Table Of ContentReport on the
Case of Dr. Saad
Eddin Mohamed
Ibrahim Imprisoned
Sociologist Cairo, Egypt
Committee on Human Rights
Torsten Wiesel, CHR Chair
Carol Corillon, CHR Director
NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Report on the Case of Dr. Saad Eddin Mohamed Ibrahim
Imprisoned Sociologist
Cairo, Egypt
Committee on Human Rights
National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine
2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 204 18
Torsten Wiesel, CHR Chair
Carol Corillon, CHR Director
This document and the actions it describes were made possible through the use of general
operating funds provided to the committee by the Richard Lounsbery Foundation, the John D.
and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, The Scherman Foundation, the National Academy of
Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine.
Contents
CURRENT SITUATION 1
THE COMMITTEE'S WORK ON THE CASE 2
THE CHRIS MISSION TO CAIRO 6
Morton Punish & Jay Davenport
Background 6
The Charges 7
The Political and Legal Environment 9
The Trial 11
Interviews 16
Effects of the Prosecution on the Human Rights and Civil Society 17
Community in Egypt
Conclusions 17
APPENDIX A: May 3 1,2001 Appeal to President Mubarak 18
APPENDIX B: Committee on Human Rights, A Description 20
..
11
Current Situation
On May 2 1,2001,62-year-o1d sociologist Saad Eddin Ibrahim, who has dual
Egyptian and U.S. citizenship, was sentenced by a three-judge panel on Egypt's Supreme
Security Court to seven years in prison. He was immediately taken from the courtroom
and is currently being held in Tora Mazraa Prison in south Cairo. Twenty seven members
of Dr. Ibrahim's staff at the Ibn Khaldun Center for Development Studies (ICDS) in Cairo
(which he directs), including two women who were detained along with him, were also
found guilty. Most received sentences ranging from one to five years in prison. A
number of them had their sentences suspended. The two women, Nadia Abdel Nour
(chief accountant at the Center) and Magda El Beh (a part-time field worker), were both
sentenced to hard labor and are being held in the Quantar Prison for Women where
conditions are harsh, and they are denied family visits.
Charges brought against these 28 individuals, which the Committee on Human
Rights (CHR) considers to be fallacious, included accepting foreign h d s w ithout
authorization, disseminating false information harmful to Egypt's interest, bribing public
employees, forgery, and embezzlement. The European Union, whose funds the court has
claimed were embezzled, has publicly stated that no misuse of their funds has been found.
The harsh verdicts, which reportedly were handed down before lawyers for the
defense had finished submitting their briefs and only an hour and a half after their
summations had been completed, and the speed at which the judgment was made came as
a shock to those following the case. It had been expected, given that thousands of pages
of evidence had been submitted to the court for consideration in its deliberations, that a
final judgment would not be reached until sometime in June 2001, at the earliest.
Respected human rights groups in Egypt and abroad immediately said that the
verdicts were politically motivated and noted that the trial failed to meet international
standards for fair trial. Lawyers for the defense reportedly will appeal the verdicts as
soon as they receive the written ruling, which is to be issued within 30 days of
sentencing. Once the written ruling is received, the defense will have 60 days to submit
an appeal, based on procedural irregularities and limited legal challenges to the substance
of the court ruling. The appeal will be submitted to the Court of Cassation, which is the
highest appellate authority in Egypt. Because the Court of Cassation is a constitutionally
governed court rather than a special court created by state security, Dr. Ibrahim and his
family remain confident that the next appeal, which could take months before being
heard, will result in exoneration of the defendants.
As he was led out of the courtroom Dr. Ibrahim, according to the press, said:
"The fight goes on for justice, democracy and human rights. We will go through all the
1
necessary litigation. I have no regrets. I'm paying a price for what I believed and stood
for. I think Egypt deserved better and that's what I stood for and what I am committed
to."
On Friday, May 25,2001, having received permission ''as an exceptional favor''
from the attorney general, several members of Dr. Ibrahim's family visited him in prison
on Friday, May 25,2001. (It appears that none of the other 27 individuals sentenced,
including those whose sentences were suspended, have been in contact with their families
since the verdicts were handed down ten days earlier.) Dr. Ibrahim's family reported that
he is being properly treated but they are worried about his health. He is suffering from a
deteriorating nervous system disorder, as yet undiagnosed, which is affecting his balance,
walking, and use of his left hand, with progressive numbness in his right (writing) hand.
