Home Home Home Home Home Home Home Home Home

Dr Maged Shebaita

Judge at the Egyptian State Council and professor of constitutional law

constitutional law expert.

  • image
  • image
  • image
  • image
  • image
  • image
  • image

CV

Home

 

Maged M. Shebaita

Cell phone No.:+2 01094100147                                                                                            Home Address

                                                                                   385 El-yasmeen Street

Email:magedshoby@yahoo.com   , website, www.maged-shebaita.com                                                                                                       Giza ,Egypt

Place of birth: Hannover,  Germany

Date of birth: June 27th 1978                                                                                                          

 

                                                                                                                                                                                  l

Education

LLM from university of London - Specification: Dispute Resolution

2016 - present  enrolled LLM Queen Marry Law School University of London

 

2016 - present enrolled PHD program on Islamic law , school of law , Cairo university , the topic is (( The power of the president of the Islamic state in the scale of democracy ))

 

2012       cairo university school of law

                                PhD in constitutional law

GPA: 4.0

                                Thesis Title A Novel presidential election strategy for more efficient checks and balances among the                                                 public authorities( comparative study between the Egyptian and American legal systems )                                                                                                                               

                               

2013                       Alexandria University               Faculty of Law                                  Egypt

                                Diploma in comparative Islamic jurisprudence  

                               

2001                       Cairo University           Faculty of Law                                                   Giza, Egypt

                                Master Degree(LLM),

                                       -Public law diploma, top 1%

                                    -International commercial arbitration diploma, top 1%

 

1999                       CAIRO UNIVERSITY  Faculty of Law English Section

                                Bachelors of Law

 

                        Special Features of the English Section:

  • Students are taught a background of common law, in particular contracts, constitutional and commercial laws.
  • 50% of the courses are taught in English.
  • This Section was visited by American and British  judges and  professors from prestigious American and British universities such as Cornell Law School, Georgetown University Law Center and Queen Mary school of law .

 

 

Awards 

      -In 2015 awarded by the Egyptian state council for his Scientific excellence .

    - In 2012 awarded by The Egyptian president a certificate of appreciation for drafting the constitution of Egypt.

    - In 2012 awarded acertificate of merit for having a degree of excellence for the doctoral thesis.

    - In 2001 awarded a Certificate of Merit and excellence for ranking 1st of the class in the international commercial arbitration diploma

 

Books

  • Maged shebaita , The Islamic form of government in the scale of democracy  to be published by 2018.
  • Maged Shebaita , the powers of the Egyptian President , comparative study with the democratic states which adopt the semi presidential system , France , Poland , Portugal , Slovenia ))published in April 2016.
  • Maged Shebaita , The president in the American constitutional system.  Published in May  2014.
  • Maged Shebaita ,The checks and balances in the American constitutional system, English Version , to be published in June 2016.

Research Articles

- Maged Shebaita , the Islamic articles in the Egyptian constitution , Lecturer in SOAS university, March , 2017

-Maged Shebaita , the reality of debate on the Islamic article in the Egyptian constitution , Speaker in the Arab Organization of Constitutional law in cooperation with Harvard University, Tunisia , March 2017 .

- Maged Shebaita , The role of the second chamber of the parliament in the Egyptian constitutions , comparative study ,   Speaker in the Arab Organization of Constitutional law. Algeria 2017.

-Maged Shebaita , The arbitration in the administrative contracts, published by the Arab Journal of Arbitration , may 2015   

- Maged Shebaita, A  debate over Article II of the 1971 Constitution in July 2012

- Maged Shebaita, A  comparative study about the presidential powers among different constitutions (France, Poland, Slovenia, Portugal, Finland). This research was utilized in drafting the Egyptian constitution in October 2012.

- Maged Shebaita, A comparative study between the rights and freedoms in the Constitution of Egypt and a number of democratic countries (France, Italy, Turkey, Greece, Belgium, Germany, Spain). This research was utilized in drafting the Egyptian  constitution in October 2012.

- Maged shebaita, A survey about human rights in the Egyptian constitution, in April 1997.

