Home   |   About   |   Working Papers   |   Reports   |   Legal Observations   |   Country Situations   |   Press Releases

Egypt: Visits & Communications

Select Year

Correspondence from 2007

The record of correspondence for 2007 is excerpted from the official United Nations report, A/HRC/4/20/Add.1.

Egypt: Excessive Use of Force in Dispersing Crowds during Parliamentary Elections

Violation alleged: Deaths due to the use of excessive force by law enforcement officials

Subject(s) of appeal: 8 males

Character of reply: Largely satisfactory response

Observations of the Special Rapporteur

The Special Rapporteur appreciates the information provided by the Government of Egypt concerning the events of 7 December 2005.

The SR notes, however, that the explanation provided by the Government for the use of potentially lethal force to disperse the crowd raises serious concerns. According to human rights law, however necessary the use of force may be to achieve a particular objective, such as the dispersal of a crowd, the force used must nevertheless be proportionate to the threat posed. (See A/61/311, paras. 33-45.) In particular, the intentional lethal use of firearms may only be made when strictly unavoidable in order to protect life, and even the potentially lethal use of firearms may only be made to apprehend the perpetrator of or otherwise prevent a particularly serious crime involving grave threat to life.

The description of the crowd provided in the allegation received by the Special Rapporteur and the description provided in the response of the Government of Egypt both suggest that for the police to have opened fire at the legs of individuals was disproportionate to any crime or threat posed by the crowd.

Letter of allegation sent on 16 December 2005

I would like to bring to the attention of Your Excellency’s Government information I have received according to which, on 7 December 2005, the police fired into crowds of people who wished to gain access to polling stations in al-Daqahlia, al-Sharqia and other areas in order to cast their votes in run-offs to the third and last phase of Egypt’s parliamentary elections. The police shootings resulted in the death of at least eight people, namely Sa‘eed al-Deghidi, Sha‘aban Abu Rabaa‘ and ‘Atif Ahmed from Damietta, Tamir al-Qamash and Mohammed al-Bahrawy from al-Daqahlia and Mostafa ‘Abd al-Salam, Mohammed ‘Aliwa and Mohammed Gazzar from al-Sharqia. Besides, ‘Izzat Ra’fat Seddiq, a fifteen-year-old boy from al-Duqahlia, was among a number of people who received gunshot injuries or were wounded by being struck by tear gas bombs. The polling stations concerned had been closed or cordoned off by the police. As well as live fire, police are reported to have used tear gas and rubber bullets in their efforts to disperse the crowds.

I would like to refer your Excellency's Government to the fundamental principles applicable to such incidents under international law. Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights provides that no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his or her life. As the Human Rights Committee has clarified, “arbitrarily” means in a manner “disproportionate to the requirements of law enforcement in the circumstances of the case” (Views of the Committee in the case Suárez de Guerrero v. Colombia, Communication no. 45/1979, § 13.3). This was further elaborated in the 1990 U.N. Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials. Principle 7 provides that “Governments shall ensure that arbitrary or abusive use of force and firearms by law enforcement officials is punished as a criminal offence under their law.”

In order to assess whether the use of lethal force was proportionate to the requirements of law enforcement, there must be a “thorough, prompt and impartial investigation” (Principle 9 of the Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions). This obligation, affirmed also in the jurisprudence of the Human Rights Committee (see, e.g. the Committee’s views in Arhuacos v. Colombia, Communication no. 612/1995, § 8.8.), is an integral part of the obligation to respect and protect the right to life enshrined in Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. This principle was recently reiterated by the Commission on Human Rights (Resolution 2005/34) which noted that every State has “the obligation … to conduct exhaustive and impartial investigations into all suspected cases of extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions”. The Commission added that this includes the obligation “to identify and bring to justice those responsible, …, to grant adequate compensation within a reasonable time to the victims or their families and to adopt all necessary measures, including legal and judicial measures, in order to … prevent the recurrence of such executions”.

While I do not wish to prejudge the accuracy of these allegations, I urge your Excellency’s Government to take all necessary measures to ensure the accountability, in accordance with international law, of any person responsible for the above mentioned shootings.

It is my responsibility under the mandate provided to me by the Commission on Human Rights to seek to clarify all such cases brought to my attention. Since I am expected to report on these cases to the Commission, I would be grateful for your cooperation and your observations on the following matters:

1. Are the facts alleged in the above summary accurate? Please provide a full list of persons deceased as a result of police shootings on 7 December 2005.

2. Please provide the details, and where available the results, of any police investigation, medical examination (autopsy), and judicial or other inquiries carried out in relation to these cases. Please include information regarding the guarantees for independence and impartiality of the investigating and adjudicating authorities. Have penal, disciplinary or administrative sanctions been imposed in connection with this incident? If your Government has not undertaken any inquiries in this matter or if they have been inconclusive, please explain why.

3. Please provide the full details of any prosecutions which have been undertaken.

4. Please indicate whether compensation has been provided to the victims or the family of the victims.

Response of the Government of Egypt dated 23 May 2006

I. Constitutional and legislative norms pertaining to the "Organization of rallies and demonstrations - the expression of opinion" contained in Act No. 10 of 1914 concerning rallies and Act No 14 of 1923 concerning the rules governing public meetings and demonstrations on the public highways:

1. The competent security department must be informed three days before the holding of the demonstration or rally (articles 1 and 9 of Act No. 14 of 1923).

2. The notification must state the time, place and purpose of the demonstration and it must be signed by five of the organizers, who must be persons entitled to exercise civil and political rights and who are of good reputation (articles 3 and 9 of Act No. 14 of 1923).

3. The time, place or purpose of the demonstration should not cause a disturbance of public order or security (articles 4 and 9 of Act No. 14 of 1923).

4. The demonstration must follow the prescribed route, or the rally must be held at the notified place, it must deal with the subject notified, and there must be no public calls or clamour for disorder or for the commission of a crime defined in the Criminal Code or other legislation, or any rioting (articles 7 and 9 of Act No. 14 of 1923).

II Legal consequences of breaches of the Assembly Act:

The legal consequences consist in the prohibition or breaking up of such demonstrations, the dispersal of any rally or assembly, and the punishment (of convenors - organizers - committee members) as prescribed by law with a prison term not exceeding six months and a fine of not more than 100 Egyptian pounds, or either of the two; participants in the demonstration are punishable with a prison term not exceeding one month and a fine of not more than 20 Egyptian pounds, or either of the two.