The director of the Tora Mazraa Prison reportedly has given his assurances that Dr.
Ibrahim will continue to be given his medications and monitored by prison doctors. The
family also reported that, in response to Dr. Ibrahim's complaint about the lack of
adequate exercise, they have been told that the situation will be remedied. The family has
requested that a committee made up of neurological specialists review Dr. Ibrahim's
private physician's findings and make urgent arrangements for follow-up care.
The Committee's Work on the Case
In the course of its work the Committee on Human Rights (CHR) learned in late
June 2000 of the detention of Dr. Ibrahim. (For a description of the CHR and a list of its
members, see Appendix B.) It carefully investigated the case, using a number of reliable
sources, and concluded that Dr. Ibrahim was most likely detained for having nonviolently
exercised his rights as promulgated by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Specifically, it appeared that Dr. Ibrahim was being detained for having exercised his
right tofieedom of opinion and information under Article 19 and for having promoted the
right to participate in government and infiee elections among Egyptian citizens under
Article 2 1. Additionally, in the course of his detention and subsequent hearings, serious
questions arose as to whether Dr. Ibrahim's right to fieedomfiom arbitrary arrest under
Article 9, his right to a fair public hearing under Article 10, and his right to be
considered innocent until proven guilty under Article 1 1 were being accorded to him by
the Egyptian authorities.
The CHR informed more than 1,700 members of the NAS, NAE, and IOM, who
serve as its correspondents, as well as the institutions in 50-some countries which are
affiliated with the International Human Rights Network of Academies and Scholarly
Societies (Network), of the facts of the case and its concerns. It urged that they intervene
vis-a-vis the Egyptian authorities to make them aware of the widespread knowledge and
alarm among the members of the international scientific community about Dr. Ibrahim's
2
I
case. Subsequently, the CHR sent its correspondents and Network members regular
updates on developments in the case and urged them to continue to write. These alerts
generated a large number of letters to the Egyptian authorities and many letters of support
to Dr. Ibrahim and his family.
In addition, the CHR wrote to the European Commission (EC) to make its officers
aware of the CHR's concerns and to learn what action the EC itself might be taking; it
sent several letters of appeal to President Mubarak and other Egyptian government
officials; it wrote to the U.S. secretary of state, the Egypt desk officer at the Department
of State, and the House and Senate foreign relations committees to request their
interventions vis-a-vis the Egyptian government authorities in Dr. Ibrahim's behalf. It
also wrote several letters to the U.S. ambassador to Egypt, Daniel Kurtzer, to thank him
for his interventions and to urge his continued attention to Dr. Ibrahim's case. The CHR
also approached, through NAS members, several prominent Egyptian scientists living
abroad to inform them of its concern about Dr. Ibrahim's plight and in the hope that they
would take personal action in his case.
Because the CHR routinely seeks to provide moral support to those colleagues
whose cases it undertakes, as well as to their families, Dr. Ibrahim's wife, Barbara, was
contacted and told of the widespread concern about her husband's case among his
scientific colleagues worldwide. The CHR also inquired as to the most constructive
private efforts the committee and the Network might consider taking in Dr. Ibrahim's
behalf. Over a period of months this contact was maintained and strengthened. At one
point Barbara Ibrahim wrote, with regard to the possibility of the CHR and Network
sending observers to Dr. Ibrahim's trial:
We are ready to get on with the trial, but some of the lawyers think that a further
%ooling offperiod' after the elections here movember 20001 would be helpful.
By December 1O th, we will have met with all the lawyers and have a clearer idea
about timing. Ifyou can hold offtill then on making travel decisions, it might be
better. We agree with you that ifan observer is to come then it should be when
the substance of the case is beingpresented. In all eventualities, we are extremely
grateful for this signal of support. There is no doubt that it is noted and makes a
difference. Our best wishes to all. . .
Subsequently, the CHR invited Dr. Ibrahim to travel to Paris in early May to
speak at a semi-public symposium, Human Rights and the Scientific Community, during
the fifth biennial meeting of the International Human Rights Network of Academies and
Scholarly Societies. The meeting was organized by the CHR, which serves as secretariat
for the Network, and was hosted by the French Academy of Sciences. In early April
Barbara Ibrahim wrote to the CHR that it seemed very unlikely that Dr. Ibrahim's
passport could be restored by the time of the symposium. Thus, the CHR invited Dr.
