 |
Al-Ahram Weekly 27 May - 2 June 1999 Issue No. 431 
|
||
Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
 |
 |
|
|
Al-Ahram Weekly 27 May - 2 June 1999 Issue No. 431
|
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
|
|
|
Egypt Region International Economy Opinion Culture Profile Living Features Travel Sports People Time Out Chronicles Cartoons Letters Wali versus Al-Shaab off to a fiery start
By Khaled DawoudThere were dramatic developments last week in criminal court hearings on a libel lawsuit brought by Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Agriculture Youssef Wali against three journalists and a cartoonist with the pro-Islamist biweekly Al-Shaab.
Since the beginning of the year and until its latest issue on Tuesday, Al-Shaab, the mouthpiece of the Islamist-oriented Labour Party, has been lambasting Wali, accusing him of "treason" for allegedly advocating normalisation of Egyptian-Israeli relations and forging close agricultural cooperation between the two countries.
Following a protracted silence, Wali initiated the libel lawsuit in early May against Al-Shaab's editor-in-chief, Magdi Ahmed Hussein, Labour Secretary-General Adel Hussein, journalist Salah Bedeiwi and cartoonist Essam Soltan.
The complaint was referred by the prosecutor-general to a criminal court, where the defendants face up to two years in prison and a hefty fine, if convicted.
Since the beginning of the trial on 15 May, the Al-Shaab lawyers' tactics have been to prolong the hearings in order to put pressure on the government to agree to a compromise between the two sides. The lawyers have flooded Chief Justice Hassib El-Beitar with dozens of requests. They insisted on summoning Wali as a key witness and postponing hearings for at least one month to give them time to prepare their case and present the court with "documents". The judge ignored their requests, postponing the hearings for four days only.
On 19 May the lawyers spent over three hours reading out some 1,200 pages of "documents". These were mainly newspaper and magazine clippings in Arabic, English and Hebrew, cited to prove allegations that Wali maintained strong links with Israel. The lawyers requested that the English and Hebrew "documents" be translated into Arabic which could take months.
To the surprise of the Al-Shaab journalists and Labour Party supporters, the lawyer chosen to argue Wali's case was none other than Nouman Goma'a, secretary-general of the liberal Wafd Party. This was an indication that some key opposition figures are opposed to Al-Shaab's fierce campaign against Wali. The agriculture minister is not only a key cabinet figure, but is also secretary-general of the ruling National Democratic Party (NDP). The anti-Wali campaign has been criticised by some journalists for "violating professional standards and journalistic ethics".
"This case is not about freedom of the press," Goma'a told the court. "Al-Shaab has exceeded all limits governing freedom of the press and the right to criticise public officials, by accusing Minister Wali of being of Jewish origin, describing him as a traitor and claiming that he agreed to construct Jewish settlements in Fayoum and Sinai. It even alleged that he was responsible for a rise in the number of cancer cases because he allegedly agreed to import sub-standard crops and seeds from Israel."
Goma'a presented the court with an official certificate confirming that Wali hailed from a Muslim family and that his full name was Wali Mizar Ga'afar.
Judge El-Beitar decided to annex all the "documents" submitted by the Al-Shaab and Wali lawyers to the dossier of the case. The presiding judge asked the lawyers to bring in their witnesses on the following day, 20 May.
"This is totally unfair. He rejected all our demands and gave us less than 24 hours to call in more than 30 witnesses. This is impossible," said Mamdouh Farag, an Al-Shaab lawyer. "We also insist on summoning Wali. It is our right and he is the central figure in this case."
Before the resumption of hearings on 20 May, the Al-Shaab lawyers presented the Higher Court of Appeals with a request for the disqualification of the criminal court from conducting hearings and asked for the case to be referred to another circuit. This means that hearings will be postponed until the Court of Appeals makes a decision. Under Egyptian law, the Court of Appeals can decide to refer the case to another circuit or, if not convinced by the lawyers' argument, return it to the same court.
When the criminal court resumed hearings on 20 May, Judge El-Beitar announced that he had received a letter from the Court of Appeals, notifying him of the lawyers' request. But he also had another announcement to make. He said he had received a second letter from the concerned judicial authorities, informing him that he should continue hearings until the end of the month.
For the Al-Shaab lawyers the announcement meant one thing: "The Court of Appeals will most probably look into our request quickly, reject it and return the case to the same court that will hand down harsh sentences against our clients," Farag told Al-Ahram Weekly. No date has yet been set by the Court of Appeals for considering the Al-Shaab lawyers' request.
The Al-Shaab lawyers also used the strategy of attempting to prolong hearings in a series of libel lawsuits brought by former Interior Minister Hassan El-Alfi against the same defendants named in the Wali case, except for cartoonist Soltan. After Al-Shaab launched a similarly harsh campaign against him and his family, accusing them of massive corruption, El-Alfi sued the newspaper. The case ended with an out-of-court settlement early last year. The former minister lost the interior affairs portfolio 24 hours after the Luxor massacre in November 1997, which claimed the lives of 58 tourists and four Egyptians.
In a libel lawsuit brought by El-Alfi's son, Al-Shaab's editor, Magdi Hussein and Mohamed Hilal, a cartoonist with the newspaper, were each sentenced to one year imprisonment early last year. However, they were released after spending four months behind bars when the ruling was quashed by the Court of Cassation.
The Wali versus Al-Shaab hearings have been conducted under tight security. From the early morning, trucks carrying dozens of anti-riot police, armoured vehicles and hundreds of policemen, dressed in uniform or in civilian clothes, surrounded the court. The four defendants arrived with an entourage of nearly 50 supporters and Labour Party members. A similar number of Wali supporters were also present in court. Separated by riot police, the two sides usually exchange insults and curses outside the courtroom.
