January, 24 2012, 08:28am EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7413 5566,After hours: +44 7778 472 126,Email:,press@amnesty.org
Egypt: Parties Pledge to End State of Emergency, Many Stop Short of Committing to Women's Rights
Most of the biggest Egyptian political parties have committed to delivering ambitious human rights reform in the country's transition, but have either given mixed signals or have flatly refused to sign up to ending discrimination, protecting women's rights and to abolishing the death penalty, Amnesty International said today.
LONDON
Most of the biggest Egyptian political parties have committed to delivering ambitious human rights reform in the country's transition, but have either given mixed signals or have flatly refused to sign up to ending discrimination, protecting women's rights and to abolishing the death penalty, Amnesty International said today.
Ahead of parliamentary elections which began in November, the organization asked political parties running in Egypt's elections to sign a "human rights manifesto" containing 10 key measures to signal that they were serious about delivering meaningful human rights reform.
Amnesty International wrote to 54 political parties and sought meetings with 15 of the main ones, nine of whom signed up to the manifesto, either in its entirety or to some of the pledges. Three others gave oral feedback.
The Freedom and Justice Party, which won the most seats in the new People's Assembly, was one of three parties not to respond substantively, despite considerable efforts by Amnesty International to seek its views.
"With the first session of the new parliament sitting this week, it is encouraging that so many of the major parties engaged with us and were prepared to sign up to ambitious pledges for change on combating torture, protecting slum residents' rights and ensuring fair trials," said Philip Luther, Amnesty International's interim Middle East and North Africa Director.
"But it is disturbing that a number of parties refused to commit to equal rights for women. With a handful of women taking up seats in the new parliament, there remain huge obstacles to women playing a full role in Egyptian political life."
"We challenge the new parliament to use the opportunity of drafting the new constitution to guarantee all of these rights for all people in Egypt. The cornerstone must be non-discrimination and gender equality."
While the only parties to sign up to all of the pledges contained in the manifesto were the Egyptian Social Democratic Party and the Popular Socialist Alliance Party, nearly all of the 12 parties who responded agreed to all of the first seven points of the manifesto.
These included commitments on civil and political rights. Key promises included ending the three-decade-old state of emergency, combating torture, upholding freedom of expression and association, ensuring fair trials and investigating abuses committed under the rule of Hosni Mubarak.
Amnesty International also secured pledges from nearly all the parties to address the rights of those living in slums and to deliver economic, social and cultural rights for all Egyptians.
Reservations
The eighth pledge, to end discrimination, was signed up to by most parties but several said they could not sign up to Amnesty International's call for an end to discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. Comments from at least two parties suggested that the issue of discrimination against Copts, including in building churches, has been exaggerated.
A number of parties had reservations over the ninth pledge, which called for women's rights to be protected, including for women to be given equal rights in marriage, divorce, child custody and inheritance. Several parties invoked Islamic law to explain why they would not commit to this.
Most parties made reservations over the 10th point, which called for the abolition of the death penalty, either stating that this was in contradiction with Islam or that they were continuing to study the issue. Even the two parties inclined to abolish the death penalty said that this was a long-term goal not achievable in the coming years.
"The real test for political parties will be to translate these pledges into initiatives in parliament to abolish repressive Mubarak-era laws, reform the police and security services, and pass laws which protect human rights and break with the legacy of abuse," said Philip Luther. "One of the first measures should be the lifting of the much-decried state of emergency."
"Women and men stood side by side in the protests and have been instrumental in the movement that toppled President Mubarak and led to these elections. Denying equality would dash the hope that Egypt is entering a new era of respect for the rights and dignity of all."
The 10 pledges in Amnesty International's Human Rights Manifesto for Egypt are:
1. End the state of emergency and reform the security forces
2. End incommunicado detention and combat torture
3. Ensure fair trials
4. Uphold the rights to freedom of assembly, association and expression
5. Investigate past abuses
6. Realize economic, social and cultural rights for all
7. Uphold the rights of people living in slums
8. End discrimination
9. Protect women's rights
10. Abolish the death penalty
Responses by Egyptian political parties to the Human Rights Manifesto for Egypt:
In November Amnesty International sent letters to 54 Egyptian political parties inviting them to sign up to the manifesto. The organization sought meetings with the leaders of 15 of the biggest parties in November and December. Below are the responses obtained:
Egyptian Social Democratic Party (part of Egyptian bloc, which won 34 seats in parliament): signed up to all 10 pledges, but said it was premature to expect abolition of the death penalty in the absence of popular support.
