<<previous | index | next>> VI. A Flawed Mirror: Prejudice and the Workings of JusticeA. A Moulid in TantaThe stigma attached to homosexual conduct in Egypt imputes a generalized guilt to those who practice it. Police and prosecutors assume men who have sex with men to be capable of, and culpable for, any other criminality. Police may thus see an act of violence against a gay man not as an occasion for investigation but as a pretext for further injustice. Instead of a concentrated search for a criminal, they stage a roundup to persecute an entire community. In several cases Human Rights Watch has documented, authorities reacted to the murder of an allegedly gay man with indiscriminate mass arrests, picking up dozens or hundreds of people with no probable cause—on the basis not of a concrete suspicion but of their mere implication in homosexual conduct—holding them illegally, and torturing them. Finding the killer gives way to the goal of expanding police repression. Such cases show unrestrained police power coupled with the power of prejudice. Several victims told Human Rights Watch the story of one such roundup. Khalil—in his forties and from a poor background in Gharbeya governorate—recounted how the events in Tanta in late 2002 “happened because this man, Adel, was murdered in his home.” When three of Adel’s gay friends broke the door down and found the body, the police arrested them. Khalil says:
Khalil was quickly picked up: “They came to my work with a big hullabaloo, talking about khawalat.” At the police station, officers beat him to name names. Like Khalil, Rafiq, in his mid-thirties, is a central figure in the community of self-identified gay men in Tanta. He says, “I still can’t believe Adel is dead. He was so strong, the strongest of all of us in body and mind and thinking. God rest his soul.”
Instead Rafiq was seized by an officer and “dragged to the detectives’ unit,” where an officer beat him on the back of the neck. Blindfolded and handcuffed, Rafiq was questioned “from 1 a.m. to 6 p.m.” Officers, he says,
At 6 a.m. police took Rafiq to the city of Mahallah al-Kobra to pick up “two of my friends: we seized them from their homes.”314 One of them, Beshoy, told us,
Rafiq says police arrested eighty-six men in those days. According to Khalil, “For the first six days, we were tortured. They would get you from the cells when you were just awake. And they would beat you again, and use the shocks.”316 Rafiq says one of the men who found Adel’s body was brutally tortured:
Another man was “hung up for four days without food or drink, by cuffs in the window.”318 “They beat one man, hung him up, and shocked him on his ears and feet and tongue,” Khalil remembers. “They’d say, ‘So you won’t talk, fine,’ and they’d buzz his tongue. One time they made all of us they’d arrested stand in the room where he was hanging with his hands above his head, while they used the electricity on him.”319 And many others were tortured, according to Beshoy: “They would take them from the cells at night, around 2 a.m. Then they would bring them back at 6 or 7 in the morning, and throw them on the floor, blindfolded. They could barely move or speak. When they revived a little they would tell us about the electroshock.”320 Khalil says,
Human Rights Watch spoke to Fahd. He said, “They rounded up so very many, but they didn’t find me. They got one guy from our street—I didn’t even know he was gay. The police came by night; they told the neighbors they were getting khawalat.”322 After a week Rafiq “saw they no longer wanted to catch the murderer, but to bring in as many gay people as possible. … That day I fainted, when I saw blood on the floor.”
Tanta holds the mosque and tomb of Sayyed al-Badawi, one of Egypt’s great religious shrines: his moulid or festival each October draws enormous crowds. As it neared, officers decided to use the detained men to cast a wider net. Freed during the day, they were forced to return to the station at night, to trawl the streets with police. Rafiq says, “We were looking for gay men, people we knew.”324 According to Khalil,
Medhat, a gay man from Cairo, told us about his eventful trip to Tanta.