 

Experience

  • 06/2000 –present,  Judge at the State Council.
  • A Member at The Administrative Court of Appeal 2017
  • Member at the Charted Institute Of  Arbitrators - London- UK , August 2017
  • seminar  at SOAS University, school of law  from March 2017
  • .lecturer at British University in Cairo . school of  law , Nov 2016

 

  • A chief justice of the administrative circuit reviewing the cases of the ministries of Finance , Health .2016    
  • A member of the disciplinary court, 2013-2014 .
  • Legal Adviser to the Egyptian Minister of Finance (specialist to review the contracts and international agreements, 2013.
  • Legal Adviser to the Minister of Investment, 2013.
  • Member of the constituent assembly authorized to write the new Egyptian constitution, 2012.
  • Member of the advisory sector to the ministries of foreign affairs, interior affairs and justice - the Council of State, 2011 - 2013.
  • Chairman of the Department of State Commissioners Authority, 2010.
  • Member of the Technical Office of the Supreme Administrative Court, 2008.
  • Member of the Technical Office of the President of the Council of State (the head of the International Cooperation Bureau), 2006-2007.
  • Clerk at the administrative court (administrative contracts and compensation circuit), 2001 - 2006.

 

Related Activities

  • Chairman of the Committee to review all agreements with the United Nations concerning the Ministry of Finance (commissioned by the Egyptian government) in 2013.
  • Chairman of the Reviewing Committee for the security  bond  agreement signed between the Egyptian government and the National Bank of Qatar (commissioned by the Egyptian government) in 2013.
  • Chairman of the Audit Committee for agreements between the Egyptian government and credit rating agencies (commissioned by the Egyptian government) in 2013.
  • Chairman of the Audit Committee of the loan agreement concluded between the Egyptian government and the Arab Monetary Fund (commissioned by the Egyptian government) in 2013.
  • Chairman of the amendment investment laws  committee, in 2013.
  •  Represented the Egyptian Council of State at the International Congress to eliminate the administrative courts , Ljubljana, Slovenia, 2007.
  • Appointed  by the President of the Council of State to draft a protocol of cooperation in the framework of judicial cooperation agreement with the Board of Grievances in Saudi Arabia, in 2007.
  • Represented  the Council of State in the International Conference for the effective role of the judiciary in arbitration in conjunction with the Cairo Regional Centre for International Commercial Arbitration in Sharm El-Sheikh, 2007.

 

Activities

#

Articles

The Fact about the Argument over Article II / Egyptian Constitution

 

حقيقة الجدل حول   المادة الثانية

اعداد

الدكتور /ماجد شبيطة

عضو مجلس الدولة وعضو الجمعيه التأسيسية

  

الإسلام دين…

 

حقيقة الجدل حول   المادة الثانية

اعداد

الدكتور /ماجد شبيطة

عضو مجلس الدولة وعضو الجمعيه التأسيسية

  

الإسلام دين الدولة، واللغة العربية لغتها الرسمية، ومبادئ الشريعة الإسلاميةالمصدر الرئيسي للتشريع

 تصاعدت وتيرة  البعض للمطالبه بحذف هذه المادة من الدستور المصري بناء على حجج منها أن مصرليست كلها مسلمة بل فيها مسيحيون ومن ثم فلا يصح القول بإسلامية مصر رسمياً .. وينسحب الأمر على الشريعة ..وكذا اللغة العربية إلى حد المطالبة باتخاذ اللهجة المصرية العامية لغة رسميةبديلة وعوضاً عن اللغة العربية .. وذلك بخلاف أصوات طالبت بإحياء اللغة الفرعونيةباعتبارها اللغة الأصل أو الأصيلة لمصر في تنويه لرفض انتماء مصر العروبي أو الاسلامىوكل ذلك تحت ادعاءات أن المادة الثانية من الدستور المصري قد تم وضعها أوتفعيلها في دستور 1971 وفي عهد الرئيس الراحلمحمد أنورالساداتوفي ظل المدالأصوليلإسلامي وفي عز وهج وتصاعد وانتشار وتأثير الجماعات الدينية في مصر ..
والوقعأن هذا الفهم مغلوط تماماً ..

إذ أنهوية مصر ولغتها قد تحددت على مدى عمرها " الدستوري " بداية مندستور 1923باعتباره أبو الدساتير المصرية الكاملةحيث نصت المادة (149) منه على أن (الإسلام دينالدولة واللغة العربية لغتها الرسمية.)

قد تأكدذلك فيدستور 1956بنص المادة (3) منه على أن : ( الإسلام دين الدولة واللغة العربية لغتهاالرسمية.) ..