III. Means used to handle rioting during demonstrations or assemblies and police authorization to use force:

  • Article 102 of Police Force Act No. 109 of 1971 concerning the circumstances in which firearms may be used to break up assemblies or demonstrations where there is a risk to public order stipulates that police officers must first issue a warning that they are about to fire and only then open fire; the order to use firearms must be issued by a superior officer, with the assembled persons first being given a warning and time to disperse and being informed of the required direction of dispersal, including the streets and roads they may use; gas weapons (rifles, ammunition, gas hand grenades) may be used and the demonstrators pursued with batons and sidearms (truncheons and bayonets); where the demonstrators fail to disperse, where alternative measures have been exhausted and in the event of attacks on police officers, on one's own person, on property or on installations, it is permissible to open fire at a person's legs.

IV. Offences committed by he demonstrators on 8 September 2005 during the run-off election for the third phase of the parliamentary elections in the Governorates of Al-Daqahlia and Al-Sharqia.

1. The above-mentioned demonstrators breached all the constitutional and legislative rules so that the law enforcement agencies had no option but to issue a warning, giving them a deadline to disperse, indicating the requested direction of dispersal and the streets and roads they could use to depart, but they failed to heed the warning.

2. The police were compelled to use gas weapons (gas handguns) and to pursue the demonstrators with batons and side arms. Alter the exhaustion of such measures, the demonstrators had still failed to disperse and had escalated their attacks, throwing stones at the police, who were forced to use firearms to disperse the demonstrators, which resulted in some fatalities among them.

V. Forensic medical reports concluded that death occurred either as a result of cuts to the head or gunshot wounds or as a result of acute circulatory and respiratory failure, which indicates that some of the deaths were due to crowding, pushing and shoving and stone-throwing, for which the demonstrators themselves were primarily responsible.

VI. Compensation is awarded on the basis of a court decision in cases where damage is culpably inflicted on another person, which means that a perpetrator must be identified so that the victim can be awarded compensation. No perpetrators have been identified in view of the fact that the investigations have not yet been completed.

Egypt: Killing of Alaa Mahmoud Abdel Latef and Mohamed Adly

Violation alleged: Death due to attacks or killings by security forces

Subject(s) of appeal: 2 males

Character of reply: Largely satisfactory response

Observations of the Special Rapporteur

The Special Rapporteur notes the information provided by the Government of Egypt.

Allegation letter sent on 11 November 2005, reproduced from E/CN/4/2006/53/Add.1, pages 67-68

Allegation letter concerning the recent shooting by a police officer of Alaa Mahmoud Abdel Lateef, a bus driver, and Mohamed Adly.

According to the information received, on 7 October 2005 a police officer from the Atlas police station got into a bus and asked the driver, Alaa Mahmoud Abdel Lateef, to order passengers to get off the vehicle so that he could give him a ride to the Atlas area. As he refused to do so, the police officer shot Alaa Mahmoud Abdel Lateef as well as his friend Mohamed Adly.

Both men were transferred to El-Manial El-Gameay hospital and placed under intensive care. Alaa Mahmoud Abdel Lateef went into a coma while Mohamed Adly got paralyzed as a result of a shot that broke his spinal cord. Reports indicate that an investigation was held and that the police officer was imprisoned for four days.

While I do not wish to prejudge the accuracy of these allegations, I urge your Excellency’s Government to take all necessary measures to guarantee that accountability of any person guilty of shooting Alaa Mahmoud Abdel Lateef and Mohamed Adly is ensured.

Reply from the Government of Egypt dated 21 February 2006

On 7 October 2005, Alaa Mahmoud Abdel Lateef and Mohamed Adly attacked and punched a police officer and attempted to seize his government-issued weapon while he was escorting them to the Helwan police station to make a report on the former individual for driving a car without licence plates. As a result, the police officer opened fire on the two individuals, wounding them both. They were taken to the Helwan general hospital, where the driver of the car, Alaa Mahmoud Abdel Lateef, subsequently died.

The Office of the Public Prosecutor undertook an investigation into the matter, and the relevant documents were placed on file under the reference No. 10166/2005 (Admin.), Helwan Division. After questioning the officer concerned, the Office of the Public Prosecutor decided to hold him for purposes of its investigation of the case.

Egypt: Death Sentences of Ezzat and Hamdi Ali Hanafi

Violation alleged: Non-respect of international standards relating to the imposition of capital punishment

Subject(s) of appeal: 2 males

Character of reply: Largely satisfactory response

Observations of the Special Rapporteur

The Special Rapporteur appreciates the information provided by the Government of Egypt concerning the death sentences of Mr. Ezzat and Mr. Hamdi Ali Hanafi.

The SR would observe that the Government does not dispute the allegation that the right to appeal was denied, and the SR would note that Egypt has made a legal commitment to respect that right.

Urgent appeal sent on 2 June 2006

I would like to draw your attention to information I have received regarding two men who are reportedly at imminent risk of execution: Mr. Ezzat and Mr. Hamdi Ali Hanafi.

According to the information received, the brothers Ezzat and Hamdi Ali Hanafi have been sentenced to death and could be executed at any time. The sentence has been sent to the supreme religious authority (Mufti) for approval. President Hosni Mubarak still has the power to commute the sentence.

Ezzat and Hamdi Ali Hanafi were sentenced to death on 25 September 2005 by the (Emergency) Supreme State Security Court (SSSC). They were arrested in March 2004 and convicted of using an area of land belonging to the state to grow unspecified "drugs"; when the security forces raided the property, they allegedly offered armed resistance, and took hostages to use as human shields.

The brothers are the first defendants sentenced to death by the SSSC since 1998. Under the Emergency Law, which has been in force in Egypt since 1981, they had no right to appeal against this verdict and could only lodge a petition to quash or reduce the sentence. On 2 May the Deputy Military Governor of Egypt rejected this petition. Under the state of emergency, the Deputy Military Governor is equivalent to President Mubarak's deputy.

It is my understanding that had they been tried before an ordinary criminal court, both defendants would have had the chance to appeal to the Court of Cassation on grounds of procedural irregularity. On a number of occasions the Court of Cassation has ordered retrials for people sentenced to death by courts of first instance.

Although the death penalty is not prohibited under international law, it must be regarded as an extreme exception to the fundamental right to life, and must as such be interpreted in the most restrictive manner. It is therefore crucial that all restrictions pertaining to capital punishment contained in international human rights law are fully respected in proceedings relating to capital offences.

While I am fully aware of the seriousness of the crimes of which these two men have been convicted I respectfully remind your Excellency that “in capital punishment cases, the obligation of States parties to observe rigorously all the guarantees for a fair trial set out in Article 14 of the [ICCPR] admits of no exception” (Little v. Jamaica, communication no. 283/1988, Views of the Human Rights Committee of 19 November 1991, para. 10); relevant to the case at issue, these guarantees include the right to appeal and to seek pardon or commutation of sentence.

