معنية برصد انتهاكات حقوق التعبير في حق الأفراد و المؤسسات.

AFTE sues Prison Authority to allow entry of supplies for protection from Covid-19 and demands allowing prisoners to communicate with their families

The Association for Freedom of Thought and Expression (AFTE), filed a lawsuit yesterday on behalf of journalist and activist, Hassan El Bana, before the administrative court, demanding that the Ministry of Interior, represented by the Prison Authority, allow Hassan El-Bana’s family to provide him with health supplies and hygiene tools such as alcohol disinfectants, masks and gloves that help prevent the infection with Corona virus (Cuvid -19). The lawsuit also demanded that his family be informed of all information and preventive measures that the Prison Authority and the Ministry of Interior are taking to prevent the spread of Covid-19 virus infection within prisons and to enable El-Bana to communicate with his family by any means, instead of weekly family visits.

The lawsuit, which numbered 37115 for the year 74 Judicial, was raised against the Prime Minister, the Minister of Interior, the Head of the Prison Authority and the Tora Prison warden, in their capacity.

This lawsuit comes as the beginning of a campaign launched by AFTE to highlight the situation of prisoners and those detained pending freedom of expression cases amidst the spread of Covid -19 virus.

Hassan El Bana completed two years in pre-trial detention on February 14, 2020, pending case No. 441 of 2018, Supreme State Security Prosecution, on charges of joining a terrorist group. Earlier, AFTE demanded to release El Bana in accordance with the law, which makes it obligatory to release prisoners in pre-trial detention in case they completed two years without being referred to trial court.

In the lawsuit, El Bana’s defense committee’s demands were based on three main elements; the first is the law and the constitution, as the latter stated that imprisonment should be in appropriate places, in the humane and health terms. In addition, all that contradicts human dignity or endangers the prisoners’ health is prohibited in prisons. The Prison Regulation Act also provides that:

“Every convict shall have the right to correspond, and make telephone calls in exchange for a fee, and his family has the right to visit him bimonthly, all under the supervision of the prison administration and in accordance with the rules and procedures established by the internal regulations. A remand prisoner has this right unless a different decision is issued by the competent public prosecutor or the competent investigating judge, in accordance with the procedures established by the internal regulations”.

The second element on which the lawsuit was based is the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, as these rules emphasized that prisoners must enjoy the same level of health care available in society, and should have the right to obtain the necessary health services free of charge and without discrimination based on their legal status.
The lawsuit also referred to the “Interim Guidance” issued by the World Health Organization with the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, on March 27, 2020, for governments and countries concerning people deprived of their liberty in light of the outbreak of the Covid-19 epidemic. The “Interim Guidance” stated that the situation may require, in light of the spread of Covid-19, replacing family visits with other measures, such as video, electronic communications and extensive telephone communications (paid phones or cell phones). It also pointed to the importance of transparency with regard to the preventive measures taken by prisons, as it stated:
“Information on preventive health measures should be provided to all persons deprived of their liberty in a language and format they understand and that is accessible; and efforts should be made to improve the hygiene and the cleanliness of the detention places. Such measures should be gender, culture, abilities and age sensitive”.
In relation to the mitigating measures, the “Interim Guidance” stated that:

“Information on mitigating measures provided to persons deprived of their liberty as well as their families should be in languages and formats that are understandable and accessible to all, clear, and accurate. They should explain the measures that the detention center is taking to protect the health of persons deprived of their liberty and the public at large. Any restrictions on rights and freedoms must be consistent with international human rights norms and principles, including legality, proportionality, necessity and non-discrimination”.

The third element on which the lawsuit was based is the abuse of power by the administration –in this case the Prison Authority- which alone took over all the powers, in a complete disregard all the fundamental rights and freedoms of convicts and remand prisoners. It also did not apply any of the constitutional articles or the legal provisions of the Prison Regulation Act, with regard to the right to communicate with the detainee and the prisoner.

You might also like