.
5. The authors averred that each time the Emergency Court has ordered the applicant’s release the
Minister for Interior, Mr Habib El-Adli, has issued a new administrative detention decree under Article 3
of the Emergency Law which allows the President, or the Minster for the Interior to order, orally or in
writing, the arrest and detention of those who ‘pose a threat to public security’.
6. The authors also alleged that the applicant has appealed his detention several times before the
State Security Emergency Court, the only and final judicial body designated for that purpose under the
Emergency Law, and the same court has passed seven orders for his release but none of them have
been implemented. In addition the authors alleged that the Applicant has submitted five complaints to
the State Security Prosecutor’s Office and ten complaints to the National Council of Human Rights but
no response has been received.
Complaint
7. The authors of this communication contend that Applicant’s arbitrary arrest and detention, his
subsequent treatment under detention, the failure of the Government of Egypt to provide the former
with adequate and effective judicial remedy, and the manner in which the 24-year long State of
Emergency has been applied in practice violates Articles 2, 5, 6, 7(1)(d), 8 and 9(2)of the Charter.
Procedure
8. The present communication was received by the Secretariat of the African Commission on the
nd
22 of November 2005.
9. The Secretariat of the [African] Commission acknowledged receipt of the communication to the
contact persons of the INTERIGHTS and the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights under letter
th
ACHPR/LPROT/COMM/ 312/2005/RK of 29 November 2005, and informed the same that the
communication will be the [African] Commission’s agenda for consideration at seizure stage at the
th
38 Ordinary Session of the [African] Commission which is being held from 21st November 2005 to
th
5 December 2005 in Banjul, The Gambia.
th
10. During its 38 Ordinary Session, the African Commission considered the communication and
decided to be seized thereof.
th
11. On 19 December 2005, the Secretariat informed the parties of this decision, transmitted a copy
of the complaint to the Respondent State and requested both parties to send in their arguments on
admissibility.
th
12. On 16 February 2006, the Complainant forwarded its arguments on admissibility of the case.
th
13. On 29 March 2006, the Secretariat acknowledged receipt of the arguments and forwarded them
to the Respondent State whose rejoinder was requested within three months.
th
14. By letter dated 19 May 2006, the complainant informed the African Commission that the alleged
victim, Mr Methwalli Ibrahim Methwalli, was released and was requesting that the complaint be
withdrawn.
th
th
th
15. During its 39 Ordinary Session that took place from 11 to 25 May 2006 in Banjul, The
Gambia, the African Commission considered the complaint and heard the parties. On that occasion,
the Complainant reiterated his wish to withdraw the complaint.
Decision of the African Commission
Consequently, the African Commission decides to strike out this communication.
Footnotes
th
1. Egypt ratified the African Charter on the 20 March 1984.
2. International Centre for [the Legal Protection of] Human Rights (INTERIGHTS) is a non-governmental
th
organisation which was granted Observer Status with the African Commission during the 18 Ordinary Session in
October 1990.