Fahd, Khalil’s friend, told Human Rights Watch that
Over two weeks after the first arrests, the scouring of the moulid stopped: police arrested a suspect. But, Khalil says, many of the tortured men fled the city. B. Fear, Loathing, and the Law: The Effect of StigmaThe roundup during the moulid in Tanta shows how, in police practice, prejudice overcomes the lack of evidence, and annuls any pretence of due process. The contempt associated with “debauchery” in Egypt can render the rule of law irrelevant. According to attorney Maher Naim, who defended the accused in the Damanhour trial (which began with a similar roundup), in debauchery cases
This chapter examines how stigma impedes the law's promises of equality and universality in Egypt. It engenders an atmosphere in which—where “deviant” acts or identity are alleged—fairness succumbs and legal protections vanish. The mass injustices in Tanta are only one, extreme result. i. Surveillance, Arrests, and HarassmentWell-publicized mass arrests of “khawalat” have become staple items in Egypt’s press. Less high-profile arrests and harassment, however, remain regular. The priority police place on close surveillance of men who have sex with men is shown in the network of informers they nourish. Informers are used to make arrests, and to maintain Vice Squad files. Walid told Human Rights Watch he was one of hundreds of men detained in the al-Zawiya al-Hamra district of Cairo in 1998, in a mass roundup after a gay man was murdered there. He says police “showed us pictures of khawalat, classified active and passive and ‘versatile.’ So many pictures! A huge book, from all over Cairo.” Throughout the roundup, informers “brought in people who were known to be gay, so they could register them and their photos and let them go—to fill the Vice Squad files.”329 One man who has informed on others described to Human Rights Watch the pressure to do so. In January 2003, Al-Arabi claimed that a US diplomat had been robbed at the Marriott Hotel in Cairo by a man he had picked up.330 Late in that month, Ibrahim, a gay man in his twenties, was named to police by an informer as frequenting the Marriott, and summoned to the Tourist Police office in the Manial district.331 He says,
Ibrahim arranged an ambush: “I called a friend who was gay, and arranged to meet at a café. The police were waiting, and they arrested him.” 332 Informers and police presence in suspected cruising areas steadily lead to arrests. On June 14, 2002, for instance, ten men were arrested while coming out of the Odeon Hotel in Cairo. “I was with two friends,” one told us. “A policeman at the door stopped us, took our IDs, and put us in a transport vehicle. When they had enough prisoners, they took us to the Qasr al-Nil police station. They said we were khawalat.” The men were beaten and kicked to force them to sign confessions; after two days, taken before prosecutors, they were released on bail. “I fled the country,” the victim said. “The police had contacted my workplace and I was fired. The rest of them must have been convicted. I know my two friends are now in prison.”333 Ramzi, nineteen years old, recounted how in November 2002, he was arrested in Ramsis Square. “I found a guy telling me, ‘Just get in, girl. It’s obvious what you are.’ And he led me over to a police vehicle.”
Ramzi was taken to the al-Azbekiya police station, where
With a hidden cellphone, he called a lawyer, who bribed Ramzi’s way free. Ramzi says, “I don’t know what happened to the others. … They were all pretty young, but older than me—in their twenties, thirties. And they were terrified too. … The policemen were looking for younger men—I don’t know why. But one of the policemen told me, ‘We’ll teach you young people a lesson, we’ll show all the young people in this country the right path.’”334 ii. Without Protection of the LawNot only are men suspected of homosexual conduct in Egypt subject to arrest and abuse by police: they routinely find themselves defenseless against abuse by others. Medhat stressed to Human Rights Watch how perilous gay life in Cairo has become. Heterosexuals regularly rob and blackmail men who have sex with men: “They know that you can't do anything about it: police would arrest you instead.”335 Anwar, in his thirties, was a victim of one such incident. In 2002, he met a man who pretended to be gay, in the cruising areas around Ramsis Station in Cairo. Instead, however, the man and a group of his friends robbed Anwar at knifepoint. Later, the man continued to harass Anwar for money. “He said he knew I was homosexual and he would tell my workplace. … What could I say in a society that is against gays?” Finally, meeting the man in Ramsis Square one night, Anwar physically took him to the al-Azbekiyya police station to report him as a thief. “The man denied everything. He said that I was a khawal, and that I had asked him to fuck me, and he refused.” An officer decided to determine whether Anwar was gay.
Several prisoners advanced, one with a switchblade: “Let’s have a look, khawal, let’s see what you can do.” Resisting rape would be the proof of Anwar’s story.
