{"id":16988,"date":"2025-01-27T16:19:34","date_gmt":"2025-01-27T14:19:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/zawia3.com\/?p=16988"},"modified":"2026-10-07T10:04:31","modified_gmt":"2026-10-07T08:04:31","slug":"failure-of-judges-children","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/zawia3.com\/en\/failure-of-judges-children\/","title":{"rendered":"Ahead of Club Elections, Judges Protest Their Children\u2019s Exclusion from Military Training"},"content":{"rendered":"

On April 22, 2023, Egypt\u2019s cabinet introduced a requirement<\/a> for new appointees across state sectors, bodies and institutions to complete a six-month qualification course at the Military Academy in Cairo. The requirement also covered recruits to judicial institutions, including the Public Prosecution, State Council, Administrative Prosecution and State Lawsuits Authority.<\/p>\n

Judicial appointments had previously been governed by the relevant statutory conditions. Articles 38 and 116 of the Judicial Authority Law<\/a> contain no requirement to complete a military-college course. Conditions include Egyptian nationality, full civil capacity, an Egyptian law degree or an equivalent foreign qualification with the necessary equivalency examination, good character and reputation, and no conviction or disciplinary ruling for a dishonourable offence, even following rehabilitation.<\/p>\n

Age rules depend on the post: Article 38 sets minimum ages of 30 for courts of first instance, 38 for courts of appeal and 41 for the Court of Cassation. The law also provides for an examination, set by the justice minister with Supreme Judicial Council approval, for direct appointment to assistant prosecutor other than through the prosecution associate route. These are distinct conditions, not a single age limit for all judicial positions.<\/p>\n

The military-course requirement provoked objections from judges, who rejected Prime Minister Mostafa Madbouly\u2019s decision to include judicial recruits in training required for government employment.<\/p>\n

Zawia3 obtained a confidential official letter dated July 9, 2023, from then Judges Club chair Mohamed Abdel Mohsen to then Court of Cassation president and Supreme Judicial Council chair Mohamed Eid Mahgoub.<\/p>\n

The letter argued that the decision explicitly undermined judicial independence and allowed government interference in selecting and training judicial personnel. It noted that newly appointed prosecutors already received intensive professional training at a dedicated prosecution training centre.<\/p>\n

Abdel Mohsen asked the council\u2019s chair to intervene and prevent interference in judicial affairs.<\/p>\n

\n

The letter maintained that the Supreme Judicial Council alone should set the rules for judicial appointments, without another authority sharing or contesting that responsibility in a way that compromises judicial independence.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\"The
The Judges Club\u2019s letter objecting to the prime minister\u2019s military-training requirement, obtained by Zawia3. The argument and request for intervention are described above.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
<\/svg><\/div>\n

Judges\u2019 children fail the screening<\/h2>\n

Despite the objections, the requirement remained in place. With its implementation<\/a>, some judges\u2019 children failed medical screening for entry to the military course, according to four judicial sources interviewed by Zawia3.<\/p>\n

The affected groups included the Public Prosecution\u2019s 2021 intake and earlier appeals, Administrative Prosecution appeals for the 2020 intake, and a State Council intake.<\/p>\n

\n

Reported exclusions among judges\u2019 children<\/h3>\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Judicial body or intake<\/th>\nNumber reported by judicial sources<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
State Council<\/td>\n47<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Administrative Prosecution appeals intake<\/td>\n26<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Public Prosecution intake and appeals<\/td>\nAbout 100<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
State Lawsuits Authority<\/td>\nResults not yet issued at the original publication date<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>
Figures supplied by judicial sources in technical offices, not a published consolidated official list.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

The exclusions renewed judges\u2019 anger. They demanded removal of the training condition, arguing that it allowed other branches of government to interfere in judicial appointments.<\/p>\n

In a January 9, 2025, comment in the closed Facebook group \u201cJudges Club,\u201d obtained by Zawia3, judge Ahmed Shahawi, an appellate-level judge at Egypt\u2019s Economic Court, called for the compulsory course requirement to be abolished.<\/p>\n

