Crime of Using Personal Content of Others
To link it to content contrary to public morals or to undermine honor and reputation

If someone uses a program or application to use another person's personal items (such as photos or videos) and links them to content contrary to public morals, or even to present the owner of the photos or videos in a way that undermines their honor or reputation, they have committed the crime of using someone else's personal content to link it to content contrary to public morals or to undermine honor and reputation.

In this case, the penalty for the perpetrator is imprisonment for a term of not less than two years and not exceeding five years, and a fine of not less than 100,000 Egyptian pounds and not exceeding 300,000 Egyptian pounds.
(Article 25 of the Information Technology Crimes Law)

The Crime of Bullying
Bullying is any speech, display of power, dominance by the perpetrator, exploitation of the victim's weakness, or exploitation of a perceived flaw of the victim—such as gender, race, religion, body shape, health or mental condition, or social status—with the intent by the perpetrator to frighten, mock, or belittle the victim.

The penalty for bullying is imprisonment for a period of not less than 6 months and a fine ranging from 10,000 Egyptian pounds to 30,000 Egyptian pounds, or one of these two penalties. If the bullying is committed by more than one person, or by individuals who have authority over the victim, the penalty is imprisonment for a period of not less than one year and a fine of not less than 20,000 Egyptian pounds and not exceeding 100,000 Egyptian pounds, or one of these two penalties.
(Article 309 bis (b) of the Penal Code)

The Crime of Sexual Harassment
Sexual harassment has two forms: the first is harassment only, and the second is sexual harassment. The crime differs according to the actions committed by the harasser and their intent behind those actions.

Harassment is when a harasser accosts a victim by performing sexual or pornographic acts, words, hints, or gestures, using any means whether in ordinary life, on the internet, or by phone.

The accosting here does not have to involve physical touching of the victim; it can happen without any friction or even meeting between the harasser and the victim.

In this case, it is considered the crime of harassment, and the penalty is imprisonment for a period of not less than six months and a fine of not less than 3,000 Egyptian pounds and not exceeding 5,000 Egyptian pounds, or one of these two penalties. In the event of repetition by the harasser through stalking and tracking, the penalty is imprisonment for a period of not less than one year and a fine of not less than 5,000 Egyptian pounds and not exceeding 10,000 Egyptian pounds, or one of these two penalties.
(Article 306 bis (a) of the Penal Code)

When Do We Say This Is a Sexual Harassment Crime?
When the harasser's intent behind their actions is to obtain a benefit of a sexual nature, they have committed the crime of sexual harassment, which is punishable by imprisonment for a period of not less than one year and a fine of not less than 10,000 Egyptian pounds and not exceeding 20,000 Egyptian pounds, or one of these two penalties.

"Sexual benefit" here means any requests or desires of a sexual nature, such as the harasser asking the victim to engage in sexual intercourse with them.
(Article 306 bis (b) of the Penal Code)

Crimes of Indecent Public Exposure (Non-Public Indecent Act)
The crime of a non-public indecent act is defined as committing an act offensive to modesty with a female without her consent. It is not required for the indecent act to be public; it is sufficient for it to be between the perpetrator and the victim alone. This crime is punishable by imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year or a fine not exceeding 300 pounds.
(Article 279 of the Penal Code)

The Crime of Defamation and Violation of Privacy
Defamation is defined as publishing information or personal photos on the internet related to the private life of the victim. Whoever does this is punished with imprisonment for a period of not less than 6 months and a fine, even if the information or photos published are true and even if the perpetrator obtained them legally, as long as the publication occurred without the victim's consent.
(Article 25 of the Information Technology Crimes Law)

As for the crime of violating privacy, it refers to anyone who unlawfully spies on, records, or transmits a conversation or photos of a person or persons in a private place by any means, without the victim's consent. In this case, the penalty is imprisonment for a period not exceeding one year, and the court shall also order the destruction and erasure of recordings and photos.

However, if the photos or recording were taken while the victim was aware of being recorded, consent is presumed, and therefore there is neither crime nor punishment for the act.
(Article 309 bis of the Penal Code)

If someone uses recordings or photos that violate the sanctity of private life (discussed previously) even in a non-public manner and without the victim's consent, they are punished with imprisonment (from 24 hours up to 3 years). If someone threatens to disclose these recordings or photos in order to compel a person to perform an act or refrain from doing one, they are punished with imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.
(Article 309 bis (a) of the Penal Code)

The Crime of Insult and Slander (Sab and Qadh)
Insult (Sab) is defined as abstract profanity that does not involve a specific incident, but it is required to represent an affront to honor or reputation. The penalty for the crime of insult is a fine of not less than 2,000 Egyptian pounds and not exceeding 10,000 Egyptian pounds.
(Article 306 of the Penal Code)

Slander (Qadh) is when someone says something about a person that, if true, would legally subject them to punishment or render them despicable in the eyes of society. Therefore, the information in slander must be of a nature that would warrant punishment or bring disgrace if true—such as accusing someone of being a thief—and the perpetrator must have stated this publicly.

