Egyptian Initiative for Human Rights



Dear Mr. Abdel Majid Mahmoud/ Deputy General,

Introduction for your attention: Heba Abdulrahman Ali Mohamed, Azza Abdulrahman Ali Muhamed, Mohamed Abdulrahman Ali Mohamed and Lawahez Mohamed Hussein have designated the office of Mr. Adel Ramadan Rafe, the lawyer, at the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights based on number 8, Mohammed Ali Street, Garden City, Cairo, Telefax: 28323972.

Subject

The custody of a citizen on the grounds of his religious convictions and his coercion in order to change them. His location is also being hidden away from his family with no visitation allowed and whoever, of his family members, tries contacting him or finding out his whereabouts is subject to insult, offense and physical abuse.

Facts

On 27/10/2008 at 1.30a.m, a force of the National Security Bureau took Reda Abdulrahman Ali Mohamed into custody and searched his home in Omar Ibn Al Khattab Street, Abu Hariz Village, Kafr Sakr, Norther Municipality, and confiscated a computer and a number of books. They claimed that he did not believe in Islam – on the way that was determined for him by the forces of National Security – and on the grounds that he believed in the ideas of the Quranists and was later on led to an unknown place.

We have made several attempts to find out where he is being detained and to be reassured about his state of health as well as find out the precise legal charges addressed againt him and the legal reasons that called for his detention, but all these attempts were met with extreme unhelpfulness from the team at the National Security Investigation Bureau who refused to disclose any information in this regard in violation of the constitution and felony law procedures.

On 12/11/2008, Heba and Azza Abdulrahman Mohamed- the sisters of the detainee and their mother Mrs. Lawahez Mohamed Hussein, 68 years old, had come to the office of the National Security investigations in Kafr Sakr to inquire about Reda Abdulrahman . They were however, shocked by the reaction of Officer Ahmad Khedr- Officer of National Security Investigation in Kafr Sakr- head to them outside insulting their honor with obscene language and statements an example of which: “Bastards” and several others that one finds embarrassing to write but will reveal at the time of investigation.
This took place in front of passers-by in the street and he also threatened to detain them all and that they will never see Reda Abdulrahman again. He, then, pushed the old lady away with his hands and asked his staff to chase the family members away from the building of National Security using force.

Mr. Consultant: The National Security Investigations cannot punish citizens because of their religious convictions no matter how different they can be. According to subjects 40, 41, 46 and 47 of the constitution it is not allowed to force citizens to believe in any convictions chosen for him or force him to change their own.
Our supreme Constitutional Court had decreed that: “Freedom of belief in its origin means that no person should be coerced into believing into a faith that he/she does not choose to believe in, neither deny someone a faith he/she has adapted or declared, nor side up with another faith in order to attack another one by denying it, disdaining or disrespecting it. Religious beliefs should show tolerance and respect to one another. It is also not permissible for a government, in the sense of freedom of faith, to interfere by punishing those who choose to have a faith the government does not choose or recognize.”
Supreme Constitutional Court- Contestation number 8, year 8, Date of Hearing 18/5/1996

The freedom to choose and have a religious conviction is a natural right, as it is not right to interfere legislatively or administratively in the relation of an individual with his/her God to the limit of forming his/her convictions which should, originally, based on will, free choice, conviction, faith and security. A citizen should not be coerced into any belief nor can a conviction be dictated to him by the government as this contradicts the Constitutional rights.

The freedom to choose and form a religious conviction is not subject to the authenticity or falseness of this conviction from the point of view of the National Security officers’ religious standards. The individual has complete freedom to choose and form his convictions no matter what the rest of his/ her society can think of them. The government should, in fact, provide the security for the practice of these rights.

The freedom to choose and form a religious conviction is neither an extravagance nor a grant from the officers of the National Security that they can bestow upon whom they wish or deny whoever they wish. The government cannot interfere to invalidate an individual’s freedom to choose his/her faith, nor claim that it knows best for people or assure them salvation on the Day of Judgment.

