Source: Human Rights Watch
(Beirut) – An Egyptian court’s ban on the activities of the 6 April
Movement is a clear violation of citizens’ rights to free association,
peaceful assembly, and free expression. Rather than enforce the ruling
against the youth opposition movement, authorities should dedicate
themselves to overturning it in court.
Egypt’s
Court of Urgent Matters ruled on April 28, 2014 in response to a
lawsuit filed by a lawyer, Ashraf Said. The suit called on the interim
authorities to freeze the protest movement’s activities on the grounds
that it allegedly engaged in espionage and defamed Egypt’s image abroad.
Authorities can potentially use the ruling to criminalize a range of
activities well within the limits of peaceful opposition, Human Rights
Watch said.
“Banning political dissent won’t make it go away,” said Joe Stork,
deputy Middle East and North Africa director at Human Rights Watch. “A
judge’s gavel can’t turn back the clock to before 2011.”
The court’s ruling marked a further escalation in the government’s
campaign against all peaceful opposition, Human Rights Watch said. Two
of the group’s founding members, Ahmed Maher and Mohammed Adel, and a
third activist, Ahmed Douma, are serving three-year sentences issued in
December 2013 for demonstrating against a repressive protest law and assaulting police officers. On April 7, a court rejected their appeal.
The 6 April Movement, which emerged on that date to support a 2008
industrial strike in the Nile Delta town of Mahalla al-Kubra, was a key
player in organizing the January 25, 2011, mass protests that prompted
the ouster of Hosni Mubarak from Egypt’s presidency.
Said told the government-owned newspaper Al-Ahram that
recorded phone calls among leading 6 April members aired on the
television talk show “Black Box” in December 2013 inspired him to file
the lawsuit. The host, ‘Abd al-Rahim ‘Ali, claimed he had more than
5,000 such recordings that proved the youth opposition group was
“conspiring against state institutions.” Whatever the legality of the
wiretaps, their release to the media clearly violated the activists’
right to privacy, as protected by the Egyptian constitution and
international law.
The 6 April Movement’s popularity rocketed among Egypt’s youth after
Mubarak stepped down. Since then government-friendly media and, at
times, the government itself, have repeatedly accused 6 April of, for
example, sedition and working with “foreign hands” against Egypt. In
July 2011, the group took to the media to ask Egypt’s general prosecutor
to investigate it to clear it of allegations of any wrongdoing after
the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, which took power following
Mubarak’s fall, claimed that the group was engaged in “suspicious
schemes that seek to sow division between the armed forces and the
people.”
After supporting the Muslim Brotherhood’s Mohamed Morsy in his
successful 2012 presidential election campaign, the 6 April Movement
backed the June 30, 2013 mass protests that encouraged the military to
remove Morsy from the presidency. As Egypt’s human rights crisis
worsened under the military-backed government, the group returned to
opposition, and again became the target of a media rumor campaign.
Egypt’s protest law,
as amended by presidential order on November 24, 2013, empowers
security officials to ban protests on vague grounds, allows police
officers to forcibly disperse any protest if even a single protester so
much as throws a stone, and sets heavy prison sentences for offenses
such as attempting to “influence the course of justice.” The law also
gives the Interior Ministry the right to ban any meeting “of a public
nature” of more than 10 people in a public place, including meetings
related to electoral campaigning.
In a March 3 letter from Torah prison,
just south of Cairo, the 6 April founder Maher urged fellow activists
to tell the world that “the police display brutality every day, and
there is no one who can stop them from murdering us in our cells if they
want to. Tell them that there is no protection today nor tomorrow, and
tell them that whoever is silent about it today will face worse
tomorrow.”
“Years of vilification did not silence the youth who risked their lives
for a more democratic Egypt, and this ruling won’t either,” Stork said.
“Rather than enforcing this ban, authorities should be vigorously
defending the rights enshrined in Egypt’s constitution.”