MB Lawyers Submit Memo of Military Trial Violations

MB Lawyers Submit Memo of Military Trial Violations

The defense lawyers of the 18 Muslim Brotherhood leaders topped by Khairat El Shater (MB Deputy Chairman) have submitted a memo Sunday of the reasons for challenging the April 15 verdict that ranged from 3 to10 years jail sentence.


The defense panel said in a press release that the challenge was based on 214 violations of the Egyptian constitution. The violations included the article upon which the decision to refer defendants to military tribunal was based, as this article was deemed unconstitutional by the administrative court. The military court also violated article 31 of the Constitutional Court Law which stipulates that the court must stop hearing the case until the court rules regarding the concurrence of jurisdiction between the military court and the constitutional court.


The defense team added that the entire procedures of the trial were null because it lacked the principle of transparency stipulated in articles 169 of the Egyptian constitution and article 268 of the penal code.


The press release added that the court was “wrong” to say that Nasser’s regime has ordered the dismantling of the Muslim Brotherhood without having any tangible evidence, affirming that the military court and the state security investigations have failed to show a copy of such decision or any record of it.


The first challenge is against the decision of the Attorney General to continue jailing the MB leaders although the verdicts were legally null because of a concurrence of jurisdiction between the Military Court and the Administrative Court, Abdel Maksoud said. The Military Verdicts were issued while the Constitutional Court was still examining the challenge against the concurrence of jurisdiction; therefore the Military Court should have stopped the case until the Constitutional Court issues its ruling on who should examine the case. So the final verdicts were released illegally.




The second challenge was against President Mubarak’s decision to bestow amnesty on prisoners on the anniversary of the July 23 revolution, from which Muslim Brotherhood detainees were excluded.


The dense panel has decided to challenge the verdicts before the Higher Military Court for  Challenges saying “the defendants have received unjust verdicts, and they were acquitted by the normal civilian judge, and the military court did not offer them a fair trial, which makes it a moral obligation for us to pursue every possible legal channel to lift injustice and apply the rule of law.”




The lawyers added in their statement that the decision to challenge the verdicts aims at supporting institutional work through defending the rule of law against the flagrant violations that were committed by the military court. They reaffirmed their commitment to law as a sign of their belief in their constitutional rights and advocating them by all possible means.




The statement added that the military tribunals against MB leaders were merely political trials that have nothing to do with the rule of law.