The National Association for Defense of Rights and Freedoms (NADRF) and Egyptian and African partner organizations demands from The Human Rights Watch Organization not to give the humanitarian cover to the terrorism in order to escape from any retribution.
NADRF and the Egyptian and African partner organizations express their deep concern about the continuation of the politicized methodology of reports on the Egyptian case which was issued by some international human rights organizations. It is well-known from the methodology of the work of human rights organizations in the world and their independent role in monitoring and documenting human rights violations without taking sides at the expense of the other, and to be the only bias towards human rights principles and victims of human rights violations.
NADRF and the partner organizations were surprised when one of the major international organizations announced a report on the Egyptian issue, and it repeated the same mistakes represented in the lack of independence and accuracy in monitoring violations, which undoubtedly contributes to supporting terrorism by providing a cover for it as well as helping terrorists escape from punishment.
Human Rights Watch recently issued a report entitled “Suspicious killings and extrajudicial executions by the Egyptian security forces,” in which the organization adopted the viewpoint of members of the Muslim Brotherhood, adopting one narrative that there are a number of extrajudicial killings in an attempt to show that the security forces The Egyptian committed this crime, and that there was no threat to the lives of soldiers and members of the security forces, and that the shooting by the latter came to liquidate those affiliated with the armed groups, based on undocumented testimonies linking them to cases of enforced disappearance.
In this context, we would like to stress that the Egyptian state has committed and is still committing several violations of human rights, but not in the manner depicted in the Watch reports.
There are many reports issued by Egyptian human rights organizations, whether at home or abroad, that monitor and document these violations in several forms, and their visions may vary among them regarding the mechanisms and methodology of human rights and legal work, but these reports – especially internal organizations – come with more accurate, clearer, more credible and documented data than Human Rights Watch adopted it.
The National Association for the Defense of Rights and Freedoms and the partner organizations express their deep concern about the deviation of the standards of some international human rights organizations, which may lead – intentionally or unintentionally – to granting a legitimate cover to the bearers of arms against the Egyptian state, through the adoption of testimonies It has a purely political orientation without investigating all the facts, and what makes the matter worse is the lack of data and information issued by the Egyptian state, which allows the terrorist groups’ narrative to be passed on.
What confirms this is the use of some phrases and terms that express the political orientation of the report, such as the use of the terms uprising of 2011 AD and the military coup of 2013 AD instead of using the terms January revolution or June 30 revolution. As well as the use of the general and military generals in the Arabic version of the report, which is a well-known political use in the literature of political writing, while the legal description of military ranks is in the words used in the state subject of the report, and the meaning of the military rank can be defined.
On the other hand, the organization, in its report, cut some phrases out of their context or reviewed some topics without completing the review, and only the points that serve the idea of the report and its conclusions.
The report cited in the case of enforced disappearance the National Council for Human Rights (NCHR) in Egypt, which called on the Egyptian state, represented by the Ministry of Interior, to clarify the fate of a number of the forcibly disappeared, and this is a welcome matter for an Egyptian national institution to engage with this issue when it was raised, but the report did not mention any of the enforced disappearances. The responses that postponed the reality of a number of those whose names were mentioned in the inquiry of NCHR. We would have liked to mention the responses for the sake of transparency and independence, which we always seek.
The report cited some political statements, which were taken from their place. For example, the statement of the President of the Arab Republic of Egypt regarding the non-trial of the accused in terrorism cases before the natural judiciary was taken away, and they considered the matter as a statement of security dealing with those accused of murder, while the statement relates to amending the legislative system and trials The exceptional and the formation of emergency circles of terrorism, and despite our categorical rejection of the exceptional trials, the statement was not intended to authorize the killing, as the report tried to portray.
The report also dealt with a number of different issues, such as the Rabaa sit-in dispersal, and that the events of the Rabaa sit-in dispersal led to the killing of approximately 817, but the report ignored the reference to what was stated in the report of the NCHR regarding the events of this dispersal, which was issued in 2014 after real documentation With those who were present during this particular event, which concluded that the dispersal was carried out using sound procedures, and that the sit-in was armed, and that the first dead person was a Police Officer. The report also confirmed that the security provided safe corridors to exit the sit-in in a safe manner. This concluded that the number of victims of the incidents of the dispersal of the Rabaa sit-in is “632 civilians and police,” which confirms that the organization’s report lacked documentation, scrutiny, and diversity of sources, which led to the adoption of a single point of view that led to the report’s emergence in this way.
NADRF and partner organizations stress the importance of the role of civil society in instilling concepts of human rights and defending victims, and the organizations’ commitment to impartiality and independence in monitoring and documenting violations through a diversity of sources and adherence to clear human rights terms. Unfortunately, these standards were absent from the organization mentioned in its last report. The organization’s approach has become to support violence and terrorism and to give a human rights cover, which completely destroys independence. An international human rights organization should not issue this many mistakes.
NADRF and the partner organizations affirm that the period that preceded the issuance of the current NGO law played an important role in the decline in the role of Egyptian human rights organizations and led to a contraction of the human rights movement in Egypt, which led to the absence of various sources of information or data on human rights violations, which undoubtedly led to the existence of such Politicized reports.
NADRF and partner organizations call on the Egyptian state, specifically the Egyptian Ministry of Interior, the Egyptian Parliament, the Attorney General, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Permanent Committee for Human Rights, and the National Council for Human Rights to always work to answer those inquiries that come to them regarding files of human rights violations, and to announce the results of investigations in those issues.
Human Rights Watch should work on addressing the Egyptian Public Prosecutor with communications that include documented cases to enable the Public Prosecution to investigate them, but adopting the press narrative method will not enable the Public Prosecution to open any investigations in any of these cases.
NCHR should open channels of communication with all international organizations concerned with the Egyptian issue to communicate with them regarding complaints and violations related to the Egyptian situation.
NADRF and the Egyptian and African partner organizations emphasize that the human rights file should not be a space for conflict or political intrigue, which is what makes human rights issues lose their importance and turns it from a mechanism to defend and protect citizens into a mechanism for political blackmail, which is what This leads to granting terrorist groups a legitimate cover for the crimes that are being committed on the one hand, and on the other hand, the continuation of human rights violations without providing any protection umbrella.
1 The National Association for Defense of Rights and Freedoms Egypt
2 Al-Haq Foundation for Freedom of Opinion and Expression and Human Rights Egypt
3 Rossy Foundation Malawi
4 Ravine Foundation Kenya
5 Faith Charity Foundation
6 INITIATIVES AFRICAINES Democratic Republic of Congo
7 We Care Children’s Foundation Sierra Leone
8 International Fan Club of Friends of Patience Dabany (FCIAD) Côte d’Ivoire
9 Fraternite Plus Benin
10 Ukombozi na fahari kwa vijana na watoto Tanzania
11 ONG-KOCARI Benin
12 CHAMEG (Changing Mentalities and Empowering Groups) Cameroon
13 Al-Naeem Foundation for Human Development Somalia
14 CHILD WATCH organization Tanzania
15 B’ Hallmark Entrepreneurial Empowerment Programme (BHEEP) Nigeria
16 African festival foundation Ghana
17 United business women association of Nigeria and Diaspora Nigeria
18 United widows foundation Ghana
19 APC Active Youth Forum Nigeria
20 International Federation for the Defense of the Rights of the Child Algeria
21 Foundation of Freedom and Community Development Support Egypt