Within the framework of the activities of the Maat Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Studies aimed at legalizing the use of the death penalty as a punitive means, the center, in cooperation and coordination with the Amman Center for Human Rights Studies, held a workshop on Sunday, March 30, 2008 at the ship Imperial in Zamalek under the title (limiting the application of the death penalty in Egyptian legislation) in which a number participated Among the judges, jurists and representatives of the Egyptian parties, in addition to a representative of the Amman Center for Human Rights Studies. At the beginning of the workshop, Professor / Ayman Aqil, Director of Maat Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Studies, explained the development that took place in the civil society movement in Egypt to limit the application of the death penalty, which resulted in the establishment of the Egyptian Coalition Against the Death Penalty, which is participating among nine Arab countries in the regional coalition to limit the application Punishment is confirmed that the workshop proposals and recommendations will be presented at the conference that will be held at the Swedish Institute in Alexandria on May 12, 2008 in cooperation between the Maat Center and the International Organization for Criminal Reform and the Amman Center for Human Rights Studies in Jordan. Aqeel explained in his speech that the death penalty was used in some countries as a means to get rid of their political enemies, and therefore it is inconceivable that defending human rights should be justified by some in attacking the rights of others, especially in light of the fact that the death penalty is the only punishment that cannot be corrected if it is proven wrong. Innocence of the penalty carried out. Aqeel pointed out that the aim of punishment is deterrence and reform, not revenge and retaliation, which is confirmed by international covenants that demanded the reduction of punishment and its use, which is what some Arab countries seek to achieve, such as Tunisia, Palestine, Algeria, Lebanon and Morocco, which have stopped issuing death sentences since 1993. In various cases. As for Egypt, Aqeel indicated that there are two parties, one of which supports retaining the punishment as a means of restraining and establishing safety in society, which is what called three members of the People's Assembly to demand that the application be carried out in the street, and on the other hand, the other party that demands the abolition of the punishment relied on the possibility of deceiving the judge with evidence and evidence It can be questioned, just as the social contract between the citizens and the government is based on the mandate to act on the benefit of the citizens and not the loss of their lives. In his speech, Mr. Manhal, the representative of the Amman Center for Human Rights Studies, talked about the center's experiences in the field of the Arab Coalition Against the Death Penalty, in which local forms emerged in Jordan, Yemen, Morocco, Egypt, Palestine and Lebanon and explained that one of the goals of the coalition is to ensure that the various Arab countries go to include them with preparing studies to measure The effect of applying the punishment in achieving deterrence and reprisal, as well as studies on alternative punishments in the event of abolishing the death penalty, with an emphasis on the importance of the role of civil society organizations in achieving this required role to protect human rights in various Arab countries. In his paper, Dr. Imad Al-Feki discussed the controversy raised by the death penalty at all levels, stressing that Pharaonic Egypt is the first country in history to abolish the death penalty and replace it with exile and hard labor in actions of public benefit, criticizing Egypt's position announced in the United Nations General Assembly by refusing to suspend the punishment. Execution Al-Fiqi stressed his rejection of the justifications presented by the Egyptian representative in the United Nations to justify his refusal to suspend the punishment, considering it a means of restraining, achieving justice and limiting the spirit of revenge, stressing that the abolition of execution is a violation of Islamic law. Al-Fiqi refuted these justifications, which he saw as unconvincing, considering that it is a difficult punishment to correct the error in applying it, in addition to the fact that its effect on achieving general deterrence is in great doubt, citing that countries that have abolished the death penalty have not witnessed an increase in the percentage of crimes for which it is required. With regard to the contradiction of the abolition of the death penalty with Islamic law, Al-Fiqi clarified that execution is not a punishment in Islam except in three cases, which are adultery, premeditated murder, and the crime of warring crimes. Al-Fiqi moved to punishment in modern legislation, stressing that he is against expanding its use, demanding the necessity of abolishing it in drug crimes and not using it as a rule in legislation, demanding that its application be limited to four or five crimes only, stressing that the guarantees established by the legislator are insufficient in terms of consensus among judges. It could be my opinion in the case of a strong head of the department, and if the mufti saw a consultant that could not be taken, and that presenting the case to the Court of Cassation is not an advantage considering that everyone can resort to him in addition to the fact that the Court of Cassation is not an advantage considering that everyone can resort to him in addition to that The Court of Cassation is concerned with trying the verdict and not re-trying the convicted person again, as it is a court of law and not a reality. Commenting on the paper, Counselor Hisham Al-Bastawisi, Vice President of the Court of Cassation, said that the debate is taking place in a non-scientific way because we adopt an idea and then we are looking for evidence to confirm it, which is an inverse logic, stressing that there is a confusion between the function of legislation and the requirements of the ruling because legislation is not aimed at changing society, which is the task of other bodies. He considered that a misplaced employment of legislation, stressing that in Egypt many laws are set for a specific purpose, especially in the punitive aspects, which causes their failure to be applied and society ignores them, such as the hygiene law and the traffic law. Al-Bastawisi emphasized that what is applied in Egypt is not Islamic law, but rather the perception of some of the law and that it is necessary to adhere to the Sharia or leave it completely without absence, because Sharia has given the judge complete freedom within the framework of controls that guarantee the freedom of the judge and not to interfere in his private affairs and that the judge’s task is to achieve justice and not Law enforcement as the law is a tool for achieving justice. Al-Bastawisi explained that not only the Arab countries refuse to abolish the death penalty, but there are other countries, such as Japan, China, and East Asia that are more strict in refusing to abolish the punishment because of their beliefs. Al-Bastawisi talked about the guarantees of a death sentence explaining it, as he emphasized that the judge’s ruling of innocence if he was simply suspicious of The rate of accusation and consulting the mufti, despite the possibility of non-compliance with it, is an opportunity for the judge to review himself, and that the Court of Cassation is not a court of law as much as it is a guarantee of the availability of more expertise to hear the case. Al-Bastawisi explained his rejection of the texts contained in drug crimes, stressing their negative impact on achieving justice, demanding that death sentences be codified and not abolished, and that it is necessary for them to remain present in cases of premeditated murder, stalking, and cases of kidnapping and rape of a female, because this is consistent with the culture of society in the death penalty in these cases. Lack of judgment may cause people to implement it themselves. He also called for the abolition of the death penalty in cases of state security, except for those related to espionage or communicating with the enemy in wartime. Al-Bastawisi concluded his speech by stressing that the problem is that some judges have been convinced by the state that their mission is to implement the law, which has caused many societal problems. In the second session, Mr. Essam Shiha (the lawyer), a member of the Supreme Committee of the Wafd Party, Mr. Hamdi Al-Assiuti, the lawyer (Secretary of Freedoms in the Tagammu Party) and Mr. Ahmed Abdel Hafeez, the lawyer (member of the political bureau of the Nasserite Party) spoke in the second session. The articles contained in the Egyptian law that punish the death penalty were discussed. At the end of the workshop, the participants agreed that the death penalty would remain in four cases, namely: - The abduction of a female and her intercourse without her desire. Murder crimes associated with premeditation. High treason crimes. Intelligence and espionage for the benefit of a foreign country in wartime. With the need to reconsider the rest of the articles to cancel them as long as they represented an unnecessary increase, and a committee consisting of Mr. Ayman Aqil, Professor Issam Shiha and Professor Hamdi Al-Assiouti was formed to formulate the final recommendations.