Class-based provision for judicial recruitment stirs discontent

A presidential decree ratifying the appointment of new comers to the general prosecution in September was met with accusations of discrimination and unconstitutionality, following the elimination of 138 candidates because their parents lack higher education.

This provision was added by the Supreme Council of the Judiciary, to complement a list of class-based provisions that candidates and members of the judicial community have fought to eliminate for years.

“What happened is a crime that necessitates investigation into all those involved in setting the rules for the appointment of the prosecution,” said Nasser Amin, the head of the Arab Center for Independence of the Judiciary, adding that the decision violates the Egyptian constitution as well as international decrees for the appointment of members of the judiciary.

The judicial authority law sets the conditions for admission to the general prosecution, which states that candidates must be at least 30 years of age, be Egyptian citizens with full citizenship rights, have a law degree, no record of any violations and a good reputation.

However, the by-laws of the Supreme Council for the Judiciary, which makes the final selection, adds further provisions, including the passing of a security check — giving the security apparatus the final word in the appointment of prosecutors, according to Amin. These additional stipulations include social background and financial means. The bylaws also completely eliminate female candidates, except for in administrative prosecution. Amin says that giving precedence to the children of judges is also a closely followed, but unwritten rule.

A candidate who was eliminated based on this latest provision challenged the decision in court, with the next session scheduled for January 2015. The defendant was not appointed, according to the case, while those ranked beneath him in his class and six brothers whose father is a judge were selected.

The eliminated candidates held a press conference on Saturday condemning the decision. Former Education Minister Hossam Eissa and former Labor Minister Kamal Abu Eitta spoke at the conference, asserting that the decision is unconstitutional and goes against the revolutionary ideals of social equality.

Article 53 of the Constitution, passed in January, necessitates equal treatment of all citizens under the law, prohibiting discrimination on the basis of social class, gender and political affiliation.

Amin says these class-based provisions were introduced in the 1970s, and before that the highest-ranking law graduates were automatically appointed to the prosecution.

During the press conference, several of the eliminated candidates with high performance rankings questioned what their parents’ education had to do with their employment.

Amin said that the new provision is “unprecedented and is considered a catastrophe for the judicial institution that will affect the prestige of the judiciary,” adding that selection criterion that are “discriminatory and inhumane” can skew the future of the next generation of judges.

A number of protests have occurred following selective class-based recruitment in the past few years.