My major concern is with the arrangements relating to the functioning of the SSSC and the procedures it follows. There would appear to be compelling reasons to conclude that these fall far short of the applicable international standards My assessment in this regard has also taken account of the conclusions reached by the Human Rights Committee. In its Concluding Observations of 28 November 2002 (CCPR/CO/76/EGY) it stated, inter alia:

16. While understanding the security requirements associated with efforts to combat terrorism, the Committee voices concern at their effects on the human rights situation in Egypt, particularly in relation to articles 6, 7, 9 and 14 of the Covenant.

(a) The Committee considers that the effect of the very broad and general definition of terrorism given in Act No. 97 of 1992 is to increase the number of offences attracting the death penalty in a way that runs counter to the sense of article 6, paragraph 2, of the Covenant.

(b) The Committee notes with alarm that military courts and State security courts have jurisdiction to try civilians accused of terrorism although there are no guarantees of those courts' independence and their decisions are not subject to appeal before a higher court (article 14 of the Covenant).

I accordingly urge your Government not to proceed with the execution of Mr. Ezzat and Mr. Hamdi Ali Hanafi until the relevant procedural defects have been rectified. In view of the urgency of the matter, I would appreciate a response on the initial steps taken by your Excellency’s Government to safeguard the rights of the two brothers in compliance with applicable international law.

It is my responsibility under the mandate provided to me by the Commission on Human Rights and reinforced by the appropriate resolution of the General Assembly, to seek to clarify all cases brought to my attention. Since I am expected to report on this case to the Human Rights Council, I would be grateful for your cooperation and your observations on the following matters:

1. Are the facts alleged in the above summary of the case accurate?

2. Please provide the details of the steps taken to guarantee that the trial of Mr. Ezzat and Mr. Hamdi Ali Hanafi conformed to international standards and indicate what arrangements for a judicial appeal to a higher court were provided.

Response of the Government of Egypt dated 11 July 2006

These two persons were charged, in Abu Tij criminal case No. 192 of 2004, registered as Higher State Security Criminal Case No. 16/2004, with: using, together with others, land owned by the State and a group of individuals to grow narcotic plants; bearing arms against public officers tasked with arresting the members of this gang; taking individuals hostage and using force, violence and threats to put pressure on public officers attempting to carry out their duties; setting fire to gas cylinders; and shooting at the police, thereby causing the death of Shima Mohammed Ahmad; and deliberately attempting to murder 10 other persons. They were not able to continue with their crimes for reasons beyond their control, namely, the intervention of the police. They were charged with possessing and procuring unlicensed firearms and ammunition for use in activities prejudicial to public security. They were sent, together with others, for trial before the Asyut Appeal Division of the Higher State (Emergency) Security Court. The case was heard in open session, until a unanimous verdict was handed down on 25 September 2005, sentencing the two men to death. The Prime Minister endorsed the verdict on 8 March 2006 and the President of the Republic gave his approval, on 28 May 2006, for execution of the sentence (pursuant to article 470 of the Code of Criminal Procedures). The lawyer for the two men submitted a request for a review of the verdict to the Prosecutor-General. The request was turned down on 3 June 2006, pursuant to article 12 of Act No. 162/1958, as amended by Act No. 164 of 1981.

It is clear from the foregoing that:

  • The death sentence was issued based on the findings of the investigation by the Department of Public Prosecutions. The two men were tried before a division of the Asyut Appeal Court which was competent to hear the case. The trial was held in open court and afforded the defence full legal guarantees. The decision to impose the death sentence was unanimous. Both men pursued all legal means to appeal the verdict. The appeal was rejected and the verdict was upheld.

  • This shows that the criminal trial afforded full safeguards and respect for due process and guaranteed the two men a full and proper defence. The trial was not vitiated by any criminal or legal errors and thus met the conditions stipulated in article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Egypt is a party.

    Correspondence from 2006

    The record of correspondence for 2006 is excerpted from the official United Nations report, E/CN.4/2006/53/Add.1.

    Egypt: Death in Custody of Nafisa al-Marakbi

    Violation alleged: Death in custody

    Subject(s) of appeal: 1 female

    Character of reply: Allegations rejected but without adequate substantiation

    Observations of the Special Rapporteur

    The Special Rapporteur appreciates the autopsy results provided by the Government of Egypt.  However, the SR remains concerned at the lack of a thorough investigation into the allegations regarding the death of Nafisa al-Marakbi.  A finding that Nafisa al-Marakbi died due to toxic shock is consistent with sexual mistreatment, and the SR regrets that a broader investigation was not conducted.  The SR finds it especially troubling that interviews were not conducted with the other detainees and members of the security forces who were potential witnesses.

    Allegation letter sent on 22 March 2005 with the Special Rapporteur on torture and the Special Rapporteur on violence against women

    Ms. Nafisa Zakaria Mohammed al Marakbi, aged 38, Sarando village died on 14 March 2005. She was among a group of women arrested by security forces and detained in a house in the village that they had converted into a makeshift detention centre. The police removed her face veil and fondled her breasts and abdomen while making sexual threats. Other women in the group were subjected to similar treatment. The police took each woman separately outside of the house for a period of time. When Ms. al Marakbi was released at 3am, her physical and psychological state was very poor. Medical officials at Damanhour General Hospital reported that she was in a coma when she was brought in by her family at 9pm. Efforts to revive her continued until 6am on 15 March, when she was pronounced dead. No autopsy was performed on the body, which security officials returned to the family and which was buried the same day.  Moreover, villagers told a delegation of human rights experts on 16 March that prior to their visit police had threatened them with arrest if they spoke to the delegation, and that shortly before the delegation’s arrival the majority of the police present in the village were moved inside large police transport vehicles in an apparent attempt to hide their presence."

    Response of the Government of Egypt dated 6 April 2005

    2. Death of Nafisa al-Marakbi: The Department of Public Prosecutions received Damanhour administrative report No. 219S5/2005 submitted by nine human rights associations and centres: the Centre for Social and Political Justice; The Hisham Mubarak Law Centre; the Nadim Centre for Rehabilitaion of Victims of Violence; the Human Rights Legal Aid Association; the Arab Human Rights Information Network; the Egyptian Centre for Human Rights; the Egyptiam Association Against Torture; The Centre for Socialist Studies; the Freedom Committee of the Bar Association and the Land Centre for Human Rights. The report stated that the above-mentioned centres and associations had been informed that Nafisa Zakariya Mohamed al-Marakbi, a citizen of Sarando village, had died after being kicked by a police officer and detained at a house on 13 March 2005 before being released at dawn the following day. She had allegedly become paralysed that evening and had been taken to hospital. She had allegedly been buried by the security forces without the knowledge or involvement of her family.