However, a traumatized Anwar dropped the charges.336 Tamer was twenty-two and living in Alexandria in 2001, when two heterosexual male acquaintances broke into his apartment: “They stole about 7000LE [about US$ 1500 at the time], some watches, my toiletries and perfumes, all my CDs. I called the parents of one of them to ask that they return all my stuff. The father said he knew I was a khawal and he was proud his son did all that to such an immoral, disgusting person.” Tamer went to the police. Once arrested, the men declared Tamer was homosexual. “The policemen began to treat me like shit,” Tamer remembers, “to say things like: ‘Aren’t there any girls, do you have to go out and act the bitch yourself? Is your asshole is taking over your brain?’ The officer hit me and slapped me in the face. He left a big bruise on my face. They went on abusing me for forty minutes or so.” The investigating officer ordered Tamer to drop the charges. “Again he began cursing. He said, ‘It’s legal to steal things from people like you.’ I said: ‘If I am gay, I don’t have the right to ask for help when things are stolen?’ He said: ‘Absolutely not.’” Tamer went home, but “It wasn’t over.” The officer demanded the next day that he return with his belongings. “He said they had arrested three gay guys for debauchery, and if I didn’t come, they would put my name and address in the case.” The officer forced Tamer to give him expensive articles, “as a ‘present’ from me, to keep silent.” Tamer says, “Almost a month later I accepted a low-paying job in a distant area, to get away from Cairo and Alex. I am paid so little. …But it is better to be there than exposed to these dangers. I’m very alone.”337 Ahmed, a businessman in his fifties, told Human Rights Watch a story of attempted murder in which the victim became a defendant. In 2000, a man with whom he had had a relationship raped him, then robbed him with an accomplice, stabbed him, and left him for dead. Although seriously injured, Ahmed hesitated to report the crime because of “the scandal for my family. My father and mother didn’t know I am gay; they couldn’t have stood the shock.” However, a police officer visited him late one night:
Ahmed ultimately told the police about the assault and robbery—though not the rape. However, when referred to the Forensic Medical Authority to check his wounds, he found prosecutors had also ordered that an anal examination be performed.339 Over the next two years, a man claiming to be from the police tried to blackmail Ahmed. The man called repeatedly, demanding money to stop a case against him; Ahmed gave him 5000LE (over US$1000). Finally, “More than two years after all this happened, I received a note from the court for a trial.”
An appeals hearing in early 2003 upheld the sentence. Having suffered rape and attempted murder, and facing prison, Ahmed is in hiding. He told Human Rights Watch in February 2003, “It would be easier for me to kill myself than to go to jail for this. … What do they want me to do? To steal, become a beggar, work in prostitution or crime? Why do they want to destroy my life?”341 iii. Failure of Due ProcessMaher ‘Abd al-Wahid, the Prosecutor General of Egypt, told Human Rights Watch that “Prosecutions for debauchery are not affected by moral revulsion.” At the same time, he said, “ We are dedicated to protecting society against perversion, from a religious, social, and cultural point of view. This kind of conduct is simply not accepted.”342 In fact, Human Rights Watch's research suggests that the criminal justice system in Egypt rarely aspires to objectivity in cases of debauchery. Invoking the “cultural and moral situation” serves as a pretext for arrests, prosecutions, and decisions based on stereotype and stigma rather than evidence. At the first level, that of the police, prejudice clearly drives the crackdown. Helmi al-Rawi, a human rights attorney, says that officers “are generally ignorant of what the law says in the first place.” In debauchery cases, al-Rawi says, “they imagine that just practicing it is a crime—it’s beyond their imagination that the law stipulates certain conditions. The police don’t have much eye for detail.”343 For details of the law: arguably not. For details of clothing, intonation, look, or stride, it is a different matter. Police single out suspects on the basis of a battery of stereotypes: minute signs of “perversion” inscribed in ways of dressing, walking, talking, which together have engendered a despised and penalized identity —of “khawal.” Thus the law helps create something like a “sexual identity” in the course of criminalizing sexual acts. Law 10/1961 defines a pattern of accumulated actions as constituting a violation. The deeds adding up to “habitual debauchery,” however, are rarely themselves visible to the police. Moreover, consensual sexual acts leave no victim to point out the suspect. In compensation, police use informers to reveal offenders and expose private conduct; beyond that, though, they routinely infer acts from appearances. Gesture and posture become clues from which proclivity and desire can be inferred. Ziyad, a Queen Boat defendant, remembers how, in Abdin police station,
