

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Decrees issued by the Egyptian ruling military council and the Justice Minister in recent days sharply reduce civilian oversight of military actions, creating conditions ripe for further serious human rights violations, Human Rights Watch said today.
A June 4, 2012 Justice Ministry Decree empowers the military to arrest civilians. On June 17, the ruling Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) issued new Constitutional Declaration provisions that set out an expanded role for the military in civilian law enforcement, including continued trials of civilians before military courts. And a June 18 decree restructuring the National Defense Council gives the military expanded decision-making powers on internal as well as national security issues, Human Rights Watch said.
"The generals' relentless expansion of their authority to detain and try civilians now goes far beyond their powers under Hosni Mubarak," said Joe Stork, deputy Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. "These decrees are the latest indication yet that there won't be a meaningful handover to civilian rule on June 30."
Increasing military authority over law enforcement will invite continued abuses from an unaccountable military, Human Rights Watch said. Abuses by the military over the past year-and-a-half, including torture of protesters in detention and excessive use of lethal force in dispersing protests, have gone unpunished because civilian prosecutors do not have jurisdiction to investigate complaints against military personnel. That leaves victims of human rights abuses without a remedy, in violation of international law, Human Rights Watch said.
The Justice Ministry Decree
On June 13, the Official Gazette published Decree No. 4994, which Justice Minister Adel Abdel Hamid issued on June 4, four days after Egypt's longstanding State of Emergency expired.
The decree states:
Without prejudice to the mandate set out in the Code of Military Justice Law 25 of 1966, military police and military intelligence officers granted a law enforcement role by the Minister of Defense shall have judicial arresting authority for crimes committed by non-military personnel.
The decree says it would apply to crimes set out in chapters 1, 2, 2bis, 7, 12, and 13 of the Penal Code. These include crimes such as the one described in article 102 ("spreading false information with the purpose of affecting national security"); article 98(c) ("operating an unregistered association"); article 133 ("insulting a public official"); and article 184 ("insulting the military or parliament").
On June 14, the SCAF general for legal affairs, Gen. Mamdouh Shaheen, appearing on the live Egyptian television show Al Qahira Al Youm, said this decree was "for the general good... so that we can organize and bring security to the street. The good of the country requires a presence for the armed forces in the street to protect the country since the police are still unable to fully perform."
Lawyers and human rights organizations have filed at least five appeals before the Council of State, Egypt's highest administrative court, contending that the Justice Minister had exceeded his authority in issuing this decree. The judge assigned to the case held the first hearing on June 19 and the judge adjourned the trial to June 26.
"This decree authorizing military arrests of civilians appears to be an attempt to embed exceptional emergency law-like powers into regular law," Stork said. "The result is likely to be a continuation of abusive law enforcement practices."
Lack of Civilian Oversight and Military Accountability During Policing
Decree No. 4994 is of particular concern because the Egyptian military considers that its arrests of civilians constitute sufficient jurisdictional basis to then bring those civilians before military courts. International human rights law applicable in Egypt prohibits trials of civilians before military courts. Moreover, the military's close involvement in law enforcement has been characterized by widespread and serious human rights violations over the past year-and-a-half, Human Rights Watch said.
Human Rights Watch has documented dozens of cases of torture by the military during arrests and in detention, most recently in Abbasiya in May, and before that, brutal beatings of male and female protesters in December 2011. On March 9, 2011, military officers subjected female protesters in detention to virginity tests. In October, Human Rights Watch documented the excessive use of force by the military in policing protests, as well as apparent extrajudicial killings of protesters at Maspero, the state media center in downtown Cairo.
Decree No. 4994 also provides that chapter 2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure will regulate the involvement of military officers. Article 23 of chapter 2 provides that law enforcement officers are subject to oversight by the public prosecutor, who can order investigations in cases of violations or infractions.
However, the SCAF contends that the public prosecutor does not have oversight over military personnel and that only the military prosecutor can initiate an investigation into any violations on their part. As reflected in the latest amendments to the Code of Military Justice, passed on May 6 by parliament, and in the discussions in parliament with General Shaheen that preceded parliament's action, the military has refused to allow civilian prosecutors to determine when military courts have jurisdiction, insisting that only military prosecutors are competent to make that determination.
The absence of any civilian oversight of the military's involvement in law enforcement and the fact that civilian prosecutors cannot investigate military abuses has already led to a climate of impunity that encourages such abuses, Human Rights Watch said.