He argued that military training threatened the civilian character and independence of justice institutions, whose work should remain free of military influence. It also created financial and administrative obstacles for qualified young applicants.<\/p>\n

Shahawi suggested that the requirement could be interpreted as a means of generating revenue for the Military College, turning training into a profit-making instrument instead of improving judicial skills. This was his criticism, rather than a verified finding about the institution\u2019s finances.<\/p>\n

He also opposed physical and psychological tests as prerequisites for judicial jobs, saying they could discriminate against women and people with disabilities. Unclear costs and assessment criteria compounded concerns about transparency, equal opportunity and military influence over judicial recruitment.<\/p>\n

\n

Shahawi called for a comprehensive review to preserve judicial independence and the civilian nature of state institutions, without imposing burdens unrelated to applicants\u2019 professional competence.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\"Ahmed
Ahmed Shahawi\u2019s comment in the Judges Club Facebook group, calling for abolition of compulsory military qualification courses for judicial recruits.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
<\/svg><\/div>\n

Seeking exceptions for judges\u2019 children<\/h2>\n

Judges then sought intervention from senior executive officials. Judges Club chair Abu El Hussein Adly Qayed announced in the club\u2019s official Facebook group and a WhatsApp group for club news and offers that he had contacted Justice Minister Adnan Fangary.<\/p>\n

The intervention concerned exceptions and appeals for judges\u2019 children who had failed the sporting assessments required for admission to the qualification course.<\/p>\n

\u201cRegarding the discussion about our children from the 2021 intake who were not notified of the sporting test, the justice minister has been contacted to resolve the matter,\u201d Qayed wrote, asking judges to send him their children\u2019s details privately.<\/p>\n

\"The
The Judges Club chair\u2019s message about contacting the justice minister over the 2021 intake and requesting applicants\u2019 details privately.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

After Qayed\u2019s January 9 posts, all seven competing candidates withdrew from the race for club chair, according to the report. Campaigning had already begun in elections to renew one third of the board.<\/p>\n

The chair\u2019s election would fill the remainder of the board\u2019s term, ending in late 2025. Voting also covered two seats for counsellors, two for court presidents and judges, and two for prosecution members. The timing prompted questions about the relationship between the intervention and the withdrawals; it does not by itself establish why each candidate withdrew.<\/p>\n

Administrative Prosecution Club chair Abdel Raouf Moussa also announced intervention with officials. In a January 10 comment on the club\u2019s official Facebook page, he said the crisis was on its way to resolution and that progress had been made on the children\u2019s medical screening.<\/p>\n

\"Administrative
Administrative Prosecution Club chair Abdel Raouf Moussa\u2019s Facebook message describing progress on the medical-screening dispute.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
<\/svg><\/div>\n

Military courses and judicial independence<\/h2>\n

Several judges interviewed described an account circulating among colleagues that former justice minister Omar Marwan, then head of the president\u2019s office, had proposed the requirement.<\/p>\n

According to that account, the Military Academy\u2019s director told some trainees that Marwan had requested the proposal, rather than it originating as a government or presidential initiative. Zawia3 attempted to contact Marwan for a response to these allegations, but received none before the original report was published. The account remains attributed to the judges interviewed.<\/p>\n

Nasser Amin, head of the Justice Support Foundation at the Arab Center for the Independence of the Judiciary and the Legal Profession, strongly opposes the courses.<\/p>\n

He describes subjecting judicial recruits to training in military institutions as an unprecedented assault on judicial independence in Egypt\u2019s modern judicial history, dating from 1883. His description is a legal and historical assessment.<\/p>\n

Amin argues that making military training an appointment condition conflicts with the constitution, the Judicial Authority Law and international standards governing selection of judicial personnel. He says professional curricula and training should be designed and supervised by the judiciary, rather than executive bodies.<\/p>\n

