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
House Dems Voice 'Deep Concern' Over Biden Claim That Israel Is Legally Using US Arms
A letter from 26 lawmakers notes the "stark differences and gaps" between what Biden administration officials say and the opinions of "prominent experts and global institutions" accusing Israel of genocide.
Apr 16, 2024
More than two dozen House Democrats on Tuesday challenged the Biden administration's claim that Israel is using U.S.-supplied weapons in compliance with domestic and international law—an assertion made amid an ongoing World Court probe of "plausibly" genocidal Israeli policies and practices in Gaza.
Citing "mounting credible and deeply troubling reports and allegations" of human rights crimes committed by Israeli troops in Gaza and soldiers and settlers in the occupied West Bank, 26 congressional Democrats led by Texas Reps. Veronica Escobar—who co-chairs President Joe Biden's reelection campaign—and Joaquin Castro asked U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, and Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines "whether and how" their agencies determined Israel is lawfully using arms provided by Washington.
"We write to express our deep concern regarding the U.S. Department of State's recent comments regarding assurances from the Israeli government, under National Security Memorandum (NSM) 20, that the Israeli government is using U.S.-origin weapons in full compliance with relevant U.S. and international law and is not restricting the delivery of humanitarian assistance," the lawmakers wrote in a letter to the Cabinet members.
The letter acknowledges the "grave concerns" of institutions and experts around the world regarding Israel's "conduct throughout the war in Gaza, its policies regarding civilian harm and military targeting, unauthorized expansion of settlements and settler violence in the West Bank, and potential use of U.S. arms by settlers, in additional to limitations on humanitarian aid supported by the U.S."
The legislators noted Israeli attacks on aid convoys, workers, and recipients—like the February 29 "
Flour Massacre" in which nearly 900 starving Palestinians were killed or wounded at a food distribution site—and "the closure of vital border crossings" as Gazan children starve to death as causes for serious concern.
While the lawmakers didn't mention the International Court of Justice's January 26
preliminary finding that Israel is "plausibly" committing genocide in Gaza, their letter highlights the "stark differences and gaps in the statements" made by Biden administration officials and "those made by prominent experts and global institutions"—many of whom accuse Israel of genocide.
The lawmakers' letter came amid reports of fresh Israeli atrocities, including a drone strike on a playground in the Maghazi refugee camp in northern Gaza that killed at least 11 children. Eyewitnesses described a "horrific scene of children torn apart."
While Biden has called out Israel's "indiscriminate bombing" in Gaza—much of it carried out using U.S.-supplied warplanes and munitions including 2,000-pound bombs that can level whole city blocks—his administration has approved more than 100 arms sales to Israel, has repeatedly sidestepped Congress to fast-track emergency armed aid, and is seeking to provide the key ally with billions of dollars in addition weaponry atop the nearly $4 billion it gets annually from Washington.
This, despite multiple federal laws—and the administration's own rules— prohibiting U.S. arms transfers to human rights violators.
According to Palestinian and international officials, more than 110,000 Palestinians have been killed or wounded by Israeli forces since October 7. Most of the dead are women and children. At least 7,000 Palestinians are also missing and presumed dead and buried beneath the rubble of hundreds of thousands of bombed-out homes and other buildings.
Around 90% of Gaza's 2.3 million people have been forcibly displaced in what many Palestinians are calling a second Nakba, a reference to the ethnic cleansing of over 750,000 Arabs from Palestine during the establishment of the modern state of Israel in 1948.
A growing number of not only progressive lawmakers but also mainstream Democrats are calling for a suspension of U.S. military aid to Israel.
On Tuesday, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)—who was criticized earlier in the war for not calling for a cease-fire—stood beside a photo of a starving Gazan girl while declaring "no more money for" the far-right government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his "war machine."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Weasel Words': Julian Assange's Wife Slams US Assurances to UK
"The diplomatic note does nothing to relieve our family's extreme distress about his future—his grim expectation of spending the rest of his life in isolation in U.S. prison for publishing award-winning journalism."
Apr 16, 2024
The wife of jailed WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange sharply criticized "assurances" the U.S. government made as the U.K. High Court considers allowing the 52-year-old Australian's extradition to the United States, where he faces 175 years in prison.
The U.S. document states that if extradited, "Assange will have the ability to raise and seek to rely upon at trial (which includes any sentencing hearing) the rights and protections given under the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States," though it points out that "a decision as to the applicability of the First Amendment is exclusively within the purview of the U.S. courts."
"A sentence of death will neither be sought nor imposed on Assange," the document adds, noting that he has not been charged with any offense for which that is a possible punishment. It comes after the U.K. court ruled last month that the Biden administration had until Tuesday to confirm that he wouldn't face the death penalty and if it did not, he could continue appealing his extradition.
Responding on social media, his wife, Stella Assange—who is an attorney—blasted the U.S. assurances as "weasel words."