    The Department of Public Prosecutions launched an investigation on 16 March 2005 and obtained a copy of her medical notes. It questioned the doctor who had examined her uipon arrival at the hospital at 9.35 p.m. on 14 March 2005. The doctor told them that the woman had died of heart and respiratory failure and that he suspected that she had been suffering from toxic shock as a result of a bacterial infection in the blood. He also said that he had found no signs of injury of foul play. The examining physician and the director of the hospital were questioned and gave the same version of events. At interview, the husband and the brother of the deceased denied that the woman had been assaulted and said that she had died of natural causes. However, the body was exhumed under orders from the Department of Public Prosecutions and a three-person panel of pathologists was asked to perform an autopsy to determine the cause of death. The procedure was carried out in the presence of the husband and the brother of the deceased, and the report concluded that the body showed no signs of injury, criminal violence or a struggle, and that the death had been due to a previous condition.

    Egypt: Killing of Alaa Mahmoud Abdel Latef and Mohamed Adly

    Violation alleged: Death due to attacks or killings by security forces

    Subject(s) of appeal: 2 males

    Character of reply: No response

    Observations of the Special Rapporteur

    The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government of Egypt has failed to cooperate with the mandate he has been given by the United Nations Commission on Human Rights.

    Allegation letter sent on 11 November 2005

    Allegation letter concerning the recent shooting by a police officer of Alaa Mahmoud Abdel Lateef, a bus driver, and Mohamed Adly.

     

    According to the information received, on 7 October 2005 a police officer from the Atlas police station got into a bus and asked the driver, Alaa Mahmoud Abdel Lateef, to order passengers to get off the vehicle so that he could give him a ride to the Atlas area. As he refused to do so, the police officer shot Alaa Mahmoud Abdel Lateef as well as his friend Mohamed Adly.

    Both men were transferred to El-Manial El-Gameay hospital and placed under intensive care. Alaa Mahmoud Abdel Lateef went into a coma while Mohamed Adly got paralyzed as a result of a shot that broke his spinal cord. Reports indicate that an investigation was held and that the police officer was imprisoned for four days.

    While I do not wish to prejudge the accuracy of these allegations, I urge your Excellency’s Government to take all necessary measures to guarantee that accountability of any person guilty of shooting Alaa Mahmoud Abdel Lateef and Mohamed Adly is ensured.

    Egypt: Death of 27 Sudanese Migrants

    Violation alleged: Excessive use of force by security forces

    Subject(s) of appeal: 27 persons (refugees and migrants; persons exercising their freedom of opinion and expression)

    Character of reply: Allegations rejected but without adequate substantiation

    Observations of the Special Rapporteur

    The Special Rapporteur appreciates the information provided by the Government of Egypt.  However, the SR regrets that the Government’s response consists of conclusory denials that lack the factual substantiation that would be provided by investigations and medical examinations.

    Allegation letter sent on 11 January 2006 with the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants

    According to the information received, on 30 December 2005, the Egyptian Security Forces evacuated by force about 1500 Sudanese migrants and refugees who were settled in Moustafa Mahmoud Square in front of UNHCR Headquarters in Cairo. They had requested to be relocated to third countries since 29 September 2005. Early in the morning, reportedly some 2000 police officers surrounded the improvised encampment, fired water cannons into the crowd and beat individuals with clubs in order to end the sit-in. At least 27 individuals are said to have died and many others were injured following the Egyptian Security Forces' attack. Numerous persons were also arrested by police forces and detained in unknown location. Reports indicate that the Interior Ministry laid blame for the violence exclusively on the migrants. It claims that twenty-three police officers were wounded in an attack incited by migrant leaders against the police. No clear information is available neither on the number and the situation of wounded persons nor on the location of numerous persons arrested by the police forces.

    Information received also indicate that on 3 January your Excellency’s Government announced that it intended to forcibly return up to 650 Sudanese nationals who have been involved in the same peaceful protest since September 2005 in front of UNHCR Headquarters in Cairo. Some would be at risk of torture if returned to Sudan. We understand that this deadline was subsequently extended.

    Without pre-judging the accuracy of the various conflicting accounts received, we would note the relevance in such situations of the United Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials. These Principles note, inter alia, that law enforcement officials should “as far as possible apply non-violent means before resorting to the use of force and firearms” and that “in any event, intentional lethal use of firearms may only be made when strictly unavoidable in order to protect life”.   We would also like to draw your Excellency’s attention to the code of conduct for Law Enforcement Officials adopted by the General Assembly resolution 34/169 (1979) which more succinctly stresses the limited role for in all enforcement operations.

    We would also like to appeal to your Excellency’s Government to ensure that all deaths that occurred in connection with the operation of 30 December 2005 are promptly, independently and thoroughly investigated in accordance with the Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions.

    It is our responsibility under the mandate provided to us by the Commission on Human Rights and reinforced by the appropriate resolutions of the General Assembly, to seek to clarify all cases brought to my attention. Since we are expected to report on these cases to the Commission, we would be grateful for your cooperation and your observations on the following matters:

    1. Are the facts alleged in the above summary accurate?
    1. Please provide the details, and where available the results, of any investigation, medical examinations and judicial or other inquiries carried out in relation to the killings of Sudanese migrants in Cairo.
    1. Assuming that those responsible for the shootings have been or will be identified, please provide the full details of any prosecutions which have been undertaken, and of any other penal, disciplinary or administrative sanctions imposed in this connection.
    1. Please indicate whether compensation has been provided to the families of victims.

    Finally, we would like to appeal to the Government of Your Excellency to make sure that there is full public accountability for the actions of the State and of its security forces by ensuring that the resulting report of the investigation is made public.

    Response of the Government of Egypt dated 8 February 2006

    1.  The sit-in demonstration of the Sudanese nationals began on 29 September 2005 in a park close to the Regional Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCH) in Cairo, which is located in a highly populated neighborhood. The demonstrators demanded UNHCR to resettle them in third countries of their choice, despite the fact that their continued presence in Egypt was never jeopardized.

    2.  The number of Sudanese nationals participating in the sit-in demonstration amounted to over 2500, including refugees, asylum seekers and illegal immigrants.

    3.  The Egyptian Government exerted all possible efforts in cooperation with the regional office of UNHCR and the Sudanese authorities for a period of more than three months to bring the sit-in protest to a peaceful end. Extensive efforts were undertaken to verify the status of those individuals and to address their claims and demands, Representatives of UNHCR, the Egyptian and Sudanese governments, civil society and the Sudanese nationals took part in these efforts.

    4.  On 15 December 2005, the Regional Office of UNHCR in Cairo informed the Egyptian Foreign Ministry that no progress had been made in ending the situation and that the Sudanese nationals have been shown very little willingness to work constructively with UNHCR towards a realistic solution. The Office expressed its extreme concern about the increasingly deteriorating situation of these nationals as a result of their living conditions as related to health and sanitation, in particular women and children.