Popular Socialist Alliance Party (part of Revolution Continues bloc, which won 7 seats in parliament): signed up to all 10 pledges, but said it was premature to expect abolition of the death penalty in the absence of popular support.
Egypt Youth Party: sent a letter with the signed manifesto, stating its commitment to human rights in general, but without giving details on the 10 pledges.
New Al Wafd Party (38 seats in parliament): signed with the exception of the abolition of the death penalty.
Democratic Front Party: signed with the exception of the abolition of the death penalty.
Reform and Development Party (10 seats in parliament): signed with the exception of the abolition of the death penalty.
Al Karama Party: agreed orally to all pledges with the exception of the abolition of the death penalty.
Al Nour Party (125 seats in parliament): agreed orally to all pledges with the exception of the abolition of the death penalty and protection of women's rights.
Revolution's Guards Party: sent a letter agreeing to the manifesto, with the exception of the abolition of the death penalty and protection of women's rights, stating that they follow directions from Al-Azhar religious institutions on such issues.
Egyptian Liberation Party: signed with the exception of the abolition of the death penalty and protection of women's rights, stressing its opposition to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW); agreed to commit to ensuring non-discrimination, with the exception of non-discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation.
The Al-Wasat (Center) Party (10 seats in parliament): signed but expressed strong reservations to the abolition of the death penalty, the protection of women's rights and ensuring non-discrimination. Expressed reservations on non-discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and according equal rights for Muslims and Copts in building houses of worship.
Egypt Revolution Party: party representatives raised concerns in a meeting over the need for "security" and the obligation to respect "Islamic values", justifying the continuation of the state of emergency, although pledging to combat torture. They also said freedom of expression, association and assembly were important but only as long as they do not "threaten public security". They said women's rights should not be in contradiction with religion and that discrimination against Copts was an issue blown out of proportion. The party did not raise reservations over other pledges.
Free Egyptians Party (part of Egyptian bloc, which won 34 seats in parliament): did not respond to meeting request nor give feedback on manifesto.
Freedom and Justice Party (234 seats in parliament): did not respond to meeting request nor give feedback on manifesto. Amnesty International did not receive a substantive response to its last attempt to contact them in January 2012.
Justice Party (1 seat in parliament): did not respond to meeting request nor give feedback on manifesto.
Amnesty International is a worldwide movement of people who campaign for internationally recognized human rights for all. Our supporters are outraged by human rights abuses but inspired by hope for a better world - so we work to improve human rights through campaigning and international solidarity. We have more than 2.2 million members and subscribers in more than 150 countries and regions and we coordinate this support to act for justice on a wide range of issues.
LATEST NEWS
Privacy Defenders Decry 'Spy Draft' in Section 702 Renewal Advanced by Senate
"It's not about who RISAA allows the government to spy on, it's about who RISAA allows the government to force to spy," explained one critic.
Apr 18, 2024
Civil liberties defenders on Thursday decried the U.S. Senate's advancement of the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act, which critics say lawmakers are trying to ram through without protection against warrantless surveillance and with a provision that would effectively make every American a spy whether they like it or not.
Senators voted 67-32 in favor of a cloture motion to begin voting on RISAA, a bill to reauthorize Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which expires on Friday. FISA—a highly controversial law that has been abused hundreds of thousands of times—allows warrantless surveillance of non-U.S. citizens but also often sweeps up Americans' communication data in the process.
In a 273-147 vote last week, House lawmakers passed RISAA, including an amendment critics say dramatically expands the government's unchecked surveillance authority by compelling a wide range of individuals and organizations—including businesses and the media—to cooperate in government spying operations.
This so-called "Make Everyone a Spy" clause would allow the attorney general or director of national intelligence to force electronic communication service providers to "immediately provide... all information, facilities, or assistance" the government deems necessary.
"This bill would basically allow the government to institute a spy draft," Seth Stern, director of advocacy at Freedom of the Press Foundation, warned Thursday. "It will lead to significant distrust between journalists and sources, not to mention everyone else."
