(2004/C 78 E/0018)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0487/03

by Hanja Maij-Weggen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(17 February 2003)

Subject:   El Khosheh judgment

In its reply to my Written Question E-3652/02 (1) the Commission states that it:‘... was encouraged by the initial measures taken by the Egyptian authorities to restore calm to the area and bring those responsible to justice’.

Is the Commission aware that the police stood by inactive when the disturbances occurred in El Khosheh in January 2000, and has it raised the role of the police with the Egyptian authorities?

Is the Commission aware that the judicial verdict in the case relating to the violence in El Khosheh in January 2000 is to be announced on 27 February 2003?

Will the Commission be present when the judgment is passed and can it issue a report on this?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(18 March 2003)

The Commission's understanding is that security forces were quickly brought in from outside to El Khosheh to restore law and order, possibly in recognition that the local police in El Khosheh were unable to do so. The villages were also visited almost immediately by Ministers and senior officials with an explicit brief to restore calm and to give assurances that those responsible for the outrages would be brought to justice. These immediate reactions contrasted strongly and positively with the official reactions to previous events in El Khosheh although questions remain concerning the behavior of local security forces.

The Commission is aware that the initial verdicts at the first trial were seen by many Coptic commentators as falling far short of assurances that the guilty would pay for their misdeeds. The verdict of the retrial announced on 27 February 2003 (only two defendents were convicted against four in the first trial) may revive criticism of the court although some human rights and Coptic sources caution against speculation that the court has been biased in favour of the defendents. It is a civil not a military or emergency court and it is quite possible that the prosecutor general will again bring the decision to the attention of the Court of Cassation after the presiding judge publishes the reasons for its decision.

Although the Commission was not present in court the Commission Delegation and Member State embassies in Cairo have closely followed this case and will continue to do so. And representations will be made through the normal channels if it is considered appropriate.

(1)  See page 9.