    5.  On 22 December 2005, the Regional Office of UNHCR in Cairo called on the Government of Egypt to take as a matter of urgency all appropriate emasures to resolve the situation through peaceful means.

    6.  The exercise of patience and restraint by the Egyptian authorities for a period of more than three months is all the more witness of Egypt’s full commitment to its legal obligations with respect to the rights of refugees in its jurisdiction, and the great importance it attaches to settling such situations by peaceful means.  However, the continuation of the sit-in protest in direct violation of the 1951 Refugee Convention which requires refugees to respect the laws and regulations of the host country, and the lack of willingness of the demonstrators to engage constructively in achieving realistic solutions (as repeatedly attested by UNHCR itself) led to the Egyptian authorities making, on 30 December 2005, a last attempt to persuade the participants in the sit-in to vacate the area.

    7.  These peaceful efforts to convince the demonstrators to vacate the area were met with aggression on the part of the harline elements who attacked the police and prevented other demonstrators from leaving. This situation led to Egyptian police intervening to establish order and assist those demonstrators trying to eave the area.

    8.  While it is sad and unfortunate that casualties resulted on both  sides during the intervention to resolve the situation, it is noteworthy that the loss of life resulted from the chaos and the stampede invoked by the extremist leaders of those demonstrators, and not b any means caused by use of excessive force or firearms on the part of the police.

    9.  The Egyptian authorities allowed UNHCR access to Sudanese detainees in order to identify their legal status. The Egyptian authorities have also released all those proven to be refugees or asylum seekers (holders of blue and yellow cards), those originating from the Darfur region, and those having valid entry visas or residential permits in Egypt. Moreover, the Egyptian authorities have provided suitable accommodations for those Sudanese detainees whose status was under review. It is also worth noting the reports in the press indicating that no Sudanese detainees would be deported.

    10.  Egypt’s response to the needs of refugees in general and Sudanese refugees in particular has always been generous. Moreover, the two million Sudanese living legally in Egypt have always fully enjoyed their rights.

    Correspondence from 2005

    The record of correspondence for 2005 is excerpted from the official United Nations report, E/CN.4/2005/7/Add.1.

    Country: Egypt

    Type, date and summary of communication: Allegation, sent with the Special Rapporteur on torture, 26 March 2004. Mahmoud Gabr Mohammed, worker and resident of El Sazeda Zeinab reportedly died in detention in the police station of El Sazeda Zeinab. He was allegedly arrested without official charges on 4 October 2003 and his family was reportedly informed of his death on 7 October 2003. According to the information received, there were numerous injuries and bruises on his body. Concerns have been expressed that he might have died as a result of torture that he was subjected to while in police custody.

    Government reply: Response dated 25 May 2004: According to the South Cairo Department of Public Prosecutions, Mahmoud Gabr Mohammed died while in detention at Saida Zainab police station awaiting sentencing in Saida Zainab misdemeanours case No. 4217/1999. Mr. Mohammed had been suffering from haemorrhaging in the urinary tract. The Department of Public Prosecutions opened an investigation, questioning witnesses who had been in detention at the Saida Zainab police station when the death occurred. Some of them said that they had heard police officers at the station beating Mahmoud Gabr Mohammed, but that they had not seen it happen. Others said that they had seen two officers beating Mr. Mohammed and then carrying him back to his cell. They said that Mr. Mohammed had been in a very bad state.The Department of Public Prosecutions also questioned Tala’t Gabr Mohammed Mohammed, the brother of the deceased, who said that, according to the information that he had received from persons being detained at the station at the time of his brother’s death, his brother had been tortured by members of the Saida Zainab investigations unit. The medical examiner’s report written on 7 October 2003, the date on which the death occurred, noted that there were several injuries on Mahmoud Gabr Mohammed’s body and that the deceased had been dead for less than one day. However, the report failed to determine the cause of death based on the physical examination. The Department of Public Prosecutions viewed the body of the deceased and asked the pathologist to conduct an examination with a view to determining what the injuries were. The pathologist’s report dated 28 February 2004 found there to be fresh wounds on various parts of the deceased’s body and stated that they had probably been inflicted on or around 5 October 2003. The report concluded that the death was suspicious.The investigation is still being conducted. The remaining witnesses have been questioned and the police officers responsible for Saida Zainab police station have been summoned with a view to charging them under article 126 of the Penal Code, based on the conclusions in the pathologist’s report.

    Observation of the Special Rapporteur: The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government for its reply. The Special Rapporteur would appreciate receiving information on the penal sanctions imposed on the perpetrators as well as information relating to compensation provided to the victim’s family.

    Country: Egypt

    Type, date and summary of communication: Allegation, sent with the Special Rapporteur on torture,13 April 2004. Muhammad ‘Abd al-Sattar al-Roubi, a 26-year-old engineer, reportedly died on 19 September 2003 while in State Security Investigations (SSI) custody in Ebshiway detention center in Tibhar (al-Fayyum). SSI officers allegedly told Mr. al-Roubi’s father that his son had committed suicide. No autopsy report was made public. It is alleged that he died as a result of torture by the police, who attempted to extract a confession regarding his political affiliations.

    Muhammad `Abd al-Qadir, aged 31, reportedly died on 21 September 2003 after he was allegedly tortured in SSI custody in Cairo. It is reported that no forensic report was made public. Since his body bore evident signs of torture, it is alleged that he died as a result of the treatment he was subjected to in custody.

    Mas`ad Muhammad Qutb, an accountant at the Engineers’ Syndicate, reportedly died in police custody on 4 November 2003. According to the information received, he was arrested by the SSI of the State Security in Giza on 1 November 2003 on suspicion of being a member of the illegal organization “Muslim Brotherhood”. He reportedly died while he was transferred from the SSI office in Gabir Ibn Hayan to Umm al-Masryyin Hospital. It is reported that the Prosecutor General’s investigation confirmed signs of inflicted injuries on his body and ordered a forensic examination to determine the cause of the death. It is alleged that he died as a result of torture in order to extract information about the above-mentioned organization.

    Government reply: Response dated 25 May 2004 Allegation concerning the death of Muhammad Abd al-Sattar al-Roubi Nasr: according to the Government, he was arrested, along with a number of others, for engaging in extremist acts, under his leadership. In particular, these acts included propaganda favouring the targeting of foreigners and foreign forces in Arab States, and suspicious contacts with terrorist elements. He hanged himself while being held in custody at the Fayyum State Security Investigations Branch pending referral to the Higher State Security Prosecutions Department. The Fayyum Department of Public Prosecutions opened an investigation to verify the circumstances of the death. One of the persons who had been detained along with the deceased was questioned and confirmed what had happened. The Department furthermore viewed the corpse and found no signs of any injuries suggesting that he had been subjected to violence. The Department decided to release the deceased’s body to his family for burial. It is worth mentioning that the Higher State Security Prosecutions Department investigated the members of the group who had been arrested along with the deceased and decided to remand them in custody for 15 days in Higher State Security case No. 1235/2003.

