This was paired with charges of insulting President Mursi, both statements allegedly posted on Facebook. (Read)
(Image: al-Jazeera)
The ruling will be appealed on a hearing to be held quite soon (Sept. 27th).
The Christian man was escorted to a separate court house from the main justice complex where misdemeanor court is usually held because they were afraid of the large numbers of protestors gathering who disagreed with the court’s rulings.
Salafists were successful in pressuring government authorities to move the trial’s location, which could have affected the outcome of the trial.
The defense team of the man says his Facebook account had been hacked, but the Coptic church Kamil attends in his city and previously warned him of the dangers of insulting Muslims and Islam.
The sentence of six years is a compound sentence, one year for insulting Islam, two for insulting President Mursi and the remaining for other charges involving disrespecting the trial procedure.
This is a grave disappointment in Egypt following the presidential elections. In this case a precedent has already been set for violating free speech in the only Arab Republic that holds free elections, a seemingly paradoxical situation. Hints of this free speech violation were already apparent during small crackdowns on post-regime change Tahrir and Alexandria gatherings.
Could this approach to speech rights be a dream come true for Salafists, The Brotherhood, and other Egyptian Islamists? It seems unwise to lump them all into one group and equally so to assume speech violations would be an attractive situation to Islamists, however the President is a member to the Freedom and Justice Party which was formed my the Muslim Brotherhood in the wake of Tahrir agitation and ousting of Mubarak.
The fact that in this case that a portion of the hard time was doled out for insulting this same President ultimately leads back to the Islamic Brotherhood and reflects a poor image to the outside world, both of the group’s lack of value for human rights as well as generally inappropriate treatment of minorities in this democracy (Christians, namely). And what a poor example for neighboring Arab states hoping to secure democracy through popular revolution.
The consequences of this case are more wide reaching, in my opinion, than merely a re-hashing of the old Coptic Christians vs. Government tussle that has continued in Egypt. A case with such draconian principals as its driving force which raised, tried and successfully convicted a man shows that all power is now behind minority invalidation in Egypt. In the past it appeared to be piecemeal at most times: the police here, Mubarak there, and civilians on occasion. The courts moving behind the executive on this is dismaying.
(Image: al-Jazeera)
The ruling will be appealed on a hearing to be held quite soon (Sept. 27th).
The Christian man was escorted to a separate court house from the main justice complex where misdemeanor court is usually held because they were afraid of the large numbers of protestors gathering who disagreed with the court’s rulings.
Salafists were successful in pressuring government authorities to move the trial’s location, which could have affected the outcome of the trial.
The defense team of the man says his Facebook account had been hacked, but the Coptic church Kamil attends in his city and previously warned him of the dangers of insulting Muslims and Islam.
The sentence of six years is a compound sentence, one year for insulting Islam, two for insulting President Mursi and the remaining for other charges involving disrespecting the trial procedure.
This is a grave disappointment in Egypt following the presidential elections. In this case a precedent has already been set for violating free speech in the only Arab Republic that holds free elections, a seemingly paradoxical situation. Hints of this free speech violation were already apparent during small crackdowns on post-regime change Tahrir and Alexandria gatherings.
Could this approach to speech rights be a dream come true for Salafists, The Brotherhood, and other Egyptian Islamists? It seems unwise to lump them all into one group and equally so to assume speech violations would be an attractive situation to Islamists, however the President is a member to the Freedom and Justice Party which was formed my the Muslim Brotherhood in the wake of Tahrir agitation and ousting of Mubarak.
The fact that in this case that a portion of the hard time was doled out for insulting this same President ultimately leads back to the Islamic Brotherhood and reflects a poor image to the outside world, both of the group’s lack of value for human rights as well as generally inappropriate treatment of minorities in this democracy (Christians, namely). And what a poor example for neighboring Arab states hoping to secure democracy through popular revolution.
The consequences of this case are more wide reaching, in my opinion, than merely a re-hashing of the old Coptic Christians vs. Government tussle that has continued in Egypt. A case with such draconian principals as its driving force which raised, tried and successfully convicted a man shows that all power is now behind minority invalidation in Egypt. In the past it appeared to be piecemeal at most times: the police here, Mubarak there, and civilians on occasion. The courts moving behind the executive on this is dismaying.
No comments:
Post a Comment