Egyptian lawyers call for application of protection laws

The Egyptian Lawyers Syndicate went on a four-day strike after six lawyers were sentenced to two years in jail for a quarrel with an employee in the judiciary authority in the Mediterranean city of Marsa Matrouh, raising calls from lawyers for the application of protection provisions in the Law of Attorneys.

What happened?

The case started when the Public Prosecution Office in Marsa Matrouh had received a memorandum from a judge accusing six lawyers of assaulting three employees at the judiciary authority on January 5. Afterwards, the six lawyers and the three employees were arrested on charges of “thuggery” and they were referred to an urgent trial, while the other three employees were released.

The incident started when a lawyer had an altercation with an employee at the Matrouh Prosecution Office, which then escalated into a fistfight between some lawyers and some employees.

Later, the six lawyers were sentenced to two years in prison with labor, besides putting them on probation for another two years.

In reaction to the court ruling, the Egyptian Lawyers’ Syndicate suspended its work and attendance before criminal courts and Public Prosecution investigations nationwide as of January 19, until further notice, to protest against the imprisonment of the six lawyers, who appealed against the court ruling.

“The Syndicate entered into a general strike across the republic after a judicial ruling was issued to imprison six lawyers in the Matrouh incident. This [the strike] is due to the failure to implement the legal procedures that should be followed in the trial, and [the failure] to respond to the legitimate demands of lawyers,” said the head of the syndicate, Abdel-Halim Allam, in a statement.

“The Syndicate respects judicial rulings. It is not permissible to attack them [rulings] at all. However, there are procedures prior to the issuance of the ruling that we object to,” he added.

On January 22, amid a big gathering of lawyers outside the headquarters of the Misdemeanor Court of Appeal in Marsa Matrouh, the court released the lawyers and adjourned the trial to February 5 for its final decision.

As a result, Allam announced the resumption of work of lawyers at criminal courts and the Public Prosecution Office starting from January 22.

‘Protection laws not applicable’

Abdel-Hamid Kishar, Attorney at Law at the General Court of Appeal, told Jusoor Post that although lawyers are protected by the Law of Attorneys, some of its provisions when it comes to protection are not applied by the concerned bodies. 

“Protection of lawyers who are on duty exists within the Law of Attorneys. There is also a penalty against anyone who assaults a lawyer on duty. But the problem lies in the application of the provisions of the law,” he said, 

“In courts, most of the clashes happen with judges or those who work with them. They are the ones who apply the legal texts, so they adapt the situation according to what they want,” he continued.

In case a lawyer and an employee exchange insults, a memorandum must be drawn up from the judge and then presented to the Public Prosecutor, who in turn investigates the matter, Kishar said, noting that if it is proven that there is a mutual assault, the lawyer would become an ordinary accused and would be tried in accordance with certain procedures that should be taken by the Public Prosecutor.

“What happened in the Matrouh case is that the lawyers were referred to a trial, which is considered a violation of the Law of Attorneys. Secondly, the lawyers themselves were assaulted, so the employee must also be tried and punished with the penalty prescribed in the court,” Kishar continued.

“Matrouh lawyers were accused of ‘bullying,’ and this is not true because the lawyer was going to start his work and the law guaranteed him protection during his work, so the fault is not in the legal texts, but the fault is in the application of law provisions,” he added.

How will the case end?

The judiciary authorities took declarations from the employees saying that there was a misunderstanding and that they are not accusing the lawyers of any crimes, meaning the court would then reconsider labeling the incident as a crime or a misdemeanor. 

Therefore, the case will change from the crime of bullying to insult and slander, which can be reconciled as there is no reconciliation when it comes to a crime, Kishar said.

Kishar is of the belief that solving the crisis of non-application of laws protecting lawyers boils down to the need for the Lawyers’ Syndicate to be in strong position to defend its members