Judges in Egypt Brotherhood's trial quit
Source: Al Jazeera
The judges presiding over the trial of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood leaders have stepped down from the proceedings, citing "uneasiness" over the trial as the defence lawyers said the panel had come under pressure to hold the trial inside a prison.
Judge Mohammed el-Qarmouti from the three-judge panel at the Cairo Criminal Court announced the decision to step down on Tuesday, just before the second session in the trial was to convene.
"We step down in both cases and we are sending the cases back to the head of the appeal court. The head of the appeal court will assign these cases to another court. Meanwhile, the defendants remain imprisoned," el-Qarmouti said.
...
"The decision of stepping down is due to the fact that the defendants were not present. Especially, after the judge had promised the defence panel their (defendants') presence. But the ministry of the interior did not bring the defendants to court," said defence counsel spokesman Mohamed Eldamaty.
Read more: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2013/10/judges-egypt-brotherhood-trial-quit-20131029133759618623.html
another_liberal
(8,821 posts)Then they could build a new courthouse inside their over-crowded detention center for political prisoners (which we undoubtedly also paid for).
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)I find it especially rich that the coup government that gunned down more than a thousand street demonstrators wants to try Morsi for murder.
dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)Mohammed Fahmy al-Qarmuty from the three-judge panel at the Cairo Criminal Court announced the decision on Tuesday, just before the second session of the trial was to convene.
He cited "uneasiness" over the trial, without further elaboration. This comes while the defense lawyers said the panel had come under pressure from security officials to hold the trial inside a prison.
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/10/29/331937/egypt-judges-resign-from-mb-chiefs-trial/
Igel
(35,320 posts)Yeah, it's possible that this technicality--the nonfulfilment of the interior ministry of a promise made by the judge--but I read it differently.
The Interior Ministry is a problem. What, exactly, the problem is may be a bit of a mystery. Perhaps it is that the trial would be held in prison. Perhaps there's a note from al-Sisi's old assistant saying, "And while you're there, check out your new quarters if you reach the wrong verdict."
Or maybe the IM is just stonewalling, providing all but only the information necessary to convict but none of the information necessary to defend. Court system is different: It's not the case that there are two sides with a neutral and fairly passive arbitrator. This is more Roman law. The judges have more authority, they don't just rule on what's presented and base their judgments primarily on what's presented.
Perhaps they don't like what's presented. Perhaps they know it's flawed or incomplete but it strikes them as impolitic or somehow infelicitous to rule against the ministry that provided the collusion that led to a military coup, forced imprisonment, martial/emergency law, and the killing of hundreds of MB members with impunity.
All such changes of power start with saying they're just doing "what's necessary." People are very bad at distinguishing "necessary" from "what I think is a good idea." And "what's a good idea" usually becomes "what benefits me and those I care about, but not others."