Conclusion:

Most of the amendments that affected the Constitution, the Penal Code and the laws complementing it (specific criminal legislations) came without an urgent social necessity, and without taking into account the foundations and philosophy of comparative criminal laws. This does not discredit the argument that it came in exceptional circumstances, nor in a dynamic reality in which the good and the bad ripple, threatening state structure. Even in those exceptional cases, there are constitutional rules and provisions that must be adhered to and implemented. There are rights and freedoms that should not be violated nor imposed with restrictions that afflict them, emptying them of their content and undermining its essence. Most of the changes were as follows:

• Inaccurate wording, permeated with ambiguity and verbal flexibility that expands to include cases that the constitution prohibits criminalizing. This also increases the potentials of selective implementation in a way that violates the equal legal protection of those addressed with its provisions.
• The amendments brought some articles of laws that the Supreme Constitutional Court ruled unconstitutional, re-drafted and merged them again into the legislation in force at the present time.
• The amendments also brought the provisions of exceptional laws and planted them in the heart of ordinary ones; the thing that curtail the rights and freedoms of those who are addressed by these provisions and ought to obey rules and orders.
• Most of the amendments aimed at imposing the executive authority’s control over every opinion (said or written) and action made by opinion makers through words or formulations that expand to include all permissible things that can be interpreted broadly and flexibly to be subject to criminalization cycle despite the clarity of a legal rule that the exceptions interpretationmay should not be expanded. Rather, its interpretation must be narrowed whenever it is in the interest of the accused.

To view the full paper, please open the link :

Constitutional Amendments Impact on the Penal Code.pdf

Conclusions and Recommendations:

In conclusion, the existing Egyptian constitution is full of many legal guarantees that guarantee the freedom, safety and right of the accused during the preliminary investigation stage, including the new text on the right of the accused to remain silent, thus being the first Egyptian legislation stipulating this right. In addition, it included special guarantees regarding the sanctity of homes and the inviolability of searching them except with a reasoned judicial permission, prohibiting searching the accused, except in cases of flagrancy and urgency, if strong and sufficient evidence to the accusation against him/her exists. In case that the evidence is insufficient, the judicial police officer may not search the accused. The constitution also approved a set of constitutional guarantees for the accused in case of arrest, interrogation and remand, the guarantees that was regulated by the Criminal Procedure Law in the previously explained way. However, the expansion of the exceptional powers granted to the Public Prosecution during its investigations into some crimes- including terrorism crimes- has detracted from the legal remand guarantees of those accused of these crimes. It became the authority of the Public Prosecution to detain in remand those accused with it for a period that exceeds five months so that the one-time does not exceed fifteen days, and then the matter is brought after that before the competent court. The Criminal Procedure Law also detracted from the guarantees of the right to defense during the investigation phase, as previously Explained.

To view the full paper, please open the link :

Legal guarantees for the accused in the stage of Investigation.pdf

The Egyptian government issued the Anti-Terrorism Law 94/2015, claiming the law is meant to deal with the exceptional circumstances Egypt had undergone at that period. The law sought to identify terrorist crimes and regulate the procedures of detaining and trying suspects. It also contained a number of provisions on infringing on basic rights stipulated in the Egyptian constitution and international charters.

Five years after the law was issued, the Arab Centre for the Independence of the Judiciary and the Legal Profession has published a legal paper titled “Cluster Acts: Five Years on the Anti-Terrorism Law”.

The paper focuses on the repercussions of the regulations stipulated by the law in light of the international standards related to legislation issued in exceptional circumstances. The paper tackles the direct effect of the law on constraining basic rights and freedoms, and the impact the law has left on other laws. The Anti-Terrorism Law founded a new legislative philosophy, which resulted in issuing legal articles bearing the same provisions in other legislation. The paper closes with conclusions of the most significant points and a number of recommendations necessary to halt the repercussions of applying the Anti-Terrorism Law.

To view the full paper, please open the link

A legal paper Clustered Legislations Five Years on the Anti-Terrorism Law.pdf