ثمدستور 1971الحالي والأخير في مادته الثانية التي نصها : (الإسلام دين الدولة، واللغة العربية لغتها الرسمية،ومبادئ الشريعة الإسلامية المصدر الرئيسي للتشريع.)..
ويلاحظ أن إضافةعبارة (مبادئ) الشريعة الإسلامية باعتبارهاالمصدر الرئيسي للتشريع .. ومبادئ الشريعة هنا هي انعكاس طبيعي لهوية مصر الإسلاميةباعتبار أن الإسلام هو دين الغالبية  من شعب مصر ..

وأنالمخاوف من التمييز العقائدي أو ديني في ظل تلك المادة تتلاشى تماماً بصريح نصالمادة( 40 ) :( المواطنون لدى القانون سواء، وهممتساوون في الحقوق والواجبات العامة، لا تمييز بينهم في ذلك بسبب الجنس أو الأصل أواللغة أو الدين

 

..وهذه المادة وحدها كافية تماماً للقضاء على أي إثارةلنعرات التمييز أو الاضطهاد والطائفية وغيرها.

 الا شكال فى الحقيقه يكمن فى فهم هذه المادة ,((وحيث إن قضاء المحكمة الدستورية العليا قد اطرد على أن ما نص عليه الدستور فى مادته الثانية – بعد تعديلها فى سنة 1980 – من أن مبادئ الشريعة الإسلامية هى المصدر الرئيسى للتشريع ، إنما يتمخض عن قيد يجب على السلطة التشريعية أن تتحراه وتنزل عليه فى تشريعاتها الصادرة بعد هذا التعديل 000 فلا يجوز لنص تشريعى أن يناقض الأحكام الشرعية القطعية فى ثبوتها ودلالتها ، باعتبار أن هذه الأحكام وحدها هى التى يكون الاجتهاد فيها ممتنعاً ، لأنها تمثل من الشريعة الإسلامية مبادئها الكلية ، وأصولها الثابتة التى لا تحتمل تأويلاً أو تبديلاً . ومن غير المتصور بالتالى أن يتغير مفهومها تبعاً لتغير الزمان والمكان ، إذ هى عصية على التعديل ، ولا يجوز الخروج عليها ، أو الالتواء بها عن معناها . وتنصب ولاية المحكمة الدستورية العليا فى شأنها على مراقبة التقيد بها ، وتغليبها على كل قاعدة قانونية تعارضها . ذلك أن المادة الثانية من الدستور ، تقدم على هذه القواعد أحكام الشريعة الإسلامية فى أصولها ومبادئها الكلية ، إذ هى إطارها العام ، وركائزها الأصلية التى تفرض متطلباتها دوماً بما يحول دون إقرار أية قاعدة قانونية على خلافها ؛ وإلا اعتبر ذلك تشهياً وإنكاراً لما عُلم من الدين بالضرورة . ولا كذلك الأحكام الظنية غير المقطوع بثبوتها أو بدلالتها أو بهما معاً ، ذلك أن دائرة الاجتهاد تنحصر فيها ، ولا تمتد لسواها . وهى بطبيعتها متطورة تتغير بتغير الزمان والمكان ، لضمان مرونتها وحيويتها ، ولمواجهة النوازل على اختلافها ، تنظيماً لشئون العباد بما يكفل مصالحهم المعتبرة شرعاً ، ولا يعطل بالتالى حركتهم فى الحياة ، على أن يكون الاجتهاد دوماً واقعاً فى إطار الأصول الكلية للشريعة بما لا يجاوزها ، ملتزماً ضوابطها الثابتة متحرياً مناهج الاستدلال على الأحكام العملية ، والقواعد الضابطة لفروعها ، كافلاً صون المقاصد العامة للشريعة بما تقوم عليه من حفاظ على الدين والنفس والعقل والعرض والمال .
(قضية رقم 119 لسنة 21 قضائية المحكمة الدستورية العليا "دستورية " جلسة 19/12/2004 ..))

 

فهنا المحكمة الدستورية العليا حددت مبادىء الشريعه الاسلامية بقطعية الثبوت قطعية الدلاله فقط و معنى ذلك أن اى حكم يثبت عن طريق السنه و التى فى جلها أحدايث أحاد – فى فهم المحكمه – لا يعمل به و هذا فى الحقيقه سيؤدى الى اهدار للشريعه فما من دليل قطعى الا و احتاج الى دليل ظنى يبين معناه و يحدد ضوابطه فعلى سبيل المثال قال تعالى (( و السارق و السارقه فأقطعوا ايديهما )) فهذا نص قطعى الثبوت قطعى الدلاله الا انه يحتاج الى السنه لبيان كيفية القطع فهل تقطع اليد كلها ام الرسغ ام ماذا .