The peculiar dynamic of so-called “sodomy laws” and their assault on privacy is that the difficulty of proof tends to dissolve the specificity of their provisions. Instead of searching out the crime itself, police look for the exterior traces of an interior tendency. In the end, officers treat not deeds but demeanors as culpable, working—as Human Rights Watch has elsewhere written—based on an “atmosphere of stigma, in which certain outward marks signal the presence of a certain kind of person, and certain identities and groups become automatic targets of the law.”345 The correspondence between particular crime and particular punishment which is basic to the rule of law begins to break down. When people are penalized not for what they do but for what they seem to be, legality itself is at risk. In the police treatment of “debauchery” in Egypt, such degradation is well underway. At the level of prosecutors, al-Rawi says, a similar situation prevails. “There is a great ignorance of the law as well … but it is particularly acute when it comes to sex crimes—they’re so appalled by the idea that they don’t ask the most basic questions of the police, and don’t investigate the basic requirements of the law.”346 One defendant in the Queen Boat case remembers State Security prosecutors enraged that a debauchery file defiled their desks. “When I first entered, the prosecutor said to his colleague, ‘Let’s finish with these sons of bitches, it’s the first time we’ve had to work on such a dirty case.’”347 Prejudice also occurs elsewhere in the legal profession. Some lawyers deny that stigma deters attorneys from taking up debauchery cases. Many defendants, however, are less sanguine. Sabir, in Tanta, complains of his lawyer's disdain: “He doesn't like to talk to me. … He barely gives me information. He behaves this way because of the nature of the case. He knows he's the only lawyer I can get. All the other lawyers in Tanta refused to take the case. We had a lot of trouble convincing this guy to handle it.”348 Ziyad says that when his mother found out about his arrest on the Queen Boat, “She tried to hire a lawyer in my home town, a friend of the family. He told her, your son is a khawal and has admitted it. I'll have nothing to do with him.”349 Finally, at the level of the judiciary, accounts of unfair treatment are common. A lawyer told Human Rights Watch that, at the first hearing in Sabir's case in Tanta, the judge arbitrarily increased the bail, saying “Do you think I believe they didn't do it? Of course they did. I'm doing this to teach these men to think twice before taking off their pants again.”350 Al-Rawi adds, “It’s not just that judges simply approve what the police and niyaba say, but that they rule on stereotypes.” Court records point to confusion between social norms and law. In his verdict in the Queen Boat retrial, Judge Hassan al-Sayes digressed from procedural questions to declare, “The issue of the case and the crimes it includes repeat what happened in the time of the Sodomites and the wrath that fell upon them. They created an unprecedented obscenity among human beings by having sexual intercourse with human and demon males, and ignoring the women God created.”351 Similarly, a prosecutor summing up the offenses of the boy involved in the Queen Boat case (see footnote 142, above), addressed the judge in sacral, not legal terms:
After such ferocious rhetoric, the three-year sentence seemed almost anticlimactic.352 That many convictions arrived at despite irrelevant arguments and flimsy evidence are overturned on appeal suggests the greater sophistication of Egypt’s higher judiciary. However, at that level as well, prejudicial injustices also occur. One victim was Nabil, whose case was detailed in chapter II. Convicted of the habitual practice of debauchery in absentia in 1997, Nabil received a one-year sentence. Article 528 (2) of the Criminal Procedural Code stipulates that a misdemeanor verdict is “dropped after the passage of five years.” In other words, an appeals court, if petitioned, should then quash an unserved sentence. To free himself from the paralyzing fear of re-arrest, Nabil made such an appeal. At a hearing on January 19, 2003, which Human Rights Watch attended, Judge Ayman Saleh disregarded the law, reduced the sentence to six months, and ordered that it be imposed. Since defendants in an appeals hearing are required to appear in the courtroom cage for their case to be heard,353 Nabil was immediately taken to prison.354 Helmi al-Rawi, his attorney in his appeal, says, “The judge simply took one look at him and decided, ‘This is a khawal, and he should be in jail.’ And he didn't give a damn what the law said.”355
Such remarks from a noted judge suggest how difficult obtaining due process is for those to whom a despised identity is imputed. Helmi al-Rawi finds such attitudes symptoms of the overall crisis of the judiciary in Egypt: the mounting failings of a system filled with ill-trained and ill-paid personnel, staffed with ex-police and ex-prosecutors, and increasingly acquiescent before social and state pressure.357 “The police force and the niyaba melt,” he says, “through ambition and promotion, into the judiciary branch. The separation of the judiciary from the executive collapses.”
