
Persecution of Egyptian gays is warning to U.S.
by Geoffrey Mock
As America responds to the Sept. 11 attacks with
legal measures intended to protect its citizens,
two imminent, high profile cases in Egypt provide
a cautionary tale of the price that can be paid
when a country takes action to fight its
perceived enemies.
On Dec. 19, Egyptian courts were expected to hear
the appeal of Saad Ibrahim, an Egyptian-American
university professor who was convicted and
sentenced to seven years in jail for his human
rights work.
On the same date, another Egyptian court reduced
the sentence of a 16-year-old boy, Mahmud, who in
September was sentenced to three years’
imprisonment and three years' probation for his
alleged sexual orientation. The appeals court
reduced the sentence to six months in jail and
six months of probation.
Mahmud and Saad Ibrahim couldn’t be more
different. One is a young boy suddenly thrown
into an international spotlight by an unexpected
arrest; the other is a longtime and well-known
democracy advocate who knew for years that his
work would ultimately lead to trouble with
security officials. But what ties the two cases
together, and should draw American attention in
the post-Sept. 11 world, is that both are signs
of a more troubling trend in Egypt: the
government’s effort to muzzle civil society.
Egypt, like the U.S., fought its own war against
armed Islamist groups in the 1980s, and was
largely successful in ending associated violence.
However, the cases of Mahmud and Saad Ibrahim
bring into sharp focus how activities intended to
reign in armed groups are easily used against
legitimate non-violent opposition within civil
society. When the U.S. utilizes military
tribunals and similarly secretive measures in the
name of national security, do we risk doing the
same?
Ibrahim was tried before a State Security Court.
Like Egypt’s military courts, these security
courts were established by presidential decree in
the fight against terrorism. But their disregard
for basic due-process rights and blind-eye to the
use of torture have long been the target of
criticism from human rights activists and the
U.S. State Department.
Evidence indicates that the legal action against
Mahmud, whose arrest was part of a larger effort
by the Egyptian government to harass gays -- and
led to the arrest and conviction of 23 allegedly
gay adult men -- is also political in nature.
As with Ibrahim, the allegedly gay adults were
tried in State Security Court, which indicates
the extraordinarily broad powers of these courts.
The point can’t be overemphasized: While military
and state security courts were instigated to
fight terrorists, their main use is against
non-violent political critics, human rights
defenders and now gays.
The rash of arrests of gays is unprecedented in
recent Egyptian history; homosexuality is not a
crime in Egypt. But it shouldn’t be surprising
that, at a time when the government sees all
critics as a threat to the political order, it
would similarly view people outside of the
mainstream socially.
The history of Egyptian politics indicates it
doesn’t have to be so. Egypt could once take
pride in its independent judiciary, an active
variety of non-governmental organizations and the
framework of a democratic government with a
myriad of opposition parties and presses.
Even in recent years with its one-party rule, the
Egyptian government has included progressive
sectors with officials trained by educators such
as Ibrahim providing a voice for democracy and
Arab human rights. Its intellectual life was
vigorous.
Time and time again we have seen these
progressive forces crushed between the violence
of the armed Islamist groups and the repression
of the Mubarak government. Yet, the history and
vitality of the Egyptian people is such that it
is not too late.
The face of the future of democracy can be found
in the young man and the old intellectual in the
courtroom. U.S. policymakers need to stand by
them.
Geoffrey Mock is an Egypt country specialist with
Amnesty International.
|