 فالمحكمه هنا بهذا المنطق تفرغ الشربعه عن مضمونها و تحيلها الى كيان غامض ليس له مدلول و لا معنى و هذا ما أراده التيار الليبرالى .

 

و على الرغم من ضيق مفهوم الشريعه عند المحكمه الا انها ما فتئت و الا قضت على هذا المفهوم ايضا ففى مناسبة الطعن على المادة 226 مدنى و التى نصها (( اذا كان محل الالتزام مبلغا من النقود و كان معلوم المقدار وقت الطلب و تأخر المدين فى الوفاء به كان ملزما بأن يدفع للدائن على سبيل التعويض عن التأخير فوائد قدرها 4 % .....))

فهذه المادة لا يختلف أحد فى انها تمثل أحدى صور الربا المحرم و قد اصدرت دار الافتاء المصرية فى 13/3/2003 فتوى باعتبار هذه المادة تمثل الربا المجمع على تحريمه الا ان المحكمه الدستورية العليا على الرغم من ذلك و من وضوح حكم المادة و كونها من المبادىء العامه للشريعه الاسلامية بمفهومها الا انها رفضت الدعوى بعدم الدستورية على اساس ان القيد الوارد فى المادة الثانية من القيود المستحدثه الى لم يرد مثلها فى الدساتير المصرية فلا يسرى الا من تاريخ اقراره (( حكمها فى الدعوى رقم 20 لسنة 1 ق جلسة 4/5/1985 .))

 

و ذات الامر ايضا فى المواد 1 و2و 7 من القانون رقم 63 لسنة 76 بحظر شرب الخمر اذ ان هذه المادة تعاقب على شرب الخمر بالحبس فى حين ان حدها فى الشريعه الجلد , فأحالت محكمة الجنح هذه الدعوى الى المحكمة الدستورية العليا فكررت ذات المبدا السابق , مع ان المعلوم من الدين بالضرورة ان الخمر حدها فى الاسلام الجلد و ليس الحبس (( حكمها فى الدعوى رقم 141 لسنة 4 ق جلسة 4/4/1987 .

 

و العجيب و الغريب ان المحكمة الدستورية العليا اعملت هذا القيد الزمنى فقط فيما يتعلق بتطبيق الشريعه اما غيرها فلا تطبق هذا المبدأ فعلى سبيل المثل قضت المحكمه بعدم دستورية المادة 10 من القانون رقم 9 لسنة 59 بخصوص الاستيراد لتعارضه مع المادة 36 من دستور 71 (( الدعوى رقم 23 لسنة 3 ق جلسة 15/5/1982 )) فاين القيد الزمنى الذى اعملته المحكمه اليس هذا القانون صادر قبل دستور 71 , و كذلك حكمها فى الدعوى رقم 18 لسنة 13 جلسة 15/5/1993 بعدم دستورية المادة 25 من القرار بقانون رقم 44 لسنة 62 .

فهذا ان دل فانما يدل بجلاء على ان المحكمه تكيل بمكيالين فهى تطبق القواعد التى تريدها على المنازعات التى تريدها .

 

كما ان فهم المحكمه الدستورية لكلمة مبادىء الشريعه الاسلامية لم تشاطرها  فيه محكمة النقض ولا المحكمة الادارية العليا بل ان كلتاهما فهمتا النص على انه المقصود من مبادىء الشريعه الاسلامية هى الشريعه الاسلامية ذاتها فقد قضت محكمة النقض بان (( الحكم المتعلق بمسالة من مسائل  الاحوال الشخصية باعتباره دليلا يخضع من ناحية صحته و اثره القانونى لاحكام الشريعه الاسلامية و مقتضاها انه اذا خالف الحكم نصا فى القران او  السنه او الاجماع فانه يبطل و اذا عرض على من اصدره ابطله و اذا عرض على غيره أهدره و لم يعمله )) الطعن رقم 258 لسنة 40 ق جلسة 23/6/1975 .