Barbara Ibrahim to speak in his stead, which she agreed to do.
3
I
During her talk Barbara Ibrahim, who is a U.S. citizen, spoke about the work of
her husband and his associates at the Center in promoting human rights and democratic
reforms in Egypt. She prefaced her remarks by saying:
It is truly, for me, an honor to be in this room today and to be addressing all of
you, to bring you personally@om my husband, @om his 27 associates, many of
whom are young Egyptians, their personal and deep gratitude and thanks for the
work that your academies, that your Network, and executive committee have done
on their behalfsince last summer when they were imprisoned, interrogated, and
are now under indictment in the high state security courts in Egypt.
Barbara Ibrahim went on to say that, in her husband's assessment, international
attention and persistence in the case of the 28 detainees means a great deal to those
people in Egypt who, at the moment, feel rather isolated within their own society. She
then described what happened on the night of June 30,2000, when her husband was
arrested.
None of our family were at home when about 30 to 40 state security policemen
surrounded our home . . in the southern part of Cairo, with guns and
,
ammunition and a warrant for my husband's arrest. They entered our home, they
gathered up his computers, some of the papers that he was working on and, very
significantly, went straight to a cupboard in his study where, only a few days
earlier, someone had brought some papers and told him there was a need for
safekeeping of these particular papers. They seemed to know the location of those
documents and took them, along with him personally.
He was taken up to his Center, where he found that the female accountant and her
assistant had also been arrested on the street, had been blindfolded, had been
brought back to the Center, and they were asked to show where all of the
JinancialJiles and the programJiles for the Center were kept. These were
systematically rounded up. They were all taken to state security headquarters in
another part of the city and held in incommunicado overnight.
Throughout her talk and during the question and answer period, Barbara Ibrahim
consistently expressed faith in Egypt's judicial system and confidence that her husband
would be exonerated.
On May 3 1,2001, following Dr. Ibrahim's sentencing to seven years in prison, the
presidents of the National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and
Institute of Medicine sent an appeal to President Mubarak (see Appendix A for the full
text of the letter) and subsequently made it public. This report was also made public at
that time. In their letter the three presidents said:
4
We hereby respectfully urge your Excellency to show humanity and exercise your
constitutional powers to intercede in this case and to immediately and
unconditionally release Dr. Saad Eddin Ibrahim. Of course, we hope that the
others who were convicted with Dr. Ibrahim will be released as well. Such a
magnanimous gesture would be most welcomed by our members and the
international scientific community.
Early in 2001 the CHR asked NASNAE member Dr. Morton Panish and former
National Research Council staff member Mr. Jay Davenport to undertake a private
mission to Cairo for the committee. The purpose of the mission was to:
- open lines of communication with relevant high level Egyptian government
officials regarding Dr. Ibrahim's case;
- meet with relevant and appropriate Egyptians, including representatives of
human rights organizations, and with Dr. Ibrahim himself who was released from prison
on bail on August 10,2000, his family, and his colleagues;
- establish whether Dr. Ibrahim's right to a fair andpublic hearing by an
independent and impartial tribunal, as promulgated by Article 10 of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, is respected;
- attend as observers Dr. Ibrahim's trial scheduled during the week of February
17,2001 , before the State Security Court; and
- present an assessment of the case to the members of the NAS, NAE, IOM, and
the Network for their consideration and possible further action.
Dr. Panish and Mr. Davenport (hereafter referred to as ''the delegates") traveled to
Cairo on February 15,2001, and remained for 12 days. The report that they wrote to the
CHR after returning from their mission follows.
5
The CHR’s Mission to Cairo
Morton Punish & Jay Davenport
I. Background
Late at night on June 30,2000, Dr. Saad Eddin Ibrahim and two of his co-workers
at the Ibn Khaldun Center for Development Studies (ICDS) were detained and
interrogated by the Egyptian State Security Police in Cairo. Dr. Ibrahim, who is 62 years
old, is a respected Egyptian sociologist, professor in the Department of Sociology at the
American University in Cairo (AUC), and director and chairman of the board of the
ICDS, also headquartered in Cairo. He holds a Ph.D. in sociology from the University of
Washington and has taught there, at Cairo University, and at several other universities in
the United States. He has published widely, including some 30 books in English and
Arabic. Dr. Ibrahim has been an adviser to the Egyptian government, president of
Cairo’s Union of Social Professions, and has served as a board member and head of Arab
Affairs of Al-Ahram Centre for Political and Strategic Studies. He is well known for his
work both as a scholar and a champion of democracy and human rights. In addition to his
membership in organizations such as the Club of Rome and the World Bank’s Advisory
Council for Environmentally Sustainable Development, Dr. Ibrahim has been a leading
proponent of democratic reforms in Egypt, particularly with regard to minority rights.