Humans are born with certain privileges called “man’s natural rights” and the Constitutional Court says that “these rights have pre-existed the community and are dictated by the humanity of an individual and the characteristics of his/ her race. A man can only exist with these privileges”.
Contestation number 34, year 15, Date of Hearing 02/03/1996 contestation

The source of these rights is not any particular law, nor are they restricted to the citizens of any particular country, they are instead, universal as they are the essence and core of human dignity.

When our constitution talked about personal freedom, it described it as a natural right, and vowed to protect “the will to choose and decide that every individual owns and nobody can exist without.” Contestation number 56, year 18, Hearing Date 15/11/1997

Egypt had signed the International Decree of Civil and Political Rights that was published on issue number 15 of the official press dated 14/04/ 1982. Thus acquiring the authority of law in the Arab republic of Egypt as per law 151 of the Constitution that stated in its 18th subject the following rights:

“1- Everybody is entitled to the right of intellectual freedom, feelings and religion. This includes his/ her freedom to believe in whatever religion they choose to believe in and his/ her freedom to adapt any religion or conviction he/she chooses as well as the freedom to display these religious convictions by worship, practice or education individually or in groups, openly or discreetly.

2- It is not acceptable to subject any individual to any type of coercion that could affect his/her freedom to choose his/her own faith or the conviction he/she chooses.”

The following is the official interpretation of the International decree of Civil and Political rights, mentioned above, as issued by the United Nations:

“The right of freedom of faith that brings together the freedom of intellect, conscious and religion- whether practiced individually or collectively – is unique in comparison to all other rights in it not being subject to any restrictions no matter what circumstances can be- including emergencies-…. The concept of religion in subject 18 is not restricted to conventional faiths or religions with clerical institutions…..Subject 18, paragraph 2 is very clear in forbidding coercion with whatever is related to faith and conviction, including the threat to use force or punishment whether to force an individual to observe the rituals of his/her faith or to adapt a different faith or deny his/her own… In the same way the 1st paragraph of Subject 19 and 2nd paragraph of Subject 18 prohibit coercing an individual to revealing his ideas, religion or convictions, and this prohibition applies to any other form of action instigated by the same motives or could have the same consequences as coercion, or listed as criteria for acceptance in educational institutions, medical care, or for getting a job etc.”
General interpretation of the UN Commission for Human Rights, session 48, year 1993, resolution 22 pertaining to subject 18 of the International Decree for Civil and Political Rights.

Since what the Ministry of Internal Affairs had conducted through the actions of the National Security Investigation Bureau is a stark violation of citizens’ right to the freedom of faith and conviction protected by the Constitution and International decrees and resolutions;

Since the Egyptian Constitution as well as Human Rights decrees preserve the rights of any detained, imprisoned, or constrained individual to modest treatment that preserve his dignity and to report the reasons of his detention or custody immediately and inform him of these reason as well, and enable him/her to make contact or seek help from whoever they see fit;

Since what has taken place is a crime of arrest and detention with no legal foundation, and the search of the detainee’s home against the wish of its occupants and in the absence of a search warrant from the Minister of Interior as well as in the absence of an order from the Deputy General’s office for arrest and search;

Since what Officer Ahmad Khedr has committed in terms of verbal and physical abuse necessitate his interrogation administratively and with the charge of felony as per subject 306 of Punishment Law, as it is a conduct indicative of an eccentric character that does not respect the law or Constitution, nor respects the duties of his responsibility and is in need of re- qualification in order to be in the sensitive post he occupies;

On the basis of the above

We ask your honor to investigate what is being reported against:

1- The violation of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, through the National Security Investigations Bureau, of the rights of the citizen Reda Abdulrahman Ali Mohamed to the freedom of religion and faith and his punishment on the grounds of these religious convictions and his coercion to change them.
2- The reported Officer Ahmad Khedr in relation to the events of verbal and physical abuse.
3- Oblige the Ministry of Internal Affairs to disclose the whereabouts of the citizen Reda Abdulrahman Ali Mohamed and the precise legal reasons for his detention and to permit his family and lawyer to visit him.
4- Activate subject number 22 of felony procedures law and the prosecution of whoever was involved in violating the law.

Our sincere gratitude,

Presented to your honor by:
Heba Abdulrahman Ali Mohamed
Mohamed Abdulrahman Ali Mohamed
Azza Abdulrahman Ali Mohamed
Lawahez Mohamed Hussein