و حديثا نسبيا قضت محكمه النقض (( ان ايراد الدستور  لاصطلاح  الشريعه الاسلامية فى اطلاقه يكشف ان مقصود المشرع الدستورى هو ان يجمع بهذا الاصطلاح بين مصادر الشريعه الاسلامية بدرجات  القطعيه فى ثبوتها و دلالتها و بين الفقه الاسلامى بتنوع مناهجه و ثراء  اجتهداته و تباين نتائجه زمانا و مكانا ))

حكم محكمة النقض , الطعن رقم 8365 لسنة 64 ق جلسة 26/2/2002

 

اما عن موقف مجلس الدولة فقد قضت المحكمة الادارية العليا  بخصوص المادة الثانية فقالت ـ((و هذا الخطاب موجه الى السلطة التشريعيه لدراسة الشريعه الاسلامية دراسة شاملة وتتولى بالتنظيم لاحكام التفصيلية مدنية كانت او جنائية او قضائيه او دولية او غيرها ))الطعن رقم 393 لسنة 36ق جلسة 3/4/84 

 

و بهذا يتبين لنا ان هذه المادة قد أحدثت لبسا قضائيا فهى تارة تعنى قطعى الثبوت و الدلاله ة تاره تعنى الشريعه الاسلاميه و تارة تعنى أحكام الشريعه الاسلامية , و لذا كان من الضرورى لازالة هذا اللبس اما حذف كلمة مبادىء من النص الدستورى و اما وضع تعريف لها .

و قد اتجه التوافق فى الجمعيه التأسيسية الى وضع تعريف لها من قبل الازهر الشريف باعتباره الجهه المختصه والمتخصصه فى هذت الشأن وبالفعل وضعت هيئة كبار العلماء بالازهر التعريف الوارد فى المادة 220 من المسودة الدستورية .

و الذى يشمل ادلة الشريعه الكلية و قواعدها الفقهيه و الاصوليه و مصادرها المعتبره لدى اهل السنه و الجماعه .

فالادله الكليه تاره تعنى بمصادر الشريع هو تاره تقتصر على الكتاب و السنه و الاجماع .

القواعد الفقهيه و الاصوليه فهى قواعد عامه وضعها الفقه الاسلامى مثل لا ضرر و ضرار , الضرورة تبيح المحظوره فهى قواعد مستخدمه فى الفقه الاسلامى و الفقه و القانونى على حد سواء .

اما المصادر المعتبره فتشمل الكتاب و السنه و الاجماع و القياس و المصالح المرسله و الاستحسان و العرف و قول الصحابى و شرع من قبلنا و هم اليهود و النصارى فالقاعدة تقول شرع من قبلنا شرع لنا طالما لم يخالف شرعنا.

و هذا التنوع فى المصادر رحمة و اذا دققنا النظر سنجد ان منها مصدرين نقلى و الباقى كله مصدر عقلى لمراعاة التطور و التجدد فى الحوادث و العلاقات الانسانيه و كانت سببا فى التخفيف من تطبيق الحدود مثل قضاء عمر رضى الله عنه فى عدم تطبيق الحدود عام الفقر و الذى يسمى عام الرماده .

اما اهل السنه و الجماعه فهو مصطلح منذ القرن الاول الهجرى و يقصد به اهل السنه غير الخوارج  و الشيعه و غيرهم و مصطلح الجماعه يعنى جماعه المسلمين و ليس اى كل المسلمين فكل مسلم مصرى من اهل السنه و الجماعه و ليس فئة دون اخرى

 

و هذا القول ليس ببدعه فاذا نظرنا الى دساتير الدول الغربيه فسنجد على سبيل المثال :

الدستور اليوناني/ تنص المادة الثالثه من الدستور اليونانى ((‏.‏

الدين السائد في اليونان من "الكنيسة الأرثوذكسية الشرقية المسيح". الكنيسة الأرثوذكسية في "اليونان"، إذ تسلم سيدنا يسوع المسيح كرئيس لها، لا انفصام متحد في المذهب مع "كنيسة المسيح العظيم" في القسطنطينية ومع كل أخرى كنيسة المسيح المذهب نفسه، مراقبة بلا تردد، كما يفعلون، المقدسة الرسولية و syn-الشرائع عدل والتقاليد المقدسة. المستقلة ويدير المجمع المقدس لخدمة الأساقفة والمجمع المقدس الدائمة النابعة منه وتجميع ها كما حددها "الميثاق القانوني" للكنيسة امتثالا لأحكام "تومي الأبوية" من 29 يونيو 1850 والمجمعية قانون 4 سبتمبر 1928.

