Saturday, 2 June 2012

One Thought On The Mubarak Trial's Verdict

I will not spend time today attempting to analyse the potential verdicts in the Mubarak trial or their "historical significance." For all we know, the verdict could be delayed. And if current trends continue, we are more likely to be underwhelmed or altogether depressed with the verdict, regardless of what it is. Nevertheless, Egypt clearly has become specialised in mind-blowing phenomena. Thus, I don't discount any possibilities anymore.

But what I do want to point out, as everyone seems to as well, is the fact is that the legal and technical case against Mubarak seems very flimsy. I have heard and read the comment quite a few times that "if we were to rule strictly on a legal basis, he would be acquitted." Of course, part of the reason why the case itself is weak is how prosecution never managed to build a proper one, especially due to the continuous apparent incapacity to get evidence. But assuming that the prosecution's case is indeed weak, that puts us in a catch-22, as one friend was reaffirming yesterday to me. In that scenario, if the verdict is consequently "not guilty" based on sound legal technicalities (I'm mainly speaking about the Protesters' Killing Case), then he would have escaped all responsibility for the death of protesters exposed to extreme violence by his regime's security forces. And if a guilty verdict was passed with such an ostensibly weak case without formidable technical backing, then it would be a politicised verdict, which would be a problem in its own way that raises concerns on the impartiality of the legal system. More immediately, it would build by itself a solid case for an appeal against the verdict. Either way, there is something to be disturbed about. But certain things are more disturbing than others.

We'll find out what happens tomorrow.

No comments:

Post a Comment