Yet looking at the law is not enough. Police, prosecutors, and judges ignore the technical requirements of the law; if they abided by those exigencies, fewer people would be charged or imprisoned. However, article 9(c) itself, along with related provisions, is vague and elastic even in the most rigorous interpretation; and it violates basic rights. An abrogation of privacy and vehicle for discrimination, it incites prejudice as well as allowing it free play. Restoring the rule of law means repealing, not respecting, repressive legislation. The prohibition of fujur should be eliminated from Egypt’s books. [313] Human Rights Watch interview with Khalil (not his real name), Tanta, Egypt, March 21, 2003. [314] Human Rights Watch interview with Rafiq (not his real name), Tanta, Egypt, April 11, 2003. [315] Human Rights Watch interview with Beshoy (not his real name), Tanta, Egypt, April 27, 2003. [316] Human Rights Watch interview with Khalil, Tanta, Egypt, March 21, 2003. [317] Human Rights Watch interview with Rafiq, Tanta, Egypt, April 11, 2003. [318] Ibid. [319] Human Rights Watch interview with Khalil, Tanta, Egypt, March 21, 2003. [320] Human Rights Watch interview with Beshoy, Tanta, Egypt, April 27, 2003. [321] Human Rights Watch interview with Khalil, Tanta, Egypt, March 21, 2003. [322] Human Rights Watch interview with Fahd (not his real name), Tanta, Egypt, March 8, 2003. [323] Human Rights Watch interview with Rafiq, Tanta, Egypt, April 11, 2003. In fact, the law requires that detainees be taken before a niyaba within twenty-four hours: Article 36, Criminal Procedural Code. [324] Ibid. [325] Human Rights Watch interview with Khalil, Tanta, Egypt, March 21, 2003. [326] Human Rights Watch interview with Medhat (not his real name), Cairo, Egypt, March 8, 2003. [327] Human Rights Watch interview with Fahd, Tanta, Egypt, March 8, 2003. [328] Human Rights Watch interview with attorney Maher Naim, Alexandria, Egypt, February 28, 2003. [329] Human Rights Watch interview with Walid (not his real name), April 23, 2003. [330] “News of the Week,” Al-Arabi, January 26, 2003. The Marriott Hotel is still known to be a discreet cruising area. US Embassy officials in Cairo denied to Human Rights Watch that an employee of their embassy had been involved. [331] Since the alleged crime happened in a hotel, the Tourist Police claimed jurisdiction. [332] Human Rights Watch interviews with Ibrahim (not his real name), Cairo, Egypt, February 3, 2003, and February 18, 2003. Ibrahim and his friend were freed after a few days. Police surveillance of the Marriott continued. On January 30, 2003, two researchers for Human Rights Watch—one from the US, one Egyptian—held a business meeting in the Marriott Hotel garden. The Egyptian researcher left the table and was approached by a stranger, also Egyptian. As they began a conversation, in which the stranger asked whether the researcher was gay, a police bailiff intervened and told the researcher that he was under arrest. He managed to alert his colleague, who accompanied him to the Tourist Police office, where after twenty minutes of interrogation he was released. The interrogation and other circumstances of the researcher’s arrest are consistent with reports that police had informants monitoring the Marriott, and entrapping Egyptians—particularly those in the company of foreigners—whom they suspected to be gay and could implicate in the robbery. [333] Human Rights Watch telephone interview with Jamil (not his real name), September 12, 2003. [334] Human Rights Watch interview with Ramzi (not his real name), Cairo, Egypt, March 4, 2003. [335] Human Rights Watch interview with Medhat, Cairo, Egypt, March 8, 2003. [336] Human Rights Watch interview with Anwar (not his real name), Cairo, Egypt, April 11, 2003 [337] Human Rights Watch interview with Tamer (not his real name), March 1, 2003 [338] Human Rights Watch interview with Ahmed (not his real name), Cairo, Egypt, February 18, 2003. Human Rights Watch has inspected Ahmed’s own case file; it shows police and prosecutors displayed a growing interest, throughout the investigation, in the possibility that Ahmed’s own sexual activities made him a criminal. In the record of an interrogation at the niyaba, Ahmed is shown as stating the two men “came to my apartment to practice vice with me, since I am a sexual pervert.” The case file is on file at Human Rights Watch; exact details on, or from, it have been suppressed to protect Ahmed's identity. [339] The language of the niyaba’s instructions to the Forensic Medical Authority clearly shows their interest in signs of consensual sex: although Ahmed had not reported the rape to the niyaba, he was referred “to verify his injuries … and whether he was sexually used from behind in sodomy or not [emphasis added].” On file at Human Rights Watch. 