Legislative Developments Expand Military Role
The SCAF's military decree of June 17, which it called a "Constitutional Declaration," greatly expands the military's powers in law enforcement. Article 53 bis(2) states that:
[I]n cases of internal disturbances that require the intervention of the armed forces, the president may ask the SCAF for permission to order the armed forces to share in law enforcement duties and the protection of public institutions. The mandate and tasks of the armed forces, as well as regulations on the use of force, arrest, detention, jurisdiction, and accountability mechanisms shall be determined by law.
The SCAF has frequently considered peaceful protests criticizing its policies to be a threat to internal security.
On June 18, the Official Gazette published another previously unannounced military decree re-structuring the National Defense Council to augment its yet undefined mandate on "national security issues." Under the decree, the council has 11 military and six civilian members and can only make decisions through absolute majority, thereby giving the military a controlling role on issues of security, further limiting civilian oversight.
In the June 17 Constitutional Declaration, which came three days after the SCAF declared the recently elected parliament dissolved, the military granted itself legislative authority until a new parliament is elected. Since it took over legislative authority on February 13, 2011, the military has issued a number of laws that violate Egypt's obligations under international human rights law. In April 2011, the SCAF issued Law 34/2011, which effectively criminalizes the right to strike. In September 2011, the SCAF expanded the scope of application of the Emergency Law to include for the first time a charge limiting freedom of expression - "spreading false information."
The SCAF contends that the Code of Military Justice is a sound law and has used it to justify the trials of at least 12,000 civilians before military courts since it took power in February 2011. It clearly intends to rely on this law to protect its prerogative of trying civilians before these courts, Human Rights Watch said.
Human Rights Watch is one of the world's leading independent organizations dedicated to defending and protecting human rights. By focusing international attention where human rights are violated, we give voice to the oppressed and hold oppressors accountable for their crimes. Our rigorous, objective investigations and strategic, targeted advocacy build intense pressure for action and raise the cost of human rights abuse. For 30 years, Human Rights Watch has worked tenaciously to lay the legal and moral groundwork for deep-rooted change and has fought to bring greater justice and security to people around the world.
"Any actions that violate US and international law regarding the conduct of war must be thoroughly investigated and appropriate accountability pursued," said the head of NIAC.
As President Donald Trump's Tuesday night deadline for Iran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz or face more war crimes approached, the National Iranian American Council on Monday urged Congress to investigate the Republican leader's remarks as well as the US-Israeli destruction of Iran's civilian infrastructure that has already occurred.
"The US-Israel war on Iran increasingly appears aimed not at defeating a military adversary but instead at breaking the nation of Iran," said NIAC president Jamal Abdi in a statement. "The past days have seen repeated US-Israeli attacks on civilian targets in Iran, including Sharif University of Technology in Tehran, one of the world's preeminent universities; a major petrochemical plant in Asaluyeh; and the B1 bridge in Karaj, Iran."
Since the US and Israel launched the war—which has not been authorized by Congress—on February 28, they have struck at least tens of thousands of civilian sites, including energy infrastructure, homes, hospitals, and schools. While surrounded by children at a White House event on Monday, Trump attempted to defend his threat to consider "blowing everything up" in Iran if the government doesn't reopen the key shipping route by 8:00 pm Eastern time Tuesday.
Abdi argued that "as Americans, we should be outraged that our government and Israel's have so blurred the lines between civilian and military targets and are openly threatening to engage in war crimes that have little to no military value while inflicting disproportionate civilian harm."
"NIAC calls on the US Congress to thoroughly investigate the targeting and threatening of civilian sites in Iran, including by utilizing all tools at Congress' disposal including subpoena power to secure documentary evidence and testimony from relevant officials," he said. "Any actions that violate US and international law regarding the conduct of war must be thoroughly investigated and appropriate accountability pursued. We cannot allow such brazen disregard for civilian life to be normalized."
So far, nearly all congressional Republicans—who have majorities in both chambers—and a short list of Democrats have blocked attempts to end Trump's illegal assault on Iran via war powers resolutions, even though the US Constitution explicitly empowers only Congress to declare war. Similar measures for Trump's military misadventures elsewhere have also failed.
Still, Abdi said that "NIAC also reiterates that Congress must pass a war powers resolution directing the president to remove US forces from Iran as soon as possible, including by ending the congressional recess early. Moreover, NIAC calls on the United Nations and other international institutions to intervene and put a stop to these advertised crimes before they take place."
