WATANI International
14 August 2011
The Muslim Brotherhood appears to be building its own judiciary
It is today a possibility no-one can discount that Egypt may be heading towards a powerful religious State. This is not going unnoticed by Copts. Ever since 25 January, Islamist views have underpinned all issues concerned with Copts and Muslims.
There is a palpable alliance between the Muslim Brotherhood (MB), the Salafi movement and other Islamic forces on the political arena; to say nothing of the fact that Islamic factions are also being courted by other political parties. Even presidential nominees look to them for support. The Islamists have formed parties such as the Wasat (Middle) party, the MB-backed Freedom and Justice; and the Salafi Nour (Light), with other Islamic parties in the pipeline. Islamists have been dealing with the various political powers including the ruling military council.
Well positioned to step in
On the international level, the United States has been conducting dialogue with the MB since 2006, and the Nour party has received invitations from the European Parliament to exchange ideas, principles and targets.
Financially, the MB has total autonomy with its own internal and external business links. According to 2008 MB figures, the group makes an annual half a billion dollars net profit from over two billion dollars of investments in Dubai, Turkey and Hong Kong.
The MB and Salafis have a hierarchy modelled after a State system, with a president, people representatives, regional governors, and the equivalent of mayors for towns and villages. All what remains for Islamists to take over Egypt and its people is to secure a sizeable portion of parliamentary seats and an Islamist president; pointers indicate that such a suggestion is not at all far-fetched. And when that happens, according to political analyst Mohamed al-Hamamsi on Middle East Online, the Islamists will be very well positioned to step in; their State inside the State is already alive and kicking.
Recent news that a fifth class of “traditional judges”, comprising 110 ‘judges’, has graduated from the MB’s al-Sulh (Reconciliation) School completes the model—now their judicial system is in place. The MB is set to establish its own State in accordance with Islamic principles.
For their part, the Salafis have set up an academy in a mosque in the Delta town of Mansoura to propagate their principles and ideology.
According to Islamic jurisprudence
The 110 graduate judges all expressed a desire to serve the people and to seek God’s reward. They said they strive, in the first place, to act as mediators, a concept which sits well with Egyptians who prefer to resolve differences peacefully.
The MB Supreme Guide attended the graduation ceremony and handed certificates to the graduates. Abdel-Rahman al-Barr, who is professor of Hadeeth (Sayings of the Prophet Mohamed) at al-Azhar University and member of the MB guidance office, told Watani that some 360 “mediator judges” had already graduated form previous classes. They, he said, play a key role in solving problems related to cases of vendetta, family and marriage, divorce, inheritance, companies, financial disputes and other matters.
Dr Barr says the function of the school is to train judges and mediators capable of resolving problems and disputes in all fields of life and acting fairly according to Islamic jurisprudence. They will avoid the drawbacks of the official judiciary system, such as the slowness in procedures and in the execution of sentences.
Parallel judiciary
According to Dr Barr, some 20 to 30 male students attend monthly six-hour sessions, four hours of theoretical study and two of practical training. They study material related to law; reconciliation; arbitration; urban and rural planning regulations; finance; family law; fundamentals of the Islamic fiqh (doctrine); principles of financial dealings and inheritance; judicial law in Islam; family in Islamic fiqh; management skills urfi (non-official) sessions; psychology and faith recommendations; and practical training in developing social and communication skills.
Asked why the existence of such schools had been kept under wrap, Dr Barr pointed out that hounding by the former regime had led them to keep many things quiet, especially the public services they provide. For this reason classes had been held in private homes. He added that arbitration between Muslims and non-Muslims only took place when both parties expressed a desire for reconciliation.
“Any kind of fear is nonsense; claiming that the MB’s arbitration is parallel to the official judiciary or a State inside the State is either because of the ignorance of the real situation or because of the other political movements’ jealousy of the MB success. Egyptian towns and villages are full of such committees and councils run by both MB and non-MB,” Dr Barr said.
Already existing
Zakariya Abdel-Aziz, president of the Cairo Court of Appeal and former head of the Judges’ Club (equivalent to a syndicate), says that such non-official judiciary already exists in Egypt, especially in rural areas. Most importantly, he explains, both parties who decide to resort to it should totally accept its judgement. With this in mind, Mr Abdel-Aziz says, non-official judges may even act to alleviate the heavy burden of the official judiciary. He said such mediators are no doubt “virtuous” men.
