During his arguments before the prosecution, the lawyer utters what the prosecutor does not like, and the matter escalates to arguments between the two, then to altercations that may reach a clash, in which sometimes the lawyer’s colleagues intervene against the prosecutor, who is protected by the police and de facto.
A scenario that happens from time to time throughout Egypt, according to the facts published by the newspapers, is perhaps only what appears on the surface of the tension between the two sides of the judicial system, and the submerged ones are more and more violent.
This constant tension between the two sects is rooted in the growing sense of victim hood among lawyers as a result of the fact that the lawyer and the prosecutor are graduates of the faculties of law, Sharia and law. However, the intermediary alone made this person sit on the prosecutor’s chair with various privileges, and kept it before him stripped of every advantage except for his fees from his profession. According to a lawyer who spoke to Al Jazeera Net, he refused to give his name.
The lawyer considered recent decisions issued by the Supreme Judicial Council to regulate joining judicial bodies as a “formal matter”, stressing that justice will only be established by transparency and fairness of selection among the applicants, as he described it.
The Supreme Judicial Council issued several decisions after a meeting with President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi, related to reforms in the judiciary, which observers considered a courageous reform. One of them was related to not repeating the names of those accepted for appointment to judicial authorities and bodies, as of the graduates of the class of 2018 for the State Council and the Public Prosecution, and from Graduates of the 2013 batch for the Administrative Prosecution Authority and the State Cases Authority.
The decisions issued a few days ago also included a provision to provide the State Litigation Authority with the reasons for not accepting the applicant for appointment in judicial positions to submit them to the judicial authority in the pending cases in this regard.
Observers considered that the decision attempts to reform the mechanisms of appointment to judicial bodies, following criticism of recent appointments to the Public Prosecution, and repeated accusations of adopting wasta and nepotism to reach the judiciary seat.