Amendments to Expedite Trials and E

On 27 April 2017, the Official Gazette issued several amendments on laws aiming to expedite trials and restrict litigation procedures.[1] These amendments were primarily directed at addressing terrorism and national security cases. Nonetheless, they have significant repercussions on litigation procedures and prosecutorial powers in general.

Changes in Court of Cassation Procedures

The latest amendments have fundamentally changed the role of the Egyptian Court of Cassation in an attempt to expedite the processing of cases before it. Generally, the law states that when the Court of Cassation reverses the appealed verdict, it orders the retrial of the case by the court that issued the original verdict (with a different composition of judges). After the latest amendments, however, if the Court of Cassation reverses a verdict, it is itself now – as a rule – required to decide the case. Prior to the amendments, the Court of Cassation was only required to directly decide a case when it has overruled the verdict of the retrial court. Notably, this amendment applies to both criminal and civil cases, which means that it will have significant ramifications on litigation procedures in commercial cases as well.

Restricting Some Litigation Procedures

In addition to those related to the Court of Cassation, the latest amendments included some significant changes to the Criminal Procedures Law where the court has been granted broader powers to restrict certain procedures related to hearing witnesses and issuing verdicts in absentia. To that effect, the amendments gave more weight to the “special attorney”, whose presence will now generally mean that the ruling is not made in absentia, even if the defendant himself is absent. Once more, even though the amendments were issued in light of the terrorist attacked on the churches in Tanta and Alexandria, their effect is not limited to cases of terrorism and national security but extends to other criminal cases.

Extending the Power to Freeze Assets and Issuing Amendments to the Emergency Law

The same law amending the criminal procedures law and the Court of Cassation law also amended two more laws – the Terrorist Entities Law and the Anti-Terrorism law. These amendments extended the prosecution’s power to freeze assets, harshen penalties for crimes listed in the terrorist entities law, and to restrict litigation procedures that prolong the duration of terrorism trials. The amendments reduced the conditions required for the prosecution to request officially classifying a person or an entity as a terrorist. It also granted the prosecution the power to freeze assets if there is evidence of an affiliation between said money and terroristic activities, without requiring the prosecution to wait until the relevant person or entity is officially classified as a terrorist. Separately, the Official Gazette issued on the same day (27 April 2017) amendments to the Emergency Law granted security authorities and the Emergency National Security Court broader powers in relation to detention and custody. As has been explained in our April 2017 Week 3 Issue of the Egypt Legal Update, the amendments give the security sector the right to arrest anyone if there is evidence they committed a crime. It also permits detaining the said person, after securing the prosecution’s permission, for seven days while evidence is being collected, without necessitating that the defendant be presented to the prosecution or to a court, which stands in contrast to regular procedures mandated by the criminal procedures law. Moreover, the amendments granted the prosecution the right to apply to Emergency National Security Courts with a request to detain those who may pose a threat to public peace for a month, open for an unspecified number of renewals. As we mentioned in that same ELU issue, it is likely that these amendments came as a reaction to the Supreme Constitutional Court’s decision in 2013 declaring as unconstitutional the article that grants the president the authority to order detention, custody, and search of people and places without being bound by the provisions of the Criminal Procedures Law.

Conclusion

The latest amendments on several criminal laws have broad ramification that extend beyond the scope of terrorism and national security cases. The amendments to the Criminal Procedures Law will generally affect criminal cases due to the new provisions on calling and hearing witnesses and the new definition pertaining to verdicts delivered in the presence of the defendant. As to the amendments concerning the role of the Court of Cassation, those have broad implications on criminal civil, and commercial cases due to the amendments requiring the Court to directly decide on appealed cases from – in most cases – the first round of appeals.   [1] Law No. 11/2017 amending the Criminal Procedures Law No. 150/1950, Appeal in front of Court of Cassation Law No. 57/1959, Terrorist Entities Law No. 8/2015, Anti-Terrorism Law No. 94/2015, Official Gazette, Issue No. 17 (cont.), 27 April 2017.