Are Egypt’s courts carrying out their own revolution?
Some recent rulings could indicate Egyptian courts are trying to reclaim — or expand, some would say — the judiciary's influence.
CAIRO — On June 21, an Egyptian administrative court issued several unexpected rulings that mostly oppose the general trend that has prevailed in the political administration of Abdel Fattah al-Sisi’s presidency. Chief among these was the quashing of the controversial maritime border demarcation agreement under which Egypt ceded the Red Sea islands of Tiran and Sanafir to Saudi Arabia.
The court also annulled the decision to freeze the funds of retired soccer star Mohamed Aboutrika — on charges of funding the Muslim Brotherhood — as well as those of Pakinam al-Sharqawi, who was the assistant to ousted former President Mohammed Morsi.
Observers of Egypt’s judicial affairs said the court's ruling on the maritime border agreement is tantamount to a revolution. International agreements concluded by the government or the president are considered outside the judiciary’s domain; the ruling sparked broad controversy related to the court’s competence in such matters.
Mohamed Basal, a researcher and head of the judicial section at Al-Shorouk newspaper, told Al-Monitor the court's recent rulings aim to expand "the powers and prerogatives of the State Council toward monitoring the work of the state.”
