{"title":"Politics on Trial? Criminal Justice and Egyptʼs Political Opposition in the Aftermath of July 2013","authors":"K. Tonstad","doi":"10.18261/ISSN.2387-3299-2021-01-03","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the aftermath of the overthrow of President Morsi in the summer of 2013, Egypt garnered international censure for violations of due process in mass trials. Thousands of members of the political opposition, pro-democracy movement, and other activists and journalists were arrested, held in pre-trial detention, handed lengthy prison sentences, or sentenced to death in criminal courts. This article shows how ordinary criminal courts became a focal point in the repression of political opposition and activists in Egypt in the aftermath of July 2013. Studying the courts’ verdicts during a time of socio-political upheaval provides insight into political and judicial dynamics, and how these may interact in times of crisis. The article shows that it was not due to executive pressure that ordinary courts reasoned and ruled as they did, but the ideologies and interests of judges. Several of the verdicts were sub-sequently overturned by Egypt’s Court of Cassation for failing to uphold Egyptian standards of due process. This divergence may be motivated by an interest in higher courts in upholding professional and institutional integrity, revealing significant cleavages within the judiciary. This, too, may in part be deemed an expression of judicial independence.","PeriodicalId":36793,"journal":{"name":"Oslo Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oslo Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18261/ISSN.2387-3299-2021-01-03","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In the aftermath of the overthrow of President Morsi in the summer of 2013, Egypt garnered international censure for violations of due process in mass trials. Thousands of members of the political opposition, pro-democracy movement, and other activists and journalists were arrested, held in pre-trial detention, handed lengthy prison sentences, or sentenced to death in criminal courts. This article shows how ordinary criminal courts became a focal point in the repression of political opposition and activists in Egypt in the aftermath of July 2013. Studying the courts’ verdicts during a time of socio-political upheaval provides insight into political and judicial dynamics, and how these may interact in times of crisis. The article shows that it was not due to executive pressure that ordinary courts reasoned and ruled as they did, but the ideologies and interests of judges. Several of the verdicts were sub-sequently overturned by Egypt’s Court of Cassation for failing to uphold Egyptian standards of due process. This divergence may be motivated by an interest in higher courts in upholding professional and institutional integrity, revealing significant cleavages within the judiciary. This, too, may in part be deemed an expression of judicial independence.