Essam al-Erian, deputy head of the MB-backed Freedom and Justice political party and the former political office manager of the Muslim Brotherhood, noted that non-formal judiciary was nothing new. “This kind of judgement is urgently needed,” he said. “It is an old judicial method and is very well known. Lately it hasn’t had much of a role to play because of the dictatorship. In some towns there is no judiciary except for the traditional urfi one, such as in case of the Bedouin in Al-Arish and other parts of Sinai, especially because the traditions fall in with Islamic jurisprudence,” he said.
For his part, president of the south Cairo court Hussam Mekkawi says he likes the idea, but fears that it might create a parallel judiciary and thus destroy a main tenet of the Constitution.
“The MB move to instate non-official judges is a mere electioneering tactic and a show of force,” says Nasser Amin, head of the Arab centre for independence of judges and lawyers. “This means the MB has crossed over its limits especially because judgement and dispute resolution is the main mission of the official judiciary,” he says. “Unofficial judiciary is already indeed in use, but only as mediation by local elders to resolve minor disputes or crimes.”
Threat to the State
“We can’t just pass over this issue,” says Tahani al-Gebali, deputy of the Supreme Constitutional Court, “because it is so critical. No party, group, or organisation is entitled to establish an institute for “non-official judges” or to practise judicial work in parallel with the national Egyptian judiciary. This threatens the foundation of the modern civil State. Only the State has the authority to establish a judiciary, so who gave these people the authority to create their own? This threatens the stability and security of the country; it creates a State within a State.”
Ms Gebali said the Egyptian judiciary had always stood in the face of the so-called non-official judiciary, insisting that arbitration can only be performed by judges drawn from the judicial system. A general assembly of judges should convene to stop the MB judges from operating, and the Ministry of Justice should be involved. Non-official judges should be brought to trial because they falsely assume the role of judges.
Human rights lawyer Ayman Oqail poses some more pertinent questions. “The idea of mediation before going to court is good, but the question is, will the Muslim Brothers play the role of the elder or tribal sheikh? What standards will be used in judgement? Is it possible to appeal after a sentence is pronounced? What principles will the judges use as reference? Is there an executive power to ensure the execution of judgements? Is it for civil disputes only, or will it extend to criminal cases? Will the reference be Islamic only, or non-Islamic as well?”
v
WATANI International
14 August 2011
Judges: civic or Islamist?
Wissam Abdel-Alim
Mina Zakariya
The Muslim Brotherhood appears to be building its own judiciary
It is today a possibility no-one can discount that Egypt may be heading towards a powerful religious State. This is not going unnoticed by Copts. Ever since 25 January, Islamist views have underpinned all issues concerned with Copts and Muslims.
There is a palpable alliance between the Muslim Brotherhood (MB), the Salafi movement and other Islamic forces on the political arena; to say nothing of the fact that Islamic factions are also being courted by other political parties. Even presidential nominees look to them for support. The Islamists have formed parties such as the Wasat (Middle) party, the MB-backed Freedom and Justice; and the Salafi Nour (Light), with other Islamic parties in the pipeline. Islamists have been dealing with the various political powers including the ruling military council.
Well positioned to step in
On the international level, the United States has been conducting dialogue with the MB since 2006, and the Nour party has received invitations from the European Parliament to exchange ideas, principles and targets.
Financially, the MB has total autonomy with its own internal and external business links. According to 2008 MB figures, the group makes an annual half a billion dollars net profit from over two billion dollars of investments in Dubai, Turkey and Hong Kong.
The MB and Salafis have a hierarchy modelled after a State system, with a president, people representatives, regional governors, and the equivalent of mayors for towns and villages. All what remains for Islamists to take over Egypt and its people is to secure a sizeable portion of parliamentary seats and an Islamist president; pointers indicate that such a suggestion is not at all far-fetched. And when that happens, according to political analyst Mohamed al-Hamamsi on Middle East Online, the Islamists will be very well positioned to step in; their State inside the State is already alive and kicking.
Recent news that a fifth class of “traditional judges”, comprising 110 ‘judges’, has graduated from the MB’s al-Sulh (Reconciliation) School completes the model—now their judicial system is in place. The MB is set to establish its own State in accordance with Islamic principles.
For their part, the Salafis have set up an academy in a mosque in the Delta town of Mansoura to propagate their principles and ideology.
According to Islamic jurisprudence
The 110 graduate judges all expressed a desire to serve the people and to seek God’s reward. They said they strive, in the first place, to act as mediators, a concept which sits well with Egyptians who prefer to resolve differences peacefully.