"It's not about who RISAA allows the government to spy on, it's about who RISAA allows the government to force to spy," he added. "Regardless of whether the end target of the surveillance is a foreigner, it's indisputable that the people the government can enlist to conduct the surveillance are Americans. And what's more, these civilians ordered to spy would be gagged and sworn to secrecy under the law."
In addition to the "Make Everyone a Spy" provision, civil libertarians have sounded the alarm over the House lawmakers' rejection of an amendment that would have added a warrant requirement to the legislation.
Critics accuse Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and colleagues including Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Mark Warner (D-Va.) of trying to rush a vote on RISAA while disingenuously claiming Section 702's powers will expire with the law on Friday. That's a misleading claim, as a national security court earlier this month approved the government's request to continue a disputed surveillance program even if Section 702 lapses.
"There is simply no defense of Majority Leader Schumer and Sen. Warner's duplicity," Sean Vitka, policy director at the progressive advocacy group Demand Progress, said in a statement. "House Intelligence Committee leaders poisoned this bill with one of the most repugnant surveillance expansions in history, and apparently the administration was too busy attacking commonsense privacy protections to notice. They know it, we know it, and now the American people know it."
"There can be no mistake: Sens. Schumer and Warner just helped hand the next president an unspeakably dangerous weapon that will be used against their own constituents," Vitka added. "And there is only one vote left to stop it."
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)—who
said earlier this week that the bill would dragoon the American people into becoming "an agent for Big Brother"—on Thursday argued that "this issue demands a debate about meaningful reforms, not a rushed vote to rubber-stamp more warrantless government surveillance powers."
In an attempt to tackle the warrantless surveillance issue, Senate Judiciary Chair Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) on Thursday proposed a RISAA amendment that would require the government to obtain a warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court before accessing Americans' private communications.
However, the amendment contains exceptions to the warrant requirement in the event of unspecified emergencies and cyberattacks.
"If the government wants to spy on the private communications of Americans, they should be required to get approval from a judge—just as our Founders intended," Durbin said in a statement. "Congress has a responsibility to the American people to get this right."
The Biden administration and U.S. intelligence agencies vehemently oppose the Durbin-Cramer amendment. The White House called the measure "a reckless policy choice contrary to the key lessons of 9/11 and not grounded in any constitutional requirement or statute."
"The amendment outright bars the government from gaining access to lawfully collected information using terms associated with U.S. persons," the administration added. "Exceptions to that prohibition are narrow and unworkable. They are insufficient to protect our national security."
On Wednesday, the House also passed the Fourth Amendment Is Not for Sale Act, which would prohibit the government from buying Americans' information from data brokers if it would otherwise need a warrant to obtain the data, which includes location and internet records. The Senate will now take up FANFSA.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'The Opposite of Leadership': US Vetoes Palestine's UN Membership
Palestine's permanent observer at the United Nations said the resolution's failure "will not break our will, and it will not defeat our determination."
Apr 18, 2024
U.S. President Joe Biden's administration on Thursday used the country's veto power at the United Nations Security Council to block Palestine's bid to become a full member of the U.N.
While 12 nations voted in favor of Palestinian membership and two abstained, the United States is one of five countries—along with China, France, Russia, and the United Kingdom—who have veto authority at the Security Council.
Since Israel launched what the International Court of Justice has said is a "plausibly" genocidal assault of the Gaza Strip in response to a Hamas-led October attack, the Biden administration has blocked three cease-fire resolutions at the Security Council. Under mounting global pressure, the U.S. finally abstained last month, allowing a cease-fire measure to pass.
In the lead-up to Thursday's vote, the Biden administration was pressuring other countries to oppose the Palestinian Authority's renewed membership effort so it could possibly avoid a veto, according to leaked cables obtained by The Intercept.
"Take a moment to ponder how isolated Biden has made the U.S.," said Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, after the veto. "Biden lobbied Japan, South Korea, and Ecuador HARD to oppose the Palestine resolution so that the U.S. wouldn't have to veto. They refused. So Biden cast his fourth veto in seven months (!!) This is the opposite of leadership."
In addition to the nations Parsi highlighted, Algeria, China, France, Guyana, Malta, Mozambique, Russia, Sierra Leone, and Slovenia voted for giving Palestine full U.N. membership while Switzerland and the United Kingdom abstained.