2-نظام الكنسية الموجودة في مناطق معينة من الدولة لا يعتبر أنه يتعارض مع أحكام الفقرة السابقة.

3-يحتفظ نص الكتاب المقدس الكرسي دون تغيير. الترجمة الرسمية للنص إلى أي شكل آخر من اللغة، بدون موافقة مسبقة بكنيسة اليونان المستقلة وكنيسة المسيح العظيم في القسطنطينية، محظور.))

The prevailing religion in Greece is that of the Eastern Orthodox Church of Christ. The Orthodox Church of Greece, acknowledging our Lord Jesus Christ as its head, is inseparably united in doctrine with the Great Church of Christ in Constantinople and with every other Church of Christ of the same doctrine, observing unwaveringly, as they do, the holy apostolic and syn- odal canons and sacred traditions. It is autocephalous and is administered by the Holy Synod of serving Bishops and the Permanent Holy Synod originating thereof and assembled as specified by the Statutory Charter of the Church in compliance with the provisions of the Patriarchal Tome of June 29, 1850 and the Synodal Act of September 4, 1928.

2. The ecclesiastical regime existing in certain districts of the State shall not be deemed contrary to the provisions of the preceding paragraph.

3. The text of the Holy Scripture shall be maintained unaltered. Official translation of the text into any other form of language, without prior sanction by the Autocephalous Church of Greece and the Great Church of Christ in Constantinople, is prohibited

 

ملحوظة‏:‏ يوجد الملايين من المسيحيين في اليونان يتبعون الملة الكاثوليكية والبروتستانتية ويوجد غيرهم يتبعون الديانة الإسلامية ولم يعترض أحد علي المادة الأولي من الدستور اليوناني طالما أن المفهوم هو أن غالبية اتباع الدولة اليونانية يتبعون الديانة الأرثوذكسية الشرقية‏.


‏2‏ـ الدستور الدنماركي  تنص المادة  3 من الدستور الدنماركى

((‏.‏تكون الكنيسة اللوثرية الإنجيلية  الكنيسةالثابته  في الدنمارك ، ويقوم هذا

أن تدعمها الدولة. ويكون الملك عضوا بالكنيسة الانجيليه اللوثرية.))

The Evangelical Lutheran Church shall be the Established

Church of Denmark, and as such shall

be supported by the State.

4

PART II

§ 5

The King shall not reign in other countries except

with the consent of the Folketing.

§ 6

The King shall be a member of the Evangelical

Lutheran Church.

ملحوظة‏:‏ يوجد الكثير من أتباع الملة الأرثوذكسية والملة الكاثوليكية وأتباع الديانة الإسلامية ولم يعترض أحد علي المادة الأولي من الدستور الدانماركي‏.‏ 

3)  دستور النرويج  تنص المادة 3 من دستور النرويج

 يتمتع جميع سكان المملكة الحق في حرية ممارسة شعائرهم الدينية.

 

ويظل الديانة الإنجيلية-اللوثرية هي الدين الرسمي للدولة. السكان الذين يعتنقون أنه ملزمون بتنشئة أطفالهم عليه .

The Evangelical-Lutheran religion shall remain the official religion of the State. The inhabitants professing it are bound to bring up their children in the same.

 

4)دستور ايسلندا /تنص المادة 62 من دستور ايسلندا(( تكون الكنيسة اللوثرية الإنجيلية كنيسة الدولة في أيسلندا، والصفة، بدعم وتحميها الدولة. ))

 

 

المادة 63 يحق للشعب إقامة مجتمعات لعبادة الله وفقا لمعتقداتهم الفردية؛ ومع ذلك، شيئا قد يكون بشر أو تمارس وهي تمس بحسن الأخلاق والنظام العام.

 

 

المادة 64 أي شخص قد تفقد حقوقه المدنية أو الوطنية بسبب دينه، ولا يجوز أنه يرفض القيام بأي واجب مدني من جراء ذلك.

 

أي شخص يكون ملزما بالمساهمة الشخصية المستحقة عليها لأي عبادة دينية أخرى غير بلده.