"The United States has issued a nonassurance in relation to the First Amendment, and a standard assurance in relation to the death penalty," she said. "It makes no undertaking to withdraw the prosecution's previous assertion that Julian has no First Amendment rights because he is not a U.S citizen."
"The Biden administration must drop this dangerous prosecution before it is too late."
"Instead, the U.S. has limited itself to blatant weasel words claiming that Julian can 'seek to raise' the First Amendment if extradited," she added. "The diplomatic note does nothing to relieve our family's extreme distress about his future—his grim expectation of spending the rest of his life in isolation in U.S. prison for publishing award-winning journalism. The Biden administration must drop this dangerous prosecution before it is too late."
The U.K. court's next hearing is scheduled for May 20. Last week, reporters asked U.S. President Joe Biden about requests from Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and members of the country's Parliament to drop the extradition effort and charges. He said that "we're considering it."
So far, the Biden administration has ignored significant pressure from Australian and U.S. politicians as well as human rights and press freedom groups, and continued to pursue the extradition of Julian Assange, who was charged under former President Donald Trump—the Republican expected to face the Democratic president in the November election.
Assange was charged under the Espionage Act and Computer Fraud and Abuse Act for publishing classified documents including the "Collateral Murder" video and the Afghan and Iraq war logs. Since British authorities dragged Assange out of the Ecuadorian Embassy in London—where he lived with political asylum for seven years—he has been jailed in the city's Belmarsh Prison.
The WikiLeaks founder's wife, with whom he has two children, was not alone in condemning the U.S. assurances on Tuesday.
"This 'assurance' should make journalists even more worried about how the Assange prosecution could impact press freedom in the U.S. and globally. The U.K. should grant Assange's appeal and refuse to extradite him," said the Freedom of the Press Foundation. "The U.S. doesn't disclaim the ability to argue that the First Amendment doesn't apply to Assange because of his nationality or other reasons, or for a court to rule against a First Amendment challenge to his prosecution."
Jameel Jaffer, director of the Knight First Amendment Institute, similarly said that "no one who cares about press freedom should take any comfort at all from the United States' assurance that Assange will be permitted to 'rely upon' the First Amendment."
"If the prosecution goes forward, the U.S. government will be trying to persuade American courts that the First Amendment poses no bar to the prosecution of a publisher under the Espionage Act," Jaffer warned. "And if the government is successful, no journalist will ever again be able to publish U.S. government secrets without risking her liberty."
"So the government's First Amendment assurances aren't responsive at all to the concerns that press freedom advocates have been raising," he concluded. "This case poses essentially the same threat to press freedom today as it did yesterday."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Workers Stage Sit-Ins to Demand Google End Israeli Cloud Contract
"Just as people of conscience demanded institutions cut ties with apartheid South Africa in the 1980s, the time is now to rise up in support of Palestinian human rights," said Google employees in an open letter.
Apr 16, 2024
Following recent reports that Google may soon expand its tech collaboration with the Israeli government, dozens of the company's employees on Tuesday entered its offices in New York City and Sunnyvale, California and announced that they wouldn't leave until executives pull out of its $1.2 billion cloud services and data contract with the country.
The No Tech for Apartheid coalition—including the Muslim-led MPower Change and the Jewish-led Jewish Voice for Peace—organized the sit-in, which marks an escalation in Google workers' protests against Project Nimbus, the 2021 contract under which Google and Amazon provide cloud infrastructure across Israel's government.
The deal includes a stipulation that the companies cannot prevent Israel from using Project Nimbus for any government agency, including the Israel Defense Forces (IDF)—which means Google employees' work may be directly supporting the country's assault on the Gaza and its killing of at least 33,843 Palestinians since October.
"Workers will NOT allow business as usual while Google continues to profit from the genocide of Palestinians in Gaza," said MPower Change.
In Sunnyvale, workers began occupying the office of Google Cloud CEO Thomas Kurian, while employees in the company's New York office began a sit-in in a common space.
Outdoor rallies were also scheduled to take place in San Francisco and Seattle, with both Amazon and Google employees attending.
Former Google cloud software engineer Eddie Hatfield, who was fired last month for disrupting a Google Israel event, was among those who protested in New York.
The sit-ins came a week after Time magazine reported that Google has entered further negotiations with the Israeli government in recent weeks, even as international human rights experts raise alarm that Israeli officials have directly caused famine to take hold in parts of Gaza by blocking humanitarian aid.
No Tech for Apartheid released an open letter addressed to Kurian and other Google and Amazon executives, saying that as long as the companies' "tech continues to power the Israeli military and government, [they] are actively complicit in this genocide."
"Your workers do not want to be complicit in genocide," reads the letter, which has been signed by 93,000 supporters. "Just as people of conscience demanded institutions cut ties with apartheid South Africa in the 1980s, the time is now to rise up in support of Palestinian human rights, to end the Project Nimbus contract, and join calls to end the Israeli occupation and siege of Gaza. This has never been more urgent. We hope that you will take this opportunity to be on the right side of history. End the Project Nimbus contract and reestablish your companies' commitments to human rights."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular