The ongoing communication by the Committee for Justice (CFJ) with UN mechanisms, aimed at addressing injustices against victims of violations in Egypt and other covered countries, has resulted in the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention issuing two opinions on complaints filed by the committee. This occurred during the 99th session of the UN Working Group, held from March 18-27, where the group issued its first opinion regarding the case of Mohamed Mahmoud Marghany Mahmoud Mubarak (Egypt), detailing the violations he faced through a complaint submitted by the committee.
Case of Mohamed Mubarak:
Mohamed Mahmoud Marghany Mahmoud Mubarak, born on July 1, 1998, was a high school student living in Minya al-Qamh, Al Sharqia Governorate, at the time of his arrest. His detention was repeatedly extended across three different cases with the same charges, a practice used by Egyptian authorities to circumvent the two-year legal limit on pre-trial detention. On June 20, 2016, State Security officers in civilian clothes arrested him without an arrest warrant or legal documents while he was taking an exam at his school. He was forcibly disappeared until July 11, during which he was tortured by beating and electric shocks to coerce a confession for acts he did not commit, resulting in physical injuries. The prosecutor was informed of this torture but ignored it and did not order an investigation.
Mubarak was held in pre-trial detention from 2016 to 2019 in case No. 2694 of 2016 on charges of “joining and participating in demonstrations,” from which he was acquitted. He was then added to another case, No. 694 of 2019, with the same charges and sentenced to one year in prison and a 50,000 Egyptian pound fine. After serving his sentence, he found himself implicated in case No. 3076 of 2022 on charges of “possession of leaflets,” and he is currently awaiting trial in a detention center in the Tenth of Ramadan City. He shares a poorly ventilated small cell with ten other detainees, is denied outdoor exercise, and sees his family only once a month for 15 minutes.
The UN Working Group found that the circumstances described in the committee’s complaint and the lack of rebuttal from Egyptian authorities demonstrated that the authorities failed to establish a legal basis for Mubarak’s arrest and detention. Hence, his detention was deemed arbitrary under Category I. Additionally, the violations of his right to a fair trial and due process were so severe that they rendered his deprivation of liberty arbitrary under Category III as well.
Case of Moaaz El-Sharqaoui:
The second opinion issued by the UN Working Group concerned CFJ’s complaint regarding Moaaz Nagah Mansour Mansour El-Sharqaoui, a student, activist, and human rights defender born on July 20, 1993. El-Sharqaoui, who was the Vice President of the Student Union at Tanta University in 2015, resided in Maadi, Cairo at the time of his arrest. He was detained at a security checkpoint in Dahab in October 2018 and subsequently forcibly disappeared and tortured.
El-Sharqaoui was brought before the prosecution in case No. 440 of 2018 on charges of “joining and funding a terrorist group,” and remained in pre-trial detention until his release in March 2020 under precautionary measures. In 2021, his case was referred to the Emergency State Security Court, which sentenced him in absentia on May 29, 2022, to ten years in prison and five years of surveillance. On May 11, 2023, State Security officers arrested him again at his home in Maadi, leading to another period of enforced disappearance until June 3, 2023, during which he was tortured. He reappeared on June 3, 2023, before the Supreme State Security Prosecution in a new case, No. 540 of 2023, on charges of “joining and funding a terrorist organization.”
The UN Working Group concluded that El-Sharqaoui’s deprivation of liberty violated Articles 3, 6, and 9 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Articles 6, 9, and 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. His detention was thus considered arbitrary and a human rights violation under Categories I and III.