Financial Rapporteur Witnessing: Accuses are Groundless, Serving Political Ends

The 17th military trial session for Muslim Brotherhood leaders is deemed of extreme significance. Chairman of the Tripartite Expert Committee, who, by the way, supervised the financial report on the court-martialed leaders, gave three legal death blows to the case, affirming the case politically-motivated.

In the course of his testimony, Mr. Sa’d Eddine, the Expert Committee Chairman, have torpedoed three answers, considered legally adequate for halting the case.

On answering the 1st question, the witness denied being the assets of Muslim Brotherhood leaders collected from suspicious sources. Note-worthy, this testimony is regarded a sufficient legal reason for abating accusations of money-laundry.

Within his answer to the question about the relation between the companies enlisted in the indictment bills and the Muslim Brotherhood organization, the Expert Committee Chairman disclaimed any kind of relation between the companies, the group and money-laundry accuses, asserting that no official record or paper proved such depicted relation.

The 3rd question focused on charges of financing extralegal student activities the MB defendants face, which also negatively answered by the financial rapporteur. “The committee did never come to such conclusion” the Expert Committee Chairman testifies, refuting the accusations of financing Al-Azhar students the Muslim Brotherhood leaders face.

Before the end of the trial, the defense panel has claimed three demands from the tribunal: first of whom was summoning the head of Money-Laundry Unit at the National Bank of Egypt for testimony. Secondly, inquiring the National Bank Money-Laundry Unit, as a competent authority and a monitor, for provision of any data, indicating involvement of MB leaders in previous money-laundry activities. Thirdly, the defense demanded the Money-Laundry Unit to confirm, by documents, whether the defendants have been accused or got involved in money-laundry activities before or not.

Notably, the tribunal decided to adjourn the hearing of the same witness to next Wednesday.