Previous 13 / 22 Next

Official Gazette – Issue No. 8 bis (a) May 26, 2013 13 Based on the above mentioned and whereas paragraph 1 of article (69) stipulates that "This law shall be published in the Official Gazette", therefore this text infringes article (223) of the constitution. For Such Reasons The Court has decided: First: not to accept the request with regard to articles (14) and (15) of the presented draft law in the manner demonstrated with reasons. Second: last paragraph of article (1), clauses (2 and 3) of article (2), clauses 6, 7 and 8 of article (10), paragraph 4 of article (12), the end of article (16), articles (22) and (31), paragraph 5 of article (38) and article (69) infringes the constitution's provisions in the manner demonstrated with reasons. Third: paragraph 1 of articles (5) and (6), paragraph 2 of article (7), article (9), paragraph 1 of article (13) and article (33) regarding pointing to judicial entities and bodies, article (10) regarding international organizations and CSOs and paragraph 3 of article (33) on full-veiled women voting comply with the constitution's provisions according to the interpretation specified by this court in the manner demonstrated with reasons. Secretary President of the Court

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Shura Council Speaker request for constitutional review of the draft law regulating the exercise of political rights.

Judgment

Question Presented: Whether the draft law adheres to the current constitutional political protections.

Alleged Acts: The Shura Council Member filed suit in the Supreme Constitutional Court seeking review of the draft law that limited political rights and they exercise thereof. The drafted law; (1) distinguished between judicial bodies and branches and required the National Elections Commission to assign supervision of voting to judicial bodies; (2) permitted those unable to cast their ballot based on visual impairment or other disability to verbally state the vote to an election official who would record it on a ballot; (3) permitting the President to set the general election date by decree; (4) no modifications may be made to the voter database after the call for elections; (5) reforming the voting abroad system to begin counting before the actual date of elections.

Summary: The court determined that the differentiation between judicial bodies and branches was unconstitutional and required that they words be synonymous. Second, the court determined that all ballots must be direct secret votes, but that this supposes the voter is sighted. Thus, the court determined that the committee head signing the ballot paper violated the right to secrecy. Third, the court determined that Presidential decree violated the constitution because it diminish the integrity of election and removed powers from the Election Commission. Fourth, the court determined that restrictions on the right to voter were limited such those they unreasonably hindered political participation. Fifth, the court determine that the constitution provides protections for Egyptians living abroad and the restriction of voting before election day failed to adhere to these protections.

Conclusion: The court struck down portion of the drafted law and unconstitutional because they conflicted with the political protections set forth in the constitution.

Legal Issue(s)

Accessibility
Vote Verification and Transmission

Region: Middle East and North Africa

Country: Egypt

Language of Decision

English

Court: Constitutional Court

Election Type: Review of law

Date of decision: May 26, 2013

Geolocation

Latitude: 30.38327401

Longitude: 31.34626495

: Geolocation

Primary Documents

SCC ruling- some elec procedures and PWDs-May 2013 (English).pdf
English
Download View

Election Judgments - IFES

Select target paragraph3

Shura Council Speaker request for constitutional review of the draft law regulating the exercise of political rights.

Primary Documents

Notifications