United Nations figures—including Secretary-General António Guterres, High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk, and special rapporteurs—have repeatedly called for an end to the regional war, which critics argue violates the UN Charter. However, as one of the five permanent members of the Security Council, the US has veto power, which hamstrings the body's ability to respond.
Iran has responded to the barrage by bombing Israel and various Gulf states, while Israeli forces have renewed attacks on Lebanon and again restricted the flow of humanitarian aid into the Gaza Strip, where they are accused of engaging in genocide. At least 13 US service members and thousands of people across the Middle East have been killed.
"President Trump can and should halt all bombing of Iran immediately, which would do far more to bring the war to a close than his reckless threats to attack more power plants, bridges, and civilian infrastructure," said Abdi. "The United States should pursue a permanent negotiated end to the war and must be prepared to use its leverage by putting sanctions relief on the table."
"While proposed mediations like a reported 45-day ceasefire proposal promulgated by Pakistan would not be without some merit," he continued, "they remain disconnected from the realities of the war and the past experience of Iran being attacked twice by the US and Israel amid negotiations."
"Iran is extremely unlikely to surrender its own leverage just to allow the US and Israel with time and space to attack once again," he added. "This deficit of trust amid war is difficult to overcome, but it must if this war is to end before more civilians are harmed."
Citing a senior Iranian official, Drop Site News reported Monday that "Tehran rejects any agreement for a temporary ceasefire to end the war" and "would only accept an agreement that leads to a permanent end to the fighting."
"The American people are watching this department squander their tax dollars, handing over giant sums to the president’s friends for claims that multiple federal judges have rejected as having no legal merit."
Rep. Jamie Raskin is demanding answers in the US Department of Justice's decision to fork over more than $1 million to Michael Flynn, President Donald Trump's disgraced former national security adviser.
As CNN reported last month, the DOJ agreed to pay Flynn $1.25 million to settle a malicious prosecution lawsuit related to his 2017 guilty plea for lying to the FBI during its investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.
A DOJ spokesperson told CNN that the Flynn settlement was "an important step in redressing that historic injustice," which began when Trump-appointed Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein selected Robert Mueller, a longtime Republican who was chosen as FBI director by former President George W. Bush, to serve as special counsel in the Russia probe.
In a letter sent to acting Attorney General Todd Blanche on Monday, Raskin (D-Md.) demanded documents and information related to the DOJ's decision to give Flynn a payout.
"The American people are watching this department squander their tax dollars, handing over giant sums to the president's friends for claims that multiple federal judges have rejected as having no legal merit," Raskin wrote. "The American people deserve a full accounting of why our tax dollars are being used that way."
Raskin noted that Flynn had affirmed his guilty plea multiple times under oath, and that Flynn's effort to sue the DOJ for $50 million was shot down by a federal judge, who dismissed the case completely. The judge found Flynn had "completely failed to establish the elements of such a claim and stopp[ed] just short of sanctioning him for bringing frivolous arguments before the court."
Raskin said that Flynn rushed to refile his complaint against the DOJ after Trump's victory in the 2024 election, at which point the DOJ "entirely reversed its position" by agreeing to pay the former national security adviser $1.25 million in a case that had already been dismissed.
The Maryland Democrat then warned that Flynn's case could be just the first in a long number of efforts by Trump allies to bilk US taxpayers.
"The Flynn settlement is an ominous test case," he wrote, "as the president and his political allies are all lining up for their free-government-money payouts. The president himself has demanded $230 million from this department... and has sued the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) for a staggering $10 billion—a figure around two-thirds the size of the IRS’s total annual budget."
Raskin also pointed to lawsuits filed by multiple Trump supporters who violently stormed the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, including five leaders of the Proud Boys who were convicted on seditious conspiracy charges and are now demanding $100 million.
"The Flynn settlement," Raskin contended, "offers a road map for this epically corrupt President to keep paying out his political underlings and private militiamen with taxpayer money."
"In every previous administration, including Trump's first, this woman would not have been a priority for enforcement," said one immigration expert.
A US Army staff sergeant saw his young wife taken away by immigration agents at his military base in Louisiana last week.
Matthew Blank, 23, who is set to begin training for deployment next month, was preparing to move into his home at the Fort Polk Army base with his 22-year-old wife, Annie Ramos, whom he married just weeks ago.
According to a report out Monday from The New York Times, Ramos is an undocumented Honduran immigrant who was brought to the United States as a toddler. She works as a Sunday school teacher and is months away from finishing a biochemistry degree. She has no criminal record.