 

إذا لم يكن شخص عضوا في كنيسة الدولة أو أي جماعة دينية معترف بها في البلاد، أنه يدفع إلى صندوق جامعة أيسلندا أو منفعة لتلك الجامعة، كما قد تكون حازمة، المبالغ المستحقة الدفع إلا الكنيسة الرسمية للدولة.

 

يمكن تغيير هذا القانون.

The Evangelical Lutheran Church shall be the State Church in Iceland and, as such, it shall be supported and protected by the State.

 

This may be altered by law.

 

 

Article 63

 

The people are entitled to establish communities for the worship of God in conformity with their individual convictions; however, nothing may be preached or practiced which is prejudicial to good morality and public order.

 

 

Article 64

 

No person may lose his civil or national rights because of his religion, nor may he refuse to perform any civic duty because of it.

 

No person is obliged to contribute personal dues to any religious worship other than his own.

 

If a person is not a member of the State Church or any other recognized religious group in the country, he shall pay to the University of Iceland or benefit fund of that university, as may be determined, dues otherwise payable to the State Church.

 

This may be altered by law.

 

‏4) ‏ ـ و على هذا فالقول بان الدساتير التى تنص على ديانة الرئيس او الدولة فى النظم الغربيه انما هى دول ملكية قول ظاهر البطلان , اذ ان اليونان و ايسلندا دول جمهورية و ليست ملكيه

5) كما لا يخفى على احد ان رئيسه الكنسية الانجليزيه هى ملكه انجلترا .

6) كما انه حديثا تم تعيين القس السابق يوخايم جاوك رئيسا لالمانيا

 

7) و ايضا يوجد دوله كامله عباره عن دوله دينيه تسمى الفاتيكان و لها سفراء فى كل دول العالم.

 

 

و على هذا فالقول بان الدساتير التى تنص على ديانة الرئيس او الدولة فى النظم الغربيه انما هى دول ملكية قول ظاهر البطلان , اذ ان اليونان و ايسلندا دول جمهورية و ليست ملكيه.

 

و نحن لا نمارى فى حق غير المسلمين من اليهود و النصارى فى التحاكم الى شرائعهم فى معتقداتهم و احوالهم الشخصية , رغم انه لا يوجد دولة واحده فى النظم الغربيه تسمح بتطبيق الشريعه على مواطنيها من المسلمين  سيما فى الاحوال الشخصيه , فهل يوجد دولة تسمح للمسلم بتعدد الزوجات مثلا!!!!!

و لا يفوتنا القول بان تحاكم اخواننا الى شرائعهم انما يستند الى دليل ظنى الدلاله!!!!!!!!!!

و هذا الذى نقول به بالدفاع عن الشريعه ليس كلام المسلمين فقط بل ايضا كلام المصريين الاقباط.

و ما أروع ما قاله الأستاذ ألبرت برسوم سلامة عضو مجلس الشعب في كلمته حول المادة الثانية من الدستور   (( .....إننا نعدل الدستور , الشعب كله يعدله , ممثلو الشعب يعدلونه طبقا لهذه الوثيقة لأنهم هم الذين صدر عنهم الدستور و هم حماته و هم الرقباء عليه .

منطلق عام ما أسماه و ما أجله ! فإذا جاز لي التخصيص و إنني مفوض بان أتحدث في هذه الكلمات القليلة عن إخواني وأخواتي النواب - و أقولها على مضض - المصريين الأقباط في هذا المجلس , فليس في هذا المجلس قبطي و لا مسلم , و لا مسلم و لا قبطي .

                              

تصفيق            

..... فليسمعها العالم , إنه في اليوم الذي نقر ونقرر فيه و نوافق بالإجماع على أن الشريعة الإسلامية هى المصدر الرئيسي للتشريع في بلادنا .

تصفيق

تقول لنا الشريعة الإسلامية و يقول لنا الدستور وهو يقول لنا هذا التقرير الكريم العظيم الذي أصبح وثيقة لا تنفصل عن النص و الذي تلي في هذه الجلسة و الذي وافقنا عليه بالإجماع يقول و اسمحوا لي فإننا نتكلم للتاريخ ونعلم أنه من المسلمات أيضا إن مبادئ الشريعة الإسلامية السمحاء – و هي سمحاء حقا – تقرر أن غير المسلمين من أهل الكتاب يخضعون في أمور أحوالهم الشخصية لشرائع ملتهم و قد استقر على ذلك رأي فقهاء الشريعة الإسلامية .يا اخوانى اننا معكم  لا نخاف و لا نرهب اننا نعلم اننا  منكم و اليكم و انكم منا والينا , اعلن على العالم فى النهاية ان مصر متحده مسليمها و مسحيها و اننا لا نرهب المستقبل نحن الاقباط و اننا نطمئن اليكم كل الاطمئنان بكم و انتم دعاتنا و انتم احباؤنا )) [1]