The penalty for slander is a fine of not less than 5,000 Egyptian pounds and not exceeding 15,000 Egyptian pounds.
(Article 303 of the Penal Code)

Who Has the Right to Report a Crime?
Generally, anyone can report any crime, whether sexual assault crimes or others. This is a right stipulated in the Criminal Procedure Law for anyone who learns that a crime has occurred. However, we do not advise people to report crimes without the victim's consent because legally this might compromise her rights. The law exempts the crimes of insult, slander, and non-public indecent acts from this rule, stipulating that only the victim herself or her special attorney-in-fact have the right to file a complaint for these crimes.

Reports submitted by persons other than the victim or without her consent are called "Hisba reports" (reports submitted by individuals claiming to protect public morals and society).
(Article 25 of the Criminal Procedure Law)

Is There Legal Liability If I Report a Sexual Assault Crime?
Generally, we always advise consulting a lawyer before taking legal action so that lawyers can determine the wording of the complaint, discuss all scenarios with the victim, and identify strengths, weaknesses, and evidence of the crime, among other things.

Generally speaking, there is no legal liability on the victim if she files a report, as she is considered a witness in the case and faces no danger at this stage. However, it is important to know that the prosecution and investigative authorities have the right to investigate facts related to the main complaint, and if the complainant is also considered an accused party, they will be investigated as a defendant. For example, if someone goes to the prosecution and says someone stole their phone, but it is later discovered that the stolen phone contains published personal photos, in this case, the complainant will be considered a victim of the crime of defamation and privacy violation, but also a defendant in the crime of theft. Therefore, consulting a lawyer is important.

Is There Confidentiality for Victims' Data?
The law guarantees in all cases the non-publication of investigations and punishes the leakage of investigative information. However, it is important to know that in all cases, the defendant always has the right to know the victims and witnesses in order to respond to their accusations.

Is There a Specific Time Limit After Which I Cannot Report?
Generally, misdemeanor crimes (any crime carrying a penalty of less than three years) cannot be investigated after 3 years. As for felonies (any crime carrying a penalty of more than three years), the period during which we can report the crime is 10 years. Naturally, we can refer to the specific crimes to see their penalties and then determine accordingly.
(Article 15 of the Criminal Procedure Law)

However, two things must be kept in mind:

For certain crimes, the right to report crimes representing an assault on rights and freedoms stipulated in the Constitution does not expire—including crimes attacking private life or women's rights. (Article 99 of the Constitution)

For the crimes of insult, slander, and indecent acts, it is required that the report be filed within 3 months from the time the victim learns of the crime and its perpetrator, otherwise the right to report expires. (Article 3 of the Criminal Procedure Law)

What Are the Legal Procedures to Take My Rights?
Naturally, we always advise consulting a lawyer before resorting to legal procedures to determine our legal standing, identify which crime or crimes to report, and gather our evidence.

Generally, legal procedures consist of 3 stages:

The Reporting Stage: In this stage, the victim—either personally or through a lawyer—files a report with the Public Prosecution or the police. It is important to know that if the victim is under 21 years of age, her father must issue the power of attorney (Tawkeel) to the lawyers. At this stage, the victim or her lawyer determines where to report. If reporting to the Public Prosecution, it is done via a complaint to the competent prosecutor or the Prosecutor General. If reporting to the police, it is done through a report at the competent authority. For internet-related crimes, the police have designated specific locations to receive and investigate complaints, such as the Internet Police, headquartered in Abbasia at the Police Academy. Complaints can be made via phone at 108 or landline 24065051, or by filing in person.

The Investigation Stage: This is the stage where the prosecution investigates the complaint, starting by hearing the statements of the victim, then the witnesses, and finally investigating the defendant. At this stage, the prosecution may decide to refer the victim to the Forensic Medicine Authority depending on the subject of the case; therefore, the presence of lawyers with the victim during investigations is essential and crucial.

