Background and Procedural History

For years Professor Ibrahim had been a fervent activist in the cause of liberal democratic reform in Egypt. His long time advocacy of freedom has made of him almost an icon of civil society within the community of Arab human rights defenders. He has been involved in the founding of some of the most prominent human rights institutions in the Arab world, and has persistently pushed for greater political participation for all political factions, including the Muslim Brotherhood, even while the government was suppressing their leaders.

Professor Ibrahim's criticism of the lack of democracy and the violations of human rights in Egypt had been longstanding. Just before his arrest he was organizing civil society's monitoring of the upcoming 2000 November elections. He had also written at that time an article sharply criticizing Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak's apparent intention to groom his son for succession to the presidency, comparing him to a hereditary monarch. There is no doubt that this criticism together with the intended monitoring of the elections, which he had repeatedly claimed were rigged by the government, must have provoked the ire of the regime, thus drawing upon himself the wrath of its State Security apparatus.

Although Professor Ibrahim has long been a controversial figure in Egyptian society yet even the government respected his work and sought his advice from time to time. But all this changed substantially on June 30th, 2000 when as Professor Ibrahim was sitting at his study late in the evening more than two dozen armed policemen raided his home and arrested him. The nature of the arrest of Professor Ibrahim and his 27 associates were characterized by the features usually found in repressive regimes: refusal to allow contact with family and lawyers, late-night interrogations, and strategies of intimidation.

The first trial before the State Security Court lasted several months with the court convening only periodically. Most of the Prosecution's evidence was not shared with the defense, but the latter was allowed three hours in which to examine the documents upon which the Prosecution's case rested, and this only in the presence of the Prosecution's lawyers.

On 21st May, 2001, the State Security Court rendered its judgment?90 minutes after the defense's closing argument! Professor Ibrahim was sentenced to 7 years in prison for illegally receiving EC funds, defaming the state, and the misappropriation of the EC funds. The other defendants received punishments from one-year prison sentences to suspended sentences.

On appeal the Court of Cassation on 6th February 2002, overturned the sentence, on grounds that the State Security Court's judgment had not been supported by the evidence, that the right of the defendants had not been fully observed, and that the Court had erroneously applied the law, in addition to having failed to consider inconsistencies between the testimony of witnesses and failure to sufficiently consider claims of moral coercion by the police. When presented with evidence that one of the confessions by a defendant had been obtained by the use of moral coercion, the trial court had not properly investigated this allegation which, if true, would have rendered the confession invalid.

A new trial was therefore set for the 27th April 2002 before a new panel of the State Security Court. This second trial reaffirmed the first sentence. Its ruling was again appealed to the Court of Cassation which once more overturned the sentence for similar defects as those found in the first trial. According to the law if a judgement is overturned twice, the Court of Cassation itself reviews both the law and the facts of the case, including re-evaluation of all the evidence. The judgement of the Court of Cassation in this third trial was handed down on 18 March 2003. It exonerated Professor Ibrahim as well as the other defendants of all wrongdoing.