He invokes the UN\u2019s 1985 Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary<\/a> and calls for the courses to end immediately. In his view, executive involvement in forming and qualifying prosecutors could distort their professional knowledge and later affect the courts.<\/p>\n

Amin says the council\u2019s leadership, the justice minister and club members will be judged by history for accepting the arrangements. He fears lasting damage to the judicial system.<\/p>\n

\n

Amin identifies two central objections: a breach of the separation of powers and interference with judicial independence, extending from appointment and training to the conduct of judicial work, transfers and secondments.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

The original interview refers to constitutional Articles 165, 166 and 173 when discussing judicial independence. Those references correspond to the numbering of the earlier 1971 constitution; the argument should not be mistaken for a quotation of the same article numbers in the constitution in force in 2025.<\/p>\n

<\/svg><\/div>\n

Equal rights to appeal\u2014or preferential treatment?<\/h2>\n

Human-rights lawyer Saleh Hasaballah, who practises before the Court of Cassation and Supreme Constitutional Court and formerly advised the Ain Shams University Independence Movement, considers special exceptions, reviews or repeat tests confined to judges\u2019 children a separate constitutional violation.<\/p>\n

\u201cIf the courses themselves violate judicial independence, the discrimination now taking place is an additional violation,\u201d he says. \u201cThey must either be abolished for everyone or applied to everyone without discrimination.\u201d<\/p>\n

He cites Article 53 of the constitution<\/a>, which guarantees equality before the law in rights, freedoms and public duties, prohibits discrimination on grounds including religion, sex, origin, disability, social status and political or geographical affiliation, and requires state action against discrimination.<\/p>\n

Mostafa El Sayed Alwan, chair of Rights for Legal Consultations and International Arbitration, argues that using club office to pressure decision-makers to reconsider only judges\u2019 children\u2019s files violates equal access to public employment, particularly judicial posts.<\/p>\n

He says applicants must satisfy professional requirements and that selective reconsideration creates resentment and directs access to justice towards a privileged group, contrary to constitutional and international equality principles.<\/p>\n

Alwan suspects that intervention was intended to influence the ongoing club elections. He points to its timing and the withdrawal of all rival candidates, questioning whether it served the public interest. This is his interpretation of the sequence of events.<\/p>\n

International-law specialist Mohamed Mahmoud Mahran, a member of the American and European societies of international law, distinguishes between the right to appeal and unequal treatment.<\/p>\n

Appealing an adverse decision is a fundamental right protected by Egyptian law and international instruments, he says, but it cannot be restricted to one section of society. Selective retesting would contradict Article 53.<\/p>\n

Judges, as parents, have the same right as other citizens to defend their children\u2019s interests, Mahran stresses. Their requests must nevertheless remain within the law and guarantee equality and equal opportunity for everyone.<\/p>\n

\n

If repeat testing is granted, all applicants should benefit under uniform, transparent criteria\u2014not only the children of members of the judiciary.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Between compulsory military qualification, judges\u2019 opposition and promises of special treatment for their children, the dispute raises two questions: whether exceptions would deepen unequal access to public office, and whether the training requirement itself interferes with constitutionally protected judicial independence.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Judicial sources report that judges\u2019 children failed screening for mandatory military qualification courses. Club leaders sought intervention as lawyers questioned the training requirement and unequal access to appeals.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":11681,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[410],"tags":[],"kateb":[8763],"class_list":["post-16988","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-investigations-en","kateb-tarek-g-hafiz"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/zawia3.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/\u0642\u0627\u0636\u064a-2.png","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/zawia3.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16988","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/zawia3.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/zawia3.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zawia3.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zawia3.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=16988"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/zawia3.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16988\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":16989,"href":"https:\/\/zawia3.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16988\/revisions\/16989"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zawia3.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/11681"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/zawia3.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=16988"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zawia3.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=16988"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zawia3.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=16988"},{"taxonomy":"kateb","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zawia3.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kateb?post=16988"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}