Undocumented immigrants who marry US citizens become eligible for green cards and can apply for full citizenship three years after receiving them. Prior to their marriage, Blank and Ramos had already hired a lawyer to begin the process.
Ramos had also applied for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) in 2020, but her application was never processed after the Trump administration halted it for new applicants.
Blank said he and his wife were following the procedures to get her legal status: "We were doing everything the right way.”
In the meantime, they were planning to begin their lives as newlyweds. On April 2, the couple headed to the base's visitor center to get Ramos registered for military spouse benefits.
They showed Ramos' birth certificate, Honduran passport, their marriage license, and Blank’s military ID. When asked whether Ramos had a visa or green card, they explained that she did not, but that they had completed the application and planned to file it within days. That's when the trouble began.
After the attendant made a "flurry of calls," they were told Ramos would be detained.
Soon enough, she was led away in shackles and taken more than an hour away to the privately owned South Louisiana Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Processing Center in Basile, where she waits with hundreds of other women who have been rounded up as part of President Donald Trump's mass deportation effort.
"She was going to move in after the Easter weekend," Blank said. "Instead, she got ripped away from me.”
The Department of Homeland Security issued a statement following initial reports of Ramos' arrest.
“She has no legal status to be in this country and was issued a final order of removal by a judge,” the statement read. “This administration is not going to ignore the rule of law.”
The statement also said that Ramos was arrested "after she attempted to enter a military base," seeming to imply she was in the process of illicit activity rather than there as a military spouse.
Ramos had been issued a deportation order in absentia in 2005, when she was 22 months old, after her family failed to show up for an immigration court hearing.
However, experts told the Times that it is very rare for people who have been issued prior deportation orders to be detained and that it's typically easy for them to adjust their paperwork.
"In every previous administration, including Trump's first, this woman would not have been a priority for enforcement," concurred Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, a senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, who wrote about the incident on social media.
While prior deportation orders can affect an undocumented person's ability to receive legal status, he said, "discretion is part of the enforcement of every law."
"She got a deportation order when she was a small child. It's quite possible that, like many people, she didn't even know about it. That's a common situation," he explained. "Immigration law has always involved choices about whether deportation makes sense or not."
Citing a YouGov/Economist poll from February, he noted that just 21% of Americans support deporting undocumented people brought to the US as kids, while just 16% support deporting those married to US citizens.
Contrary to previous administrations, which tended to target immigrants with criminal records and recent arrivals for deportation, around three-quarters of those currently in ICE detention have no criminal convictions, according to data published in February.
While there is no complete data on how long the average ICE detainee has lived in the US, the Deportation Data Project found that during the first nine months of the second Trump administration, the number of arrests away from the border increased by a factor of 4.6, suggesting that it was going after undocumented immigrants who have been in the US for longer periods of time.
According to Blank's parents, who were there as their son's young spouse was taken away, even the ICE agents who enforced the order to arrest Ramos did not appear proud of what they were doing.
“They told us that they didn’t have a choice, they said they had to take Annie,” recalled Blank's mother, who said the agents apologized.
“I begged them not to take her,” she said. “They said the higher-ups made them do it.”
Ramos told the Times that she knows no other home besides the United States.
"I grew up here like any American,” she said over the phone. “My husband and family are here.”
The facility where she is being held, run by GEO Group, a multibillion-dollar private prison company, has been the subject of dozens of complaints from current and former female detainees who have claimed they were denied basic medical treatment, hygiene supplies, and edible food.
Others have said they've faced sexual abuse and harassment and were subject to forced labor. In December, a former guard pleaded guilty in federal court to sexually abusing a Nicaraguan detainee in mid-2025.
Ramos' detention comes as thousands of US service members deploy to fight Trump's war in Iran. ICE has also been deployed to military bases to screen the family members of Marine recruits at their graduation as recently as last week.
Blank, who has previously been deployed to the Middle East and Europe, said he was "going to fight with everything I have" to secure his wife's freedom.
"She is going to move in with me. We will start a family," Blank said. "I am going to be with her and serve my country."
Their lawyer has petitioned the court to reopen her removal order, which could freeze her deportation. Until it is reopened, however, she could be deported at any moment.
They have also continued to push forward with the effort to get Ramos a green card. But the guards at Basile have refused to let them bring the completed forms inside to get Ramos' signature.
The Congressional Hispanic Caucus said on social media that Blank "should be focused on training today," but "instead, he was forced into a fight against his own government to free his wife."
A GoFundMe campaign created by Blank's sister to pay for the legal fight has raised more than $20,000 since Saturday.