The Criminal Trial Stage: This takes place if the prosecution decides to refer the defendant to trial. At this stage, the victim has the right to be present at the trial and request compensation, and is referred to as a "civil claimant" (Madda'iya bil-Huquq al-Madaniyya). She joins the prosecution's requests to impose punishment on the defendant, as the prosecution acts as the opponent of the defendant at this stage.

Contact Information:
Phone: 0228430315

Mobile: 01011908976

Email: Ragheblegal@gmail.com

Website: ahmedragheb.org

Instagram: @ragheblegal

Facebook: Ahmed Ragheb for Law and Legal Consultations

Constitutional Challenge to the Constitutionality of Paragraph (4) of the First Clause of Article 134 of the Egyptian Code of Criminal Procedure, as Amended by Law No. 145 of 2006, for Its Conflict with Article 54 of the Constitution of the Arab Republic of Egypt

Submitted by Counsel for the Defendant:
.............................................

In Case No.:
.............................................

Submitted at the Hearing for the Renewal of the Defendant's Pretrial Detention on: .... / .... / 2019

The undersigned counsel for the defendant submits this memorandum to set forth the constitutional challenge to Paragraph (4) of the first clause of Article 134 of the Egyptian Code of Criminal Procedure, on the grounds that it conflicts with Article 54 of the Constitution of the Arab Republic of Egypt.

Defense

Many legal scholars and jurists rightly regard pretrial detention as a harsh and exceptional measure that is inconsistent with justice. On one hand, it conflicts with the presumption of innocence afforded to every accused person; on the other, it undermines the principle of equality by treating a defendant held in pretrial detention differently from one who has been released pending trial.

Despite the severity of this measure, it has a legitimate legal basis rooted in the State's interest in preserving the integrity of criminal investigations and safeguarding the proper administration of justice. Accordingly, legislation has established rules governing the use of pretrial detention so that it remains confined to its proper purpose: protecting the integrity of investigations by ensuring that the accused remains available to the investigating authority for questioning and confrontation whenever necessary, while at the same time preserving the defendant's constitutional presumption of innocence.

Legislative and Historical Development of the Grounds for Pretrial Detention

Historically, pretrial detention was primarily used against persons who had no fixed residence or employment, since such circumstances increased the risk of flight. Consequently, the legislative policy in many jurisdictions—including Egypt—limited the use of pretrial detention to persons without a known place of residence or where there was a genuine risk of absconding, provided that sufficient evidence existed against the accused and that the alleged offense constituted either a felony or a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for more than three months.

Accordingly, Article 134 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, prior to its amendment, provided:

"If, after questioning the accused—or in the event of the accused's flight—the evidence appears sufficient, and the offense constitutes either a felony or a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for more than three months, the investigating judge may order the accused to be held in pretrial detention.

The accused may also be held in pretrial detention where he has no fixed or known residence in Egypt and the offense is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment."

Subsequently, a legislative trend emerged whereby pretrial detention came to be used as a general preventive measure intended to preserve public order. This approach was adopted by the Egyptian constitutional legislator in the 1971 Constitution, Article 41 of which provided:

"Personal liberty is a natural right and shall be safeguarded and may not be infringed. Except in cases of flagrante delicto, no person may be arrested, searched, detained, have his liberty restricted in any manner, or be prevented from moving except by an order required by the necessity of the investigation and the protection of the security of society. Such order shall be issued by the competent judge or the Public Prosecution in accordance with the law. The law shall determine the duration of pretrial detention."

Pursuant to this constitutional provision, Article 134 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was amended to include additional grounds for pretrial detention, including Paragraph (4) of the first clause, concerning the prevention of serious disturbances to public security and public order resulting from the gravity of the offense.

Following the 2006 amendment, Article 134 provided:

"After questioning the accused—or in the event of the accused's flight—where the offense constitutes a felony or a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not less than one year, and sufficient evidence exists, the investigating judge may order the accused to be held in pretrial detention if one of the following circumstances or grounds exists:

1. The offense was committed in flagrante delicto and any resulting judgment must be executed immediately.

2. There is a risk that the accused may flee.

3. There is a risk of prejudice to the investigation, whether by influencing the victim or witnesses, tampering with physical evidence or other indicia, or reaching agreements with co-defendants to alter or conceal the truth.

4. To prevent serious disruption of public security and public order that may result from the gravity of the offense.

Nevertheless, the accused may be held in pretrial detention if he has no fixed or known residence in Egypt and the offense is a felony or a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment."