The MB Supreme Guide attended the graduation ceremony and handed certificates to the graduates. Abdel-Rahman al-Barr, who is professor of Hadeeth (Sayings of the Prophet Mohamed) at al-Azhar University and member of the MB guidance office, told Watani that some 360 “mediator judges” had already graduated form previous classes. They, he said, play a key role in solving problems related to cases of vendetta, family and marriage, divorce, inheritance, companies, financial disputes and other matters.
Dr Barr says the function of the school is to train judges and mediators capable of resolving problems and disputes in all fields of life and acting fairly according to Islamic jurisprudence. They will avoid the drawbacks of the official judiciary system, such as the slowness in procedures and in the execution of sentences.
Parallel judiciary
According to Dr Barr, some 20 to 30 male students attend monthly six-hour sessions, four hours of theoretical study and two of practical training. They study material related to law; reconciliation; arbitration; urban and rural planning regulations; finance; family law; fundamentals of the Islamic fiqh (doctrine); principles of financial dealings and inheritance; judicial law in Islam; family in Islamic fiqh; management skills urfi (non-official) sessions; psychology and faith recommendations; and practical training in developing social and communication skills.
Asked why the existence of such schools had been kept under wrap, Dr Barr pointed out that hounding by the former regime had led them to keep many things quiet, especially the public services they provide. For this reason classes had been held in private homes. He added that arbitration between Muslims and non-Muslims only took place when both parties expressed a desire for reconciliation.
“Any kind of fear is nonsense; claiming that the MB’s arbitration is parallel to the official judiciary or a State inside the State is either because of the ignorance of the real situation or because of the other political movements’ jealousy of the MB success. Egyptian towns and villages are full of such committees and councils run by both MB and non-MB,” Dr Barr said.
Already existing
Zakariya Abdel-Aziz, president of the Cairo Court of Appeal and former head of the Judges’ Club (equivalent to a syndicate), says that such non-official judiciary already exists in Egypt, especially in rural areas. Most importantly, he explains, both parties who decide to resort to it should totally accept its judgement. With this in mind, Mr Abdel-Aziz says, non-official judges may even act to alleviate the heavy burden of the official judiciary. He said such mediators are no doubt “virtuous” men.
Essam al-Erian, deputy head of the MB-backed Freedom and Justice political party and the former political office manager of the Muslim Brotherhood, noted that non-formal judiciary was nothing new. “This kind of judgement is urgently needed,” he said. “It is an old judicial method and is very well known. Lately it hasn’t had much of a role to play because of the dictatorship. In some towns there is no judiciary except for the traditional urfi one, such as in case of the Bedouin in Al-Arish and other parts of Sinai, especially because the traditions fall in with Islamic jurisprudence,” he said.
For his part, president of the south Cairo court Hussam Mekkawi says he likes the idea, but fears that it might create a parallel judiciary and thus destroy a main tenet of the Constitution.
“The MB move to instate non-official judges is a mere electioneering tactic and a show of force,” says Nasser Amin, head of the Arab centre for independence of judges and lawyers. “This means the MB has crossed over its limits especially because judgement and dispute resolution is the main mission of the official judiciary,” he says. “Unofficial judiciary is already indeed in use, but only as mediation by local elders to resolve minor disputes or crimes.”
Threat to the State
“We can’t just pass over this issue,” says Tahani al-Gebali, deputy of the Supreme Constitutional Court, “because it is so critical. No party, group, or organisation is entitled to establish an institute for “non-official judges” or to practise judicial work in parallel with the national Egyptian judiciary. This threatens the foundation of the modern civil State. Only the State has the authority to establish a judiciary, so who gave these people the authority to create their own? This threatens the stability and security of the country; it creates a State within a State.”
Ms Gebali said the Egyptian judiciary had always stood in the face of the so-called non-official judiciary, insisting that arbitration can only be performed by judges drawn from the judicial system. A general assembly of judges should convene to stop the MB judges from operating, and the Ministry of Justice should be involved. Non-official judges should be brought to trial because they falsely assume the role of judges.
Human rights lawyer Ayman Oqail poses some more pertinent questions. “The idea of mediation before going to court is good, but the question is, will the Muslim Brothers play the role of the elder or tribal sheikh? What standards will be used in judgement? Is it possible to appeal after a sentence is pronounced? What principles will the judges use as reference? Is there an executive power to ensure the execution of judgements? Is it for civil disputes only, or will it extend to criminal cases? Will the reference be Islamic only, or non-Islamic as well?”