The Trial of All Centuries

An overhead shot of thousands gathered in Tahrir Square. Military tanks roaming the streets of the country. Civilians taking the law into their own hands. Former Vice President Omar Suleiman announcing the resignation of former President Hosni Mubarak. Egyptians taking to the streets to clean up their cities. These are all images that will forever be engraved into the minds of 80 million people from this most memorable of years. As of last month, however, there is one image that tops them all: the image of the overthrown president lying on a hospital bed being wheeled into a caged courtroom dock. By his side stand his two sons, Gamal and Alaa, in the white jumper suits of the accused. Once the most powerful family in the nation, these three men are now being tried for corruption and murder in a common court of law. Some 3,000 soldiers and police officers stood guard outside of the Police Academy — formerly known as the Mubarak Police Academy — where the trial is being held and five times the 600 people allowed to attend inside the courtroom, including lawyers, families of martyrs and media. Outside the court, clashes between pro- and anti-Mubarak factions broke out while elsewhere in the country, people tuned in to state TV’s live broadcast, watching in amazement, and often amusement, as this truly historic event unfolded. Behind the historic significance lurks skepticism. Many believed the trial would not happen at all, fearing the governing Supreme Council of Armed Forces was reluctant to prosecute one of their own. Now that it has started, the question becomes whether this trial will be a fair prosecution or a mere charade put on to calm the raging streets of the country.   Day in Court The Mubaraks had been in custody for interrogations since April: Alaa and Gamal in Tora Prison, and Mubarak reportedly under house arrest at Sharm El-Sheikh International Hospital, where he had been admitted after complaining of heart-attack-like symptoms. On June 1, Egyptian state media announced that the Mubarak trial was set for August 3. Despite the news, skeptical protestors continued to call for a speedy trial, making it a key demand during a three-week sit-in that shut down Tahrir Square in July. On August 3, as scheduled, the trial opened with a full day of legal proceedings. Joining the Mubaraks in the dock were former Interior Minister Habib Al-Adly and six former security chiefs. Additionally, Hussein Salem, a businessman and Mubarak crony arrested in Spain after fleeing Egypt, is being tried in absentia for charges of corruption and illegal accumulation of wealth along with the former first family. Mubarak is accused of conspiracy to commit murder and attempted murder of more than 800 protestors during the 18-day uprising, abusing power to amass wealth, and approving natural gas sales to Israel at below-market prices. If found guilty, he could face the death penalty. Already serving a 12 year prison term for corruption, Al-Adly is also charged with conspiracy to commit murder and attempted murder of more than 800 protestors and faces the death penalty if convicted. Gamal and Alaa Mubarak are accused with abuse of power and illegally amassing wealth — crimes that carry several years of jail time. The first session saw Mubarak and his two sons deny all charges against them, and the trial was adjourned until August 15. During the second session, Judge Ahmed Rifaat ordered an end to the live broadcasts of the trial and adjourned the proceedings once more until September 5. History in the making “The fact that the once-president of a country is now on trial is a huge deal for Egypt,” says Ahmed Fawzy, a lawyer and member of the Front to Defend Egypt Protesters. Historic moment aside, Fawzy is concerned that the delay in actually bringing the case to trial might have compromised some of the evidence. “To leave people with that much influence and power for that long, and with the same members from the former regime still working in the national intelligence and the police force [could easily allow them] to manipulate the evidence,” he asserts. Fawzy says the delay was very much intentional, and had it not been for the continued pressure by the protesters in Tahrir Square and other parts of the country there may not have been a trial at all. “Mubarak was in Sharm El-Sheikh, in his ‘palace’, still being [waited] on by the National Guard and giving out statements,” he says. “He was not being treated as a regular citizen.” In statements to the media, Mubarak’s lawyer Farid El-Deeb asserted that the 83-year-old Mubarak was far too frail to stand trial, claiming that the former president suffered from cancer and heart failure. At one point, El-Deeb claimed the former president had slipped into a coma — reports denied by health