This legislative approach was subsequently subjected to considerable criticism on the ground that, in this form, pretrial detention effectively assumed the character of a punishment, contrary to its preventive nature. As a result, a new legislative trend emerged, restoring pretrial detention to its original purpose: safeguarding the investigation rather than protecting public order. Accordingly, French law adopted the system of judicial supervision as an alternative.

In line with this legislative development, the constitutional framers of the 2014 Egyptian Constitution embraced the same principle, limiting the legitimacy of pretrial detention solely to the needs of the investigation, abandoning the broader justification contained in the 1971 Constitution that extended to the protection of society's security.

Accordingly, Article 54 of the current Egyptian Constitution provides:

"Personal freedom is a natural right, safeguarded and inviolable. Except in cases of flagrante delicto, no person may be arrested, searched, detained, or have his freedom restricted in any way except by a reasoned judicial order required by the investigation.

Every person whose freedom is restricted shall immediately be informed of the reasons, notified in writing of his rights, enabled to contact his family and lawyer without delay, and brought before the investigating authority within twenty-four hours from the time his freedom was restricted.

No investigation may commence except in the presence of the accused's lawyer. If the accused has no lawyer, one shall be appointed for him, with appropriate assistance provided for persons with disabilities in accordance with the procedures prescribed by law.

Every person whose freedom is restricted, and any other interested person, has the right to challenge such measure before the judiciary, which must decide the challenge within one week; otherwise, the detainee shall be released immediately.

The law shall regulate the rules, duration, and grounds for pretrial detention, as well as cases in which compensation shall be payable by the State for pretrial detention or for the execution of a sentence subsequently overturned by a final judgment.

In all cases, no defendant in an offense for which detention is permissible may be tried except in the presence of retained or court-appointed counsel."

Having briefly outlined the legislative and historical evolution of pretrial detention, particularly within Egyptian legislation, it remains necessary to demonstrate the conflict between Paragraph (4) of the first clause of Article 134 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and Article 54 of the Egyptian Constitution.

This conflict is evident in the first paragraph of Article 54, which states:

"Personal freedom is a natural right, safeguarded and inviolable. Except in cases of flagrante delicto, no person may be arrested, searched, detained, or have his freedom restricted in any way except by a reasoned judicial order required by the investigation."

Thus, the constitutional legislator has prohibited any restriction on personal liberty—except in cases of flagrante delicto—unless three cumulative conditions are met:

1. A judicial order exists;

2. The judicial order is reasoned; and

3. The reasoned judicial order is required by the investigation.

However, Paragraph (4) of the first clause of Article 134 authorizes pretrial detention for an entirely different reason—namely, to prevent serious disruption of public security and public order that may result from the gravity of the offense. This directly conflicts with Article 54 of the Constitution.

Nor may it be argued that the fifth paragraph of Article 54 authorizes the legislature to regulate the grounds for pretrial detention, since such legislation must remain consistent with the limitations imposed by the first paragraph of Article 54. This conclusion follows from the constitutional principle that constitutional provisions must be interpreted harmoniously and as an integrated whole.

Furthermore, Article 29 of the Supreme Constitutional Court Law No. 48 of 1979 provides:

(a) If, during the hearing of a case, a court or judicial body finds that a statutory provision or regulation whose constitutionality is necessary for deciding the dispute may be unconstitutional, it shall stay the proceedings and refer the matter to the Supreme Constitutional Court without fees.

(b) If one of the parties raises a constitutional challenge during the proceedings and the court considers the challenge to be serious, it shall adjourn the case and grant the party raising the challenge a period not exceeding three months to institute constitutional proceedings before the Supreme Constitutional Court. If such proceedings are not instituted within that period, the constitutional challenge shall be deemed abandoned.

Accordingly, the defense respectfully submits that Paragraph (4) of the first clause of Article 134 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is unconstitutional because it conflicts with Article 54 of the Constitution, for the reasons set forth above.

Accordingly

The defense respectfully requests that the Court:

1. Refer Paragraph (4) of the first clause of Article 134 of the Code of Criminal Procedure—which authorizes pretrial detention "to prevent serious disruption of public security and public order that may result from the gravity of the offense"—to the Supreme Constitutional Court on the grounds that it conflicts with Article 54 of the Constitution;

Or, alternatively:

2. Grant the defense leave to institute proceedings before the Supreme Constitutional Court challenging the constitutionality of Paragraph (4) of the first clause of Article 134 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, insofar as it authorizes pretrial detention "to prevent serious disruption of public security and public order that may result from the gravity of the offense," for its conflict with Article 54 of the Constitution.

Counsel for the Defendant

Ahmed Ragheb
Attorney-at-Law