Egypt: Commissioner's Advisory Report Revisited

Last October, Egypt's State Council's Commissioner released his report in preparation for the November and then the final 16 December 2006 Supreme Administrative Court session which was to decide on the fate of the Baha'is of Egypt.

In order to provide some background information and in light of the recently posted article published in the Daily Journal by John E. Noyes, it may be timely to revisit the October post which addressed the Commissioner's report. It is interesting indeed to reflect back on that report as it might help us understand how the Supreme Administrative Court had reached its decision.

More recently, a French lawyer writing for a legal blog named New Legal World Order published a three part article analysing Egypt's Supreme Court's decision regarding the Egyptian Baha'is. The posts can be seen here, here and here. Of note, the Egyptian legal system is based on the French system, and the State's Commissioner position and duties are quite similar in both countries, except that--based on the analysis of this case--Egypt's Commissioner did not appear to act independently and without bias as he is supposed to, and as mandated by French jurisprudence.

To be brief, it is clear that Egypt's Supreme Administrative Court accepted the State Commissioner's report on its face and had based its entire case and arguments on that report. It dismissed most procedural arguments from the plaintiff (government appellant) and entirely ignored the defendants' (Baha'is) legal arguments. It simply repeated word for word the commissioner's report which was essentially a verbatim reproduction of opinions from previous court cases involving the Baha'is over the preceding decades.

The following is a re-publication of the October post, with added comments (in red) pointing to how the case had panned out:

In preparation for Egypt's Supreme Administrative Court session scheduled for 20 November 2006, the long-awaited government Commissioner's Advisory Report that was requested by the court was released on Thursday, 12 October 2006, and a summary of the report was published in Rose el-Yousef newspaper yesterday. The 24 page report, as expected, supported the opinions of the appellants, i.e. the Ministry of Interior and the other government agencies who had appealed the lower Administrative Court's ruling which granted the Baha'is their right to indicate their religion on government-issued official documents.

It is not surprising that this clearly biased and one-sided report repeats the exact same illogical and unjustified statements and conclusions that have been circulating among the Egyptian fundamentalist establishment for many years.

In brief, it concluded that since the Baha'i Faith is not recognized in Egypt as a "divine religion," therefore its followers in that land have no rights whatsoever and that they simply do not exist! Consequently, they concluded that Egypt's Constitutional guarantees of freedom of belief and religion do not apply to the Baha'is. That Egypt is not bound to its commitment as a cosignatory to the United Nations Universal Declaration on Human Rights, and that the Baha'is, in Egypt, should not be under its protection--since, as far as they are concerned, Egypt should have no obligations towards them! That the Baha'i are apostates (whether or not they descended from an Islamic background). That they are a threat to the "general [public] order" of the State, and that all their marriages are null and void.... That "methods must be defined that would insure that Baha'is are identified, confronted and singled out so that they could be watched carefully, isolated and monitored in order to protect the rest of the population as well as Islam from their danger, influence and their teachings." The report also calls for the original plaintiffs (the Baha'i family that won the case) to be charged for all court costs!

The travesty of this report is that it identifies the Baha'is as a threat to the nation, isolates them in a corner, deprives them from every right to citizenship, strips them from all their civil rights, calls for their elimination and expulsion, declares their children as illegitimate and their men and women as cohabiting out-of-wedlock.... Above all, Rose el-Yousef newspaper made sure that this report got published expeditiously so that it would serve its own purposes and agenda in its propaganda campaign against the Baha'is.

If the Supreme Administrative Court accepts this report on its face, then we should wonder if any sense of decency or humanity can have a place in that country!

--It did accept it on its face as reflected in its 16 December 2006 decision.

As most of us know, these allegations, misrepresentations, illogical and slanderous conclusions have no basis in fact and have no legal justification. It is inconceivable that a modern civilization in the 21st century could degenerate to this point of oppression of its minorities under the watchful eye of the rest of the world. One would certainly hope that, if in the remote possibility that such conclusions and judgements became contemplated for implementation by the court, the anticipated consequent outrage expressed by the world would be a deterrent to such possible outcome.

--There was and continues to be an outrage, but this did not act as a deterrent to the court.

It is also prayerfully hoped and expected that the Supreme Administrative Court will stand for justice and for its duty to uphold the guarantee of human rights to its constituency, and that President Mubarak will stand for his noble calling and quest for justice for all his citizens when he addresses the nation this upcoming Thursday as was published in this previous post.

--The court did not "stand for justice" or for "its duty to uphold the guarantee of human rights to its constituency." President Mubarak's action, specific to this case, remains to be seen.

It is essential that when religious tolerance is promoted, it must also include tolerance towards religious beliefs other than Egypt’s "recognized three." Anything less than that would be a waste of time and of no use. We can't say that “we are tolerant to only the few we recognize, and anything else is not our concern.” This would not be tolerance.

--Egypt continues to state that it only accepts the "recognized three" religions. It insists on refusing to accept the legitimacy of any other denominations, thus denying them their civil rights.

The issue is not whether or not a religion is divine--this is a whole different matter--the issue is that any religious belief must be respected, regardless of its origin or legitimacy. This is how today's world functions and is what the United Nations Universal Declaration on Human Rights has been based on. It is essential that this nation must provide the guarantee of equality and of civil rights to all Egyptian citizens, even those who happen to have a different religious belief. No law-abiding human being in this world expects any less than that. Egypt is no exception.

The Baha'is are not, and have never been, a threat to anyone or anything, and in particular "General [Public] Order" (al-Nezam el-Aam) as claimed by the many proclamations made by Egypt’s fundamentalist establishment as well as the biased sections of the media; all this rhetoric has been fabricated in order to defame the Baha'is...it is an excuse and a "catch phrase" that is intended to manipulate the masses and justify the injustices.