He has served as secretary general of the Arab Organization for Human Rights (Cairo).
As secretary general of the Egyptian Independent Commission for Electoral Review, he
has supervised the monitoring of the election process in Egypt. A report documenting
instances of government election violations and fraud in the 1995 parliamentary elections
was produced by the Commission. During a September 13,2000, talk at the American
University in Cairo, Dr. Ibrahim reportedly said that he believed it was his criticism of
these elections that were behind the charges brought against him.
The ICDS is an independent research organization whose main objective is the
advancement of applied social sciences in Arab countries and the developing world, with
a primary focus on Egypt. Its board of directors and staff include prominent Egyptian
scholars, former cabinet ministers and diplomats, as well as people from the arts and
business communities in Egypt. The Center has conducted many well-regarded studies
and conferences on democratic reform and the strengthening of civil society. Emphasis
has also been placed on equal rights for women and on exposing and mitigating strife
between Copts and Moslems in Egypt. In addition, the ICDS has trained Egyptian
students in social science research methods and has given them opportunities to
participate in field research. According to the Middle East Times, the Ibn Khaldun Center
has been “a thorn in the Egyptian regime’s side” since the radical Islamist threat receded
in the mid-to-late 199Os, when it and similar organizations began to focus more on the
government’s lack of democratic reform than on Islamist extremist violence. The
6
Center’s activities have been kept under surveillance for some time, and in January 2000
the authorities ordered its journal, Civil Society, to close down.
At the time of the detention of Dr. Ibrahim and two of his staff members during
the night of June 30,2000, the security police also closed the ICDS and seized all
computers and files as well as research materials and financial records. Since that time,
entry to the Center has been denied to its board members and staff. The state prosecutor
has been given access to the confiscated records in the preparation of the case against Dr.
Ibrahim and his staff, but these same records are closed to the defense. The personal
computer, files, and family safe in the home of Dr. Ibrahim were also confiscated by the
prosecutor.
During the next six weeks, 28 people (including Dr. Ibrahim) were placed in
preventive detention in Cairo’s al-Turah prison or Quantar Prison for Women. At the
time of the initial June 30 detention, the detention order was for 15 days pending the
outcome of a state investigation. Subsequently it was renewed twice, up to the maximum
45-day time limit under the 1981 Egyptian emergency law. Dr. Ibrahim and his
colleagues were released on bail ranging from 10,000 to 25,000 Egyptian pounds (4
Egyptian pounds equals about US $1) on August 10,2000, pending the filing of formal
charges. As is routine in cases under the emergency security law, the prosecution used
the detention time to uncover and present new accusations.
During the early weeks of Dr. Ibrahim’s detention and confinement many
newspapers, apparently under government influence, published articles containing
speculation, rumors, and inaccurate accounts of his behavior and actions. Several
reported identical factual errors, suggesting orchestration. For example, according to the
Middle East Times, the pro-government paper Akbar El Yom wrote that “He (Ibrahim)
deserves to be stoned . . . we know he is . . . loyal to those who pay him lots of money in
return for information . . . in which he defames Egypt’s reputation.” According to Al-
Ahram Weekly Dr. Ibrahim faced 30 accusations over the course of his detention.
Subsequently newspaper comments became more temperate. In fact, sensational
accounts and most speculative accusations disappeared for some time from the front
pages and editorials, particularly in the government controlled media. Knowledgeable
observers believe that the apparent smear campaign was abruptly abandoned in response
to international expressions of concern and protest. However, in early April sources close
to Dr. Ibrahim claimed that the Egyptian press was again sensationalizing the case and
cited as an example a recent interview of President Hosni Mubarak that was published in
Newsweek on March 3 1,2001 , but reportedly misquoted by the Egyptian press.
11. The Charges
At the time of Dr. Ibrahim’s release on bail, many people in Egypts’ civil rights
community assumed that the accusations against him would be dropped based on their
7