    Allegation concerning the death of Muhammad Abd al-Qadir al-Sayid: On 16 September 2003, a preventive detention order was issued under the terms of Act No. 162 of 1985 authorizing the arrest of Muhammad al-Sayid and a number of others for engaging in certain extremist activities and for maintaining contacts with members of terrorist organizations who had fled the country and had formerly received military training and taken part in fighting in Afghanistan. On 21 September 2003, Muhammad al-Sayid was taken ill while in detention at the Qubba gardens police station in Cairo. He was transferred to a private hospital and given emergency treatment. The examining physician made sure that his condition had stabilized and sent him back to the detention centre. However, he became ill again that same day and was taken to a public hospital. The specialist who examined him found that Mr. Al-Sayid had suffered a massive coronary, as a result of which he died shortly afterwards.The incident was recorded in Qubba gardens police station report No. 8145/2003 and the Department of Public Prosecutions authorized the burial.

    Allegation concerning the death of Mas`ad Sayid Muhammad Qutb: Mr. Qutb died while being transferred to prison pursuant to a detention order issued by the Minister of the Interior on 1 November 2003. The Department of Public Prosecutions opened an investigation, questioning the police officer who had written the report and the police sergeant responsible for guarding the building. They both said that Mas`ad Sayid Muhammad Qutb had felt very ill and the officer had taken him in a departmental vehicle to Umm al-Misriyin Hospital for emergency treatment, but he had died. As soon as it received the report, the Department of Public Prosecutions went to view the deceased’s body, which showed signs of injuries. It decided to order the pathologist to perform an autopsy. Mohammed Ghraib Abd al-Aziz was questioned in the investigation conducted by the Department of Public Prosecutions. As the representative of the widow, mother and brothers of the deceased, he said that he would be seeking legal action against the State security investigators responsible for torturing the deceased. He also filed a civil suit against them. The pathologist’s report found there to be injuries on the deceased’s body and concluded that the death, which had occurred approximately one day prior to the autopsy, was suspicious. Under article 126 of the Penal Code, any public official or employee who orders or himself carries out the torture of an accused person with a view to extracting a confession from him faces a penalty of life in prison, imprisonment at hard labour or a term of 3 to 10 years in prison. If the victim dies, the penalty imposed is that prescribed for premeditated murder. The Department of Public Prosecutions summoned the police officer and charged him, police officers being public officials, with torturing Mas`ad Sayid Muhammad Qutb in order to extract a confession from him and thereby causing his death. When the police officer and police sergeant were presented with the pathologist’s findings, they denied the charges against them and presented arguments to defend themselves against the findings. The documents are still being examined with a view to verifying the accused persons’ defence arguments.

    Observation of the Special Rapporteur: The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government for its reply. The Special Rapporteur regrets that no autopsy was carried out on the bodies of Muhammad ‘Abd al-Sattar al-Roubi andMuhammad `Abd al-Qadir. In the case of Mas`ad Sayid Muhammad Qutb, the Special Rapporteur would appreciate receiving information on the penal sanctions imposed on the perpetrators as well as on the compensation provided to the victim’s family

    Country: Egypt

    Type, date and summary of communication: Allegation, sent with the Special Rapporteur on torture, 15 September 2004: On 23 May 2003, Abdallah Rizq Abdel Latif Rizq was arrested by 6th October City policemen in the vicinity of a youth club in the city's Sixth District. He was detained for six days and subject to beatings and torture to make him confess to a number of thefts. On the seventh day he died after receiving an electric shock. On 30 May at 1 pm, 6th October City police officers arrested and detained his father at the police station until 5pm and informed him that his son had died following an electric shock received while he was in the bathroom, and that his body had been taken to 6th October City's General Hospital. At 6.30pm Abdallah Rizq Abdel Latif Rizq's sister and mother went to the hospital in order to seek permission to bury him but were refused entry to the hospital. On the 31 May 2003 his sister saw his body and observed several marks of torture on his body.

    On 2 July 2003, Ahmed Mohamed Ahmed Amr was arrested by the head of the al-Mahalla al-Kubra investigations unit, and detained for three weeks at the al-Mahalla al-Kubra station. He was injected in the sole of his right foot with a dirty hypodermic needle, from which he contracted blood poisoning and developed gangrene. He was taken to the al-Mahalla al-Kubra district hospital which transferred him to Samanoud public hospital. He died four days later after a serious drop in blood pressure caused by blood poisoning.

    On 15 October 2003, Rady Mostafa Ahmed Nassar was arrested by the al-Mahal al-Kubra Judicial Verdicts Implementation Unit Nassar in pursuance of an earlier verdict against him and was taken to the transfers section of Tanta Police Station no. 2. On 18 October he was taken to the Khalfiyya Transfers Section, Cairo. The following morning his brother went to enquire about him but police officers denied that he was in their custody. He was found in the al-Sahal Police Station in extremely bad health with wounds behind the right ear and back. He was kept in iron shackles until he was close to death, and upon the insistence of his family he was taken to the al-Khazandara Hospital, where he died upon arrival on the evening of 19 October.

    On 27 October 2003, policemen in civilian clothes burst into Mahmoud Mohamed Tamman’s home in order to arrest his oldest son. An officer of the Police Investigations Unit beat him with a pistol on his chest until he lost consciousness. The family was prevented from seeking medical assistance for him, and he died shortly. The police arrested family members, and forced his son to make a statement saying that his father had died from natural causes, in return for the release of those detained.

    On 12 December 2003, Samir Ezzat Salah al-Sherif was arrested on a misdemeanor charge of assault, brought to the Sherbeen Prosecution Office, and remanded in custody at Sherbeen Police Station for the duration of the investigation. In detention, he was subjected to electric shocks and to severe ill-treatment. On 15 January 2004 he was transferred to the Sherbeen Hospital, which refused to accept him because of his severe injuries. He was returned to the police station where he remained without receiving any medical treatment until his death on 19 January 2004.

    Confined to a wheelchair, Mohamed As-Sayed Nagem was arrested on 31 December 2003 and taken to state security headquarters in Benha. He was detained until 7pm on 6 January 2004. At the time of his release he was in a coma and died the following morning. No investigation has been carried out.

    On 3 January 2004, Mohamed Hassan Hassan Abdallah was arrested and taken to Azbekeya Police Station. He died at dawn the next day. The family found the following injuries on his body: bruising and injuries to the scalp, neck and back.