340 More than two years after police arrested Ahmed’s two assailants on charges of robbery and assault, the disposition of their case is unclear. The file contains no indication of what sentence, if any, they received. Ahmed says, “I’ve been told the two men were sent to prison for two years. Two years for robbery and for attempted murder! The judge must think that because it is related to homosexuality, I deserved it or brought it on myself.” Ahmed’s own file shows that the other two defendants were also charged with the habitual practice of debauchery, but does not indicate (as it generally would) that the assailants were in detention. [341] Human Rights Watch interview with Ahmed, Cairo, Egypt, February 18, 2003. [342] Human Rights Watch interview with Counsellor Maher ‘Abd al-Wahid, Prosecutor General, Cairo, Egypt, February 26, 2003. [343] Human Rights Watch interview with attorney Helmi al-Rawi, Cairo, Egypt, April 19, 2003. [344] Human Rights Watch interview with Ziyad, Alexandria, Egypt, February 28, 2003. [345] See More than a Name: State-Sponsored Homophobia and its Consequences in Southern Africa, Human Rights Watch and the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission, 2003, p. 86. [346] Human Rights Watch interview with attorney Helmi al-Rawi, Cairo, Egypt, April 19, 2003. [347] Human Rights Watch interview with Faisal, Cairo, Egypt, February 21, 2003. Indeed, prosecutors in several stories recounted in this report showed a repugnance to the point of violence against men suspected of having sex with men. In Damanhour, for instance, a prosecutor forced the defendants to chant, “We’re khawalat, we’re whores, we like to get fucked”; in the Agouza case, a prosecutor slapped three of the accused for refusing to align themselves as either active or passive. [348] Human Rights Watch interview with Sabir, Tanta, Egypt, March 8, 2003. [349] Human Rights Watch interview with Ziyad, Alexandria, Egypt, February 28, 2003. [350] Human Rights Watch interview with a lawyer who wished to remain anonymous, Tanta, Egypt, March 8, 2003. [351] Verdict by Judge Hassan al-Sayes in case no. 5375/2001, Qasr al-Nil Court of Misdemeanors, March 15, 2003, on file at Human Rights Watch. [352] Prosecutor Ashraf Hilal, in court file in case no. 2041/2001, September 18, 2003, Cairo Juvenile Court of Misdemeanors, on file at Human Rights Watch. [353] Article 237, Criminal Procedural Code. [354] Verdict by Judge Ayman Saleh in case no. 5205/1997, al-Azbekiya Court of Appeals, January 19, 2003, on file at Human Rights Watch. [355] Human Rights Watch interview with attorney Helmi al-Rawi, Cairo, Egypt, April 19, 2003. At three successive hearings, the same judge rejected motions to suspend the sentence pending a Cassation Court review. Nabil was finally released in July 2003, and has since suffered severe depression: letter from Nabil to Scott Long, Human Rights Watch, January 9, 2004. [356] Human Rights Watch interview with Judge Mohammed Abdel Karim, March 11, 2003. [357] The condition of the courts occasioned controversy when, in early 2003, the Nasserist daily Al-Arabi published a memorandum sent by retired jurist Yehya al-Rifai to the heads of Egypt’s Lawyers' Syndicate and to the board of the Judges’ Club. Al-Rifai said the state of the judiciary was “deteriorating” amid government interference in judicial decisions and attempts “to bring the judiciary under the direct control of the Ministry of Justice.” Citing the Ministry's power over salaries and benefits, he accused the state of honing both threats and temptations to eviscerate the “customs, values, and traditions of the judiciary.” Judge Yehya al-Rifai, “I announce the death of justice in Egypt,” Al-Arabi, January 5, 2003. [358] Human Rights Watch interview with attorney Helmi al-Rawi, Cairo, Egypt, April 19, 2003.
|