The Maat Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Studies, the coordinator of the Egyptian Coalition Against the Death Penalty, in cooperation with the National Council for Human Rights, held a round table entitled “Controls of the death penalty in light of the international protection of human rights” on Sunday October 21, 2007 within the National Council, in which a large number of law professors, experts and judges participated.
Where the table opened with the speech of Counselor Adel Koura, which revolved around the necessity of setting governing controls to approve the death penalty and put forward the articles in which the punishment is decided for discussion, and that this table is not intended to abolish the punishment completely from Egyptian legislation and laws as much as what is the aim of it to lay down guarantees for this punishment.
In his opening speech, Professor Ayman Akil, “Coordinator of the Egyptian Coalition Against the Death Penalty,” spoke about the requirements calling for the abolition of the death penalty, and that this is not a defense of the perpetrators of crimes, but a prevention of treating a crime with one of them. Of crime
Aqil explained in his speech some examples that confirm the cruelty and ugliness of the punishment and its futility
He also added that it is possible to replace that penalty with another punishment that is less violent and more humane.
Dr. Imad Al-Feki, “Professor of Criminal Law,” addressed both opinions in favor of and against abolition. In his speech, he also explained the arguments of both supporters and opponents of the punishment, discussed some articles in Egyptian laws that include the death penalty and explained its unconstitutionality.
As for Dr. Khairy Al-Kabbash, “Professor of Criminal Law and President of the Court of Appeal,” it revolved around what are the legal controls related to the death penalty, which guarantee the fairness of its report and its implementation, so that it can be embodied in three types of controls. First: The controls required when deciding on the death penalty.
Second: The controls to be imposed when sentencing the death penalty.
Third: The necessary controls during the procedures for implementing the death penalty.
Then the discussion was opened in front of the attendees, and the discussion revolved around the rules governing the punishment and the guarantees through which we guarantee the fairness of the punishment in the right of both the accused and the victim, and also the attendees discussed the possibility of activating and applying these guarantees and also they dealt with some articles related to the punishment and the possibility of their cancellation, amendment or replacement The penalty is another less violent penalty
The participants also agreed on the guarantee of the necessity to take the opinion of the mufti regarding death sentences presented to him and that it should be mandatory and compulsory. They also agreed on the necessity of presenting the case to the Court of Cassation and it shall have the right to consider the matter.
At the end of the interventions, the attendees recommended several recommendations, which were divided into two parts,
The first section: Reconsidering the articles that punish the death penalty in the penal code, the anti-drug law, the military courts law, and also the arms and ammunition law.
Especially in the Penal Code, which contains 39 articles in which the death penalty is prescribed, including the articles that punish the crimes of assaulting state security, and which the legislator is dearly using that punishment. These articles have also been described as vague and contain vague phrases and words, but in order to determine that punishment, it is necessary. The materials are more accurate and clear.
Noting that the state may not supervise the application of the death penalty.
As for the second section of the recommendations, it was concerned with the guarantees related to the death penalty. This part dealt with all the available guarantees that can be proposed and put up for discussion in front of specialists and decision makers and presented to the Egyptian legislator and judge.
At the end of the table, the attendees presented some recommendations that were:
1- The need to take the opinion of the Mufti regarding death sentences and make his opinion mandatory for the court.
2- Presenting the case in which the death sentence was issued by the courts to the Court of Cassation as a second degree.
3- The presence of the heads of the department that issued the ruling on that penalty and during its execution.
4- Expanding the use of the pardon system and the application of blood money.
5- The judgment issued also by the exceptional courts was presented to the Court of Cassation
6- Impermissibility of referring civilians to the military judiciary, especially for crimes that are punishable by death.
7 - The judicial member present for the procedures for the implementation of the death penalty shall record what the convicted person wishes to say in accordance with what the law permits him in a separate report.