    On 15 February 2004, As-Sayyed Moustafa Moussa was arrested by a Detective of the al-Baragil Police Station pursuant to an earlier sentence issued for fraud and taken to Awsim Police Station. He was beaten during his arrest in order to force him to inform the police officers of the whereabouts of his wife, who also had a prison sentence issued against her. He suffered injuries to his right ankle. On 19 March 2004 he was taken to Aswim General Hospital for treatment and returned to the police station the same day. He died on 21 March. The family found injuries to his back when they came to collect his body for burial.

    Government reply: Response dated 15 December 2004: The government gave a detail account in relation to each case of alleged death in custody brought to its attention by the SR. In each case, investigations including autopsies were duly carried out according to the current legislation. According to the Government, “it is clear from the above that there is no evidence that any of the above-mentioned persons (excluding the cases that are still before the courts) was beaten or tortured at any police station in any part of the country. Many of the persons concerned had been previously charged with offences against public security and arrested on instructions from the Department of Public prosecutions or by judgements’ enforcement units which were serving orders handed down by various juidicial bodies. All the procedures taken against them were legal and were carried out under the supervision of the competent judicial authorities.”

    Observation of the Special Rapporteur: The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government for its reply.

    Country: Egypt

    Type, date and summary of communication: Allegation, 5 October 2004. Mr. Amr Atress Hassan was arrested on 9 September 2004 and presented the next day to the Prosecutor General who ordered that he be detained for four days during the course of investigations. On 12 September 2004, when he appeared before the Prosecutor General, his mother was shocked by the state of his health. Mr. Amr Atrees Hassan told his mother that he had been tortured. Amr Atress Hassan was taken back to Imbaba Police Station after the Prosecutor General renewed his detention. The family then received a telephone call informing them that their son had been taken to Imbaba Central Hospital. Upon reaching the hospital the family was informed that Mr. Amr Atress Hassan had died and that his body was in the hospital post mortem room. When the victim's brother examined the body, he found bruising to the wrists, ankles and the right ear, as well as bruising and inflammation of the abdomen area. The family reportedly presented a report to the Prosecutor General who appointed a forensic doctor to conduct an autopsy, corroborate the injuries and determine the cause of death.

    Government reply: Response dated 2 November 2004. On 12 September 2004, Mr. Amr Atress Hassan Ibrahim was brought before the Department of Public Prosecutions so that the Department could decide on whether to extend his time in detention after he had been charged (with aggravated robbery) in Imbaba police station administrative case No. 11969. The Department of Public Prosecutions decided to extend his detention in the above-mentioned case. On his way back from the offices of the Department of Public Prosecutions, Mr. Ibrahim, who was with a number of others charged with various offences, was suddenly taken ill and died shortly afterwards. According to the autopsy report, which was signed by a doctor from the Department of Forensic Medicine of the General Hospital, Mr. Ibrahim died of natural causes, having developed an inflammation in the abdominal cavity. There were no signs of injury on the body. A report was written on his death and two of the accused persons who happened to be with him in detention at the Imbaba police station testified that Mr. Ibrahim had suddenly felt ill and that he had died of natural causes. He had not been subjected to any form of torture at the police station. There is no evidence to support the allegations that the deceased had been beaten or tortured at the Imbaba police station in Giza.

    Observation of the Special Rapporteur: The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government for its reply.

    Correspondence from 2004

    The record of correspondence for 2004 is excerpted from the official United Nations report, E/CN.4/2004/7/Add.1.

    Communication sent

    On 4 June 2003, the Special Rapporteur, jointly with the Special Rapporteur on torture, sent a communication to the Government of Egypt in connection with the following individual cases.

    Hussain Mohamed Mursi was reportedly found dead in Al Ramel police station in April 2001. He was allegedly arrested on 25 April 2001 by the Verdict Implementation Unit and kept in detention, although the prosecution authorities reportedly had ordered his release. According to the informtation received, he was beaten by police officers to compel him to confess to his involvement in a number of crimes.

    Nader Fath Alsyed was reportedly beaten and stabbed to death by a police assistant at the Nasr City police station, Cairo, on 29 April 2001. According to the information received, he was assaulted by police guards after he allegedly refused to stand steady on a brick and threatened guards with a piece of sharp metal. A forensic report allegedly described injuries on his face, forehead, neck, chest, shoulder and back and wounds and cuts on his left thigh, but also allegedly indicated that the main cause of death was a stab wound on his thigh.

    Medhat Gaber Tadros was reportedly arrested for robbery on 23 or 24 April 2001 by the intelligence division at Embaba police station. He was allegedly beaten and sucjected to electric shocks and other forms of ill-treatment which reportedly caused his death. According to the information received, two police officers were charged with torture and the case referred to a criminal court on 12 May 2002.

    Ahmed Taha Hussein was reportedly arrested on 29 October 2001 and taken to Qwesna police station. His house was allegedly searched without warrant and his brother was arrested on the same day. They were both kept for some hours in a police vehicle before they were reportedly released. However, on the following day an officer of the Qwesna police station reportedly informed Mr. Hussein’s family of his death, but they were not allowed to attend his burial. On 13 January 2002, the victim’s family lawyer filed a report with the prosecutor general stating the family’s suspicions as to the reasons for his death, and lodged a second report with the Menufiya attorney general requesting an autopsy. A first forensic report was allegedly vague: it reportedly stated that there was signs of congestion in his scalp and white foam in his trachea, that his heart was in good condition and that there was an accumulation of dark urine in his bladder, and that there were no traces of poison or drugs. According to this report, his death was caused by a dormant illness difficult to determine by forensic medicine. The attorney general reportedly filed the report in March 2002. However, the victim’s family and a local human rights organization submitted a complaint to the prosecutor general and the Minister of the Interior against the decision to file the report and the procedures taken by the police officers against the victim and his family.

    Communication received

    On 3 October 2003, the Government of Egypt transmitted its response in connection with the following individual cases which were the object of allegations sent by the Special Rapporteur on 2 September 2002.

    With regard to allegations concerning the death of Sayid Qanawi Salim Ali as a result of torture at El-Imbaba police station, the Government stated that, on 7 March 2000, while being served with a warrant, Ali tried to escape but fell from a great height. He was reportedly injured and taken to hospital for treatment, where he died. The facts surrounding the death were allegedly contained in Imbaba precinct administrative report No. 947/2000. The Department of Public Prosecutions reportedly undertook an investigation and the case was re-registered with a criminal registration number. At the time of the communication, the Department was still working on the investigation and had not yet taken a decision on the matter. The Government submitted that there was no evidence to show that the man had been beaten as the allegations claimed.