officials. Amid the rumors, many doubted the former president would show up to his own trial. “The trial has been attended by Mubarak twice so far, which is a positive sign,” says Emad Gad, a senior analyst at Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies. Lawyers’ showdown However, Gad was less than impressed with the lawyers representing the martyrs, noting that they seem to be more interested in hogging the stage and promoting themselves. Gamal Eid, founder and executive director of the Arabic Network for Human Rights Information, agrees. “The number of lawyers that showed up created a disorderly situation, and some of the lawyers were not even representing any of the martyrs’ families but were there simply because of how well-known they are,” says Eid, explaining that some of the lesser-known lawyers hired by families of the martyrs in turn brought in a more-recognized lawyer to speak on their behalf. According to Eid, the martyrs’ legal team is in a difficult position since there are over 400 families being represented by different lawyers, with no apparent coordination among them. One of these lawyers is Sayed Fathy, representing the families of several martyrs including Hossam El-Din Zaky, Ayman Abdel Rahman and Mostafa Abu Zeid. While Fathy admits that there is a bit of disorganization among the lawyers, he adds that they are trying to create a united civil defense team. “There is currently an attempt to contact all parties so that the confusion that happened in the previous times doesn’t happen again,” says Fathy. “Because anyone has the right to employ any lawyer they would like, there was a mix-up and there were lawyers but no defense front or clear plan.” Fathy explains that should there be a united legal team for the martyrs’ families, then they could consolidate one list of demands and divide up the roles, such as questioning the witnesses, speaking on their behalf in court and so on. In contrast, the Mubarak family has only one legal team, led by El-Deeb, working on their behalf. Fair-o-meter The very structure of the trial has raised concerns about how fair the trial is going to be. “As far as I can see until now, the trial is proceeding in a just way,” Eid notes. “We want a trial for Mubarak, but we also want a fair trial.” At the same time, Eid sympathizes with Rifaat over the presiding judge’s difficult task. “[Rifaat] is trying to move with the procedures normally,” Eid notes, “but the problem is the papers that he got from the General Prosecutor’s office are not properly put together, and the charges do not match the case.” Eid is referring to the fact that the Prosecutor’s office has combined two sets of charges involving different sets of defendants into one trial. Mubarak, Al-Adly and the six security officials face charges related to murdering protesters; Mubarak is also facing corruption-related charges with his two sons, who are not facing murder charges. It is not clear whether the judges will eventually order the murder and corruption charges separated into two different trials. Eid says they never should have been combined in the first place. Throw in all the legal teams involved — the defendants, the state’s prosecution for corruption and murder charges and the hundreds of lawyers representing the martyrs’ families — and the three-judge panel has a tangle of legal requests that could drag the trial out for months. While the state’s prosecution are representing the criminal prosecutors out to prove Mubarak and codefendants for the murder charge, the martyrs’ lawyers are the civil rights defendants calling for financial compensations to the families. Experts agree that combining Al-Adly and Mubarak in the same murder case allows for a better chance for both men to be convicted of the killing of protestors, as opposed to Mubarak having a separate trial that focuses mainly on the corruption charges. And while the decision to no longer broadcast the trial live was met with disapproval in the street, Eid agrees with it to some extent. “The decision is correct in one aspect — you cannot broadcast the witnesses’ statements. But we are hoping that the judge will amend his decision and allow the lawyers’ statements to be aired,” says Eid, adding that perhaps the reason behind not broadcasting the trials is to force the lawyers to focus more on the case than on hogging the media spotlight. All the experts agree that it is too soon to predict the outcome of the trial, but expect the next few sessions to be more of an indicator as the so-called “introductory” part of the trial is over. Whatever the trial’s outcome, it cannot help but have a direct effect on the turbulent transitional period the country is going through. Observers agree that the future cannot be stable until we are able to peacefully lay our past to rest.