DOHA: Amal Alamuddin, leading human rights lawyer, and expert on Egyptian legal system, has detailed the injustices in the Egyptian trial of three Al Jazeera English journalists in an incisive opinion piece for the Huffington Post.
Alamuddin, a barrister at London’s Doughty Street Chambers, specialising in international law, criminal law, human rights and extradition, noted that four successive governments in Egypt had used sham trials and questionable laws to silence media freedom and freedom of speech, with the Al Jazeera trial being a clear example of this.
She outlined the breaches of law and due process in the case of Mohamed Fahmy, Peter Greste and Baher Mohammed in an opinion piece titled ‘The Anatomy of an Unfair Trial’, Al Jazeera said in a statement.
“The first lesson in how to pull off a show trial is that it helps to have antiquated laws that criminalise ordinary (and necessary) speech,” she wrote.
“What else does the Al Jazeera case teach us is needed for show trials? You must present some sort of evidence so that it looks like a real case, and if you do not fabricate it then at least make it secret or irrelevant,” Alamuddin wrote.
“Of course, no real subversion of justice would be complete without a wholesale denial of due process for the defence. Here, the judge denied bail for no good reason and then told the defence to pay $170,000 to view the video evidence that would be presented against them.”
Alamuddin said the government under President Abdel Fattah Al Sisi had the opportunity to amend this: “This case will set a precedent for press freedom and nascent democracies in the region, and presents President Sisi with an opportunity to show that this administration is a true new beginning.”
THE PENINSULA