After the vote, U.N. Newsreported on remarks from Riyad Mansour, a U.N. permanent observer for the state of Palestine:
"We came to the Security Council today as an important historic moment, regionally and internationally, so that we could salvage what can be saved. We place you before a historic responsibility to establish the foundations of a just and comprehensive peace in our region."
Council members were given the opportunity "to revive the hope that has been lost among our people" and to translate their commitment towards a two-state solution into firm action "that cannot be maneuvered or retracted," and the majority of council members "have risen to the level of this historic moment, and they have stood on the side of justice and freedom and hope, in line with the ethical and humanitarian and legal principles that must govern our world and in line with simple logic."
"The fact that this resolution did not pass will not break our will, and it will not defeat our determination," Mansour added. "We will not stop in our effort. The state of Palestine is inevitable. It is real. Perhaps they see it as far away, but we see it as near, and we are the faithful."
Parsi said that "a Western-friendly senior Global South diplomat" told him of Biden's veto: "Whatever agonizing claim the U.S. had to lead a self-appointed free world has died a very loud public death on the Security Council horseshoe tonight. YOU CAN'T LEAD IF YOU CAN'T LISTEN."
Biden, a Democrat seeking reelection in November, has faced fierce criticism in the United States and around the world for U.S. complicity in Israel's war on Gaza—which Hamas, not the Palestinian Authority, has controlled for nearly two decades. In under seven months, Israeli forces have killed 33,970 Palestinians, injured another 76,770, displaced most of the besieged enclave's 2.3 million population, devastated civilian infrastructure, and severely limited the flow of lifesaving humanitarian assistance.
Israel—which already got $3.8 billion in annual U.S. military aid before October 7—continues to receive weapons support from the Biden administration, even as a growing chorus of critics, including some Democrats in Congress, argues that the arms transfers violate U.S. and international law.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Shameful': Columbia Greenlights Police Crackdown on Anti-War Encampment
Even after dozens of students were arrested, hundreds "rushed to take the place of their classmates" and continued the protest.
Apr 18, 2024
The arrests of dozens of Columbia University and Barnard College students on Thursday "galvanized" other supporters of Palestinian rights on the campuses, as hundreds of students occupied the school's western lawn after New York City police filled at least two buses with protesters who had been detained for setting up an encampment.
"Disclose, divest, we will not stop, we will not rest," chanted hundreds of students as they marched around the area where organizers had set up a tent encampment early Wednesday morning.
Columbia President Minouche Shafik informed the campus community on Thursday that she had authorized the police to clear the encampment.
As it has been in the past, the school has become a center of anti-war protests—and crackdowns by school officials and the police—since Israel began its bombardment of Gaza in October.
Pro-Palestinian students and alumni have demanded that Columbia divest from companies that profit from Israel's apartheid policies in the occupied Palestinian territories and cancel its dual degree program with Tel Aviv University.
In response to pro-Palestinian demonstrations, Columbia in November suspended the campus chapters of Jewish Voice for Peace and Students for Justice in Palestine—an action that pushed the New York Civil Liberties Union and Palestine Legal to file a lawsuit on behalf of the students last month.
On Thursday, police and Columbia employees took down about 50 tents that had been up for more than a day and disposed of them in trash cans and alleyways—but The New York Times reported later that "demonstrators repitched a couple of tents, and ... recovered the main signage from the encampment as well," while hundreds of students were "still gathered and chanting on the south side of the grass."
The arrests came a day after Shafik testified before the U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce about antisemitism on campus.
U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), whose daughter, Isra Hirsi, was among the Barnard students who were suspended on Thursday for participating in the encampment protest, questioned Shafik about whether antisemitic protests have actually taken place at Columbia, prompting the president to say there have not.
"There has been a rise in targeting and harassment against anti-war protesters, because it's been pro-war and anti-war protesters is what it seems, like, correct?" asked Omar.
"Correct," replied Shafik.
On Thursday, Omar posted on social media two images of protesters at Columbia: one from the encampment this week, and one from 1968, when students protested the U.S. war in Vietnam.
New York City Council member Tiffany Cabán was among those who condemned the university's crackdown on the protests on Thursday.
"Suspending and arresting Columbia/Barnard student activists and disbanding student organizations—including Jewish students and organizations—doesn't combat antisemitism or increase safety," said Cabán. "All it does is punish and intimidate those who believe in human rights for Palestinians. Shameful."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular