The Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights (EIPR) strongly condemns the ruling by the Benha Child Court sentencing two children to ten years in prison on “terrorism” charges based on their alleged online activity. This harsh verdict followed a rushed trial that lacked minimum fair trial guarantees, with the court failing to question the childrenor their lawyers’ oral arguments, and ignoring all defense motions.

EIPR, which represented one of the children during the trial, has documented a series of violations since their arrest in 2024, culminating in their prosecution on illogical charges that do not even align with definitions contained in the Anti-Terrorism Law. The severe sentence was issued despite the mandatory psychosocial expert report confirming that there was no reason for delinquency or cause for concern, and recommending that the child be reunited with his family.

The case (No. 4240 of 2024) involves two defendants who were under 18 at the time of arrest. Although no adults were implicated in the case, both children were transferred from their hometowns to New Cairo and brought before the Supreme State Security Prosecution (SSSP)—treated as adults instead of being referred to the Child Prosecution Office. This deprived them during the investigation phase of all child protection guarantees under the Egyptian Child Law.

The SSSP charged the first child with founding and leading a terrorist group, and the second with joining such a group. Both were additionally charged with financing the unnamed group and conspiracy to commit a terrorist act. It is worth noting that Article 1 of the Anti-Terrorism Law (No. 94 of 2015) defines a terrorist group as consisting of at least three persons, making all charges in this case illogical and baseless.

The first trial session was held on 18 November, where the court denied the defense team’s request for obtaining the case files, allowing them only to read it. However, the court heard the prosecution’s argument, which referenced attributed confessions to both children that were not included in the documents reviewed by the defense and included in the official investigation records they were allowed to review. The court then set 23 December for issuing its verdict, disregarding substantive defense requests such as summoning and crossexamining prosecution witnesses. It concluded the case without hearing the defense oral arguments or questioning the children.

EIPR lawyers represented Mohamed Emad, the second defendant, a US citizen of Egyptian origin who lives with his family in the United States. He was arrested on 19 August 2024 from his family home while spending his summer vacation in Egypt. At the time, his family was unable to learn the reason for his arrest or his whereabouts, and he remained forcibly disappeared for more than two weeks.

Emad reappeared on 5 September 2024 before the SSSP, which interrogated him for the first and only time without presenting any evidence for the charges levelled against him. The prosecution relied solely on a single investigation report drafted by a National Security officer. It treated the period of enforced disappearance as lawful detention, based on an order under Article 40 of the Anti-Terrorism Law, which allows “holding” suspects for up to 14 days before presenting them to the prosecution. However, it ignored Article 41 of the same law, which guarantees the suspect’s right to contact family and consult a lawyer during detention—a right denied to Emad and his family, who remained unaware of his whereabouts for more than two weeks.

The only reasonable verdict should have been acquittal, given the absurdity of the charges, the lack of conclusive evidence, and the series of violations the two children faced from arrest to trial. 

EIPR stresses that the continued prosecution of a wide range of citizens—including children—under the pretext of “terrorism” clearly demonstrates the state’s persistence, ten years after the enactment of the notorious Anti-Terrorism Law, in punishing and persecuting citizens instead of genuinely addressing the threat and prosecuting the real perpetrators who endanger children and all citizens.