    Concerning the case of Mohammed Samir Abu al-Wifa, who reportedly died while in detention at Al-Qubba Park police station, the Government reported that he was on a register of criminals known for their tendency to impose their will on others. He was arrested in 2001 in order to put a stop to his dangerous criminal activities. His release was ordered on 8 January 2001. On 12 January 2001, formalities relating to his release were being carried out at Al-Qubba Park police station when he began to complain of shortness of breath. He died shortly afterwards. This was confirmed by some of his fellow prisoners in the same cell and the details of the incident were allegedly set forth in administrative report No. 399/2001. The Department of Public Prosecutions undertook an investigation after the family of the deceased accused the head of the investigation unit at the station of having beaten him and caused his death. The medical report on the examination of the deceased was signed by a forensic doctor on 1 November 2001 and the Department of Public Prosecutions ruled out foul play and discontinued the case. The Government submitted that there was no evidence to show that the man was beaten as the allegations claimed.

    Finally, with regard to allegations relating to Ahmad Hasan Ahmad, who was reportedly beaten to death while in custody at the Qalyubiya State Intelligence Headquarters, the Government mentioned that Mr. Ahmad was a registered criminal with 11 previous convictions for a variety of crimes. On 28 February 2000, the Department of Public Prosecutions issued a warrant for his arrest. He was allegedly caught in flagrante delicto and found to be in possession of drugs and a knife. The Department decided to remand him in custody pending further investigations. On 2 March 2000, his fellow inmates reportedly stated that he was taken seriously ill and had gone into a coma. He was transferred to hospital for emergency treatment, where he died. According to the Government’s response, the autopsy carried out by a forensic doctor indicated that the death was caused by swallowing a certain kind of insecticide. There were no signs of beating or torture on the body. The Department decided to file the case as a suicide. The Government reported that there was no evidence to show that the man was beaten as the allegations claimed.

    Correspondence from 2003

    The record of correspondence for 2003 is excerpted from the official United Nations report, E/CN.4/2003/Add.1.

    Communication sent

    On 2 September 2002, the Special Rapporteur, jointly with the Special Rapporteur on torture, sent an allegation to the Government of Egypt relating to the following individual cases.

    Ahmed Taha Mohamed Yousef, aged 42, was reportedly arrested on 23 February 2002 and taken to the El Wayli police station, in El Wayli district, Cairo, where he is believed to have been beaten to death. The police were allegedly looking for his brother at Ahmed Yousef’s residence in the Albaseya district but since they could not find him, Ahmed Yousef was reportedly arrested instead. The Special Rapporteurs have been informed that the Public Prosecutor’s Office started an investigation into misdemeanours concerning these facts. Four officers involved in Mr. Yousef’s death are believed to have been detained for four days pending investigation. The head of the El Wayli police station investigation unit and a security officer are reported to have been summoned by the prosecution for questioning. The Special Rapporteurs have recently been informed that the Cairo Misdemeanours Court pronounced a verdict on three defendants attached to the El Wayli police investigations unit. The three policemen are said to have been sentenced to five years’ imprisonment with hard labour, and are obliged by law to pay civil compensation. The case was then referred to the competent appeals. According to the information received, a the civil court will establish the amount of compensation that is to be paid to the victim’s family.

    Said Qenawy Selim, a 25-year-old carpenter and resident of Ezbet Al-Saayda, was reportedly arrested on 27 February 2001 after being accused of theft. He is alleged to have been detained in a police station for 11 days during which he was not referred to any judicial authority for investigation. His family was allegedly summoned to the police station on 8 March 2000 and informed that Mr. Selim was sick. According to the information received, when the family went to the hospital where he had been transferred, they were told that his body had been taken to the morgue. It is reported that his corpse presented several injuries. An account of the case was allegedly sent by a human rights non-governmental organization to the relevant authorities. The family is believed to have later been subjected to intimidation by the officers of Imbaba police station.

    Mohamed Samir Aboul Wafa, a 22-year-old detainee at the Hadayek Al-Qubba police station, reportedly died in custody on 13 January 2001. According to the information received, his father saw marks of physical violence on his arms and chest and around his neck as well as marks left by ropes on his shoulders and around his ankles. It is reported that the body, which was also examined by the Hadayek Al-Qubba public prosecutor and a forensic expert summoned by the prosecutor, was found to have been bleeding from the nose, ears and mouth. The family is reported to have filed complaints with various authorities requesting an investigation into the suspicious death of Mohamed Samir Aboul Wafa in custody.

    Khaled Salem Mohamed Salem, a 29-year-old street peddler, was reportedly arrested on 9 May 2000 by officers from the Quesna police after he was involved in a quarrel. It is alleged that he was referred to the prosecutor’s office under accusation of attempted murder and held for four days under investigation. According to the information received, on 14 May 2000 he was referred again to the prosecution for renewal of his dentention. He is believed to have been beaten while in custody and, as a result, to have been taken to a hospital. The Special Rapporteurs have been informed that when his sister tried to visit him on 14 May 2000, she was denied access. It is reported that on 17 May 2002, his relatives were informed about his death. The family reportedly filed an account with the Quesna prosecutor’s office to ask for an investigation into his death.

    Abdel Hamid Ramadan Abdel Hamid Zahran (commonly known as Khaled Zahran), aged 34, was reportedly arrested on charges of drug trafficking on 12 August 1999. It is alleged that although the Banha misdemeanors court ordered his release on 1 March 2000, he was kept in detention until 9 March 2000. On that day, an order for his imprisonment for one month was reportedly issued. It is believed that on 10 March 2000 he was taken to the Qalyubeya State Security office where other detainees allegedly saw him in a bad condition. Mr. Zahran reportedly died on 11 March 2000. According to the information received, the doctor who conducted the forensic examination concluded that his death was the result of a rib fracture as well as heart and respiratory failure. He also reported bruises on the kidneys and blood clots in the brain. An account of the facts has been transmitted by a human rights non-governmental organization to the relevant authorities.

    Ahmed Hassan Ahmed, a 26-year-old worker, was reportedly arrested on 27 February 2000 and detained in the investigation unit of Shobra El-Kheima police station. According to the information received, investigation officers from that police station went to his family’s home on 2 March 2000 and told his relatives that he had died. One of his relatives reportedly assisted at the washing of his corpse in Nasser Public Hospital and reported that the body presented several injuries, in particular bruises on the shoulders, the top of the back and the soles of his feet as well as on the lower lip. An autopsy was allegedly conducted on the same day. An account of the facts is reported to have been sent by the family to the Minister of the Interior and to the public prosecutor’s office.

    Correspondence from 1983-2002

    The United Nations Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions has been corresponding with Governments regarding alleged violations since the mandate was established over two decades ago. While the Project on Extrajudicial Executions is making efforts to provide easily browsed versions of as many years as possible, much of the earlier correspondence is available only in the PDF versions of reports from 1983 to the present.








Governments Other