ثم تحدث النائب اسطفان باسيلى (( اننى استحدث الان لشيوختى اولا و لاننى عشت فى العمل القضائى سبعه و خمسين عاما محاميا و لقد عرفت لمضى المدة ان الشريعه الاسلامية هى خير ما يمكن ان يطالب به , لا المسلم وحده بل ايضا المسيحى لان بها ما يرضينا و العهده النبوية موجوده فى دير سيناء و المكتوبة بخط الامام على تؤكد الحفاظ علينا فى كل مالنا من حقوق و ما علينا من واجبات و القاعدة الشرعيه (( امرنا بتركهم و ما يدينون )) و اليوم مع هذه البهجه التى اراها احس كانه يوم دخول الاسلام الى مصر يستكمل كل ما كان ناقصا  وواجب الاكتمال فيم يتعلق بتطبيق الشريعه الاسلاميه و ما فيها من مصادر الرحمة الكثير للمواطنين , لقد رايت تجارب كثيره فى حياتى و على سبيل المثال الولد يموت فى حياة ابيه فلا يرث ابناؤه شيئا و يحصل الاعمام و العمات على كل شىء و لكنهم وجودوا فى ان الشريعه الاسلامية بها احكام تنصف هؤلاء الابناء فكانت الوصيه الواجبه عام 1946 , لذا أقل انه يوم بهجه يوم ان يكون لكل انسان فى مصر ما يسعده و يوم ان يكون اسم الشريعه الاسلامية هو المسيطر على كل تشريعاتنا فان ذلك ما يسعدنا))[2]

 

لم يقف الامر عند هذا الحد بل ان النواب الاقباط شاركوا فى تقنين الشريعه الاسلامية من خلال الجان البرلمانية :

النائب جورج رفائيل عضو لجنة المعاملات المالية

النائب عدلى عبد الشهيد عضو لجنة القانون البحرى

النائب نشأت برسوم عضو لجنة القوانين الاجتماعيه

النائب اسطفان باسيلى عضو لجنة القوانين الاقتصادية

النائب وديع فريد عضو لجنة القانون الجنائى .

 

                              هذه هى مصر التى نعرفها

 


([1]) مضبطة مجلس ,الشعب الجلسة السابعة و السبعين , الفصل التشريعي الثالث , دور الانعقاد العادي الأول , المعقودة فى 30 من أبريل سنة 1980 , ص 7235و ما بعدها.

[2] مضبطة الجلسة السبعين  اول يوليو 1982 الفصل التشريعى الثالث , دور الانعقاد الثالث  المجلد الثامن ص 6239 

More

THE IMPACT OF COVID 19 ON THE PERFORMANCE OF ADMINISTRATIVE CONTRACTS IN EGYPT

 

THE IMPACT OF COVID 19

ON THE PERFORMANCE OF ADMINISTRATIVE CONTRACTS IN EGYPT

COMPARATIVE STUDY

BY

JUDGE…

 

THE IMPACT OF COVID 19

ON THE PERFORMANCE OF ADMINISTRATIVE CONTRACTS IN EGYPT

COMPARATIVE STUDY

BY

JUDGE DR/ MAGED M.SHEBAITA

THE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE EGYPTIAN STATE COUNCIL

LLM (UNIVERSITY OF LONDON)

PHD ( CAIRO UNIVERSITY )

MAY 2020

 

 

 

Abstract

Any country undertakes several actions to fulfill the public needs of it’s people or to achieve economical and financial targets. One of the most famous actions is CONTRACTS, the state is usually engaged in several contractual relationships to achieve the aforementioned targets.

In Civil Law countries, the Administration concludes two types of contracts, Public  Law Contracts[1] and Private Law Contracts.

The overwhelming opinion in the Egyptian Administrative Law, jurists and judgments are that there are 3 main criterion to distinguish administrative contract from civil and commercial contracts, which had been explained in the judgment of the Supreme Administrative Court

“It is recognized that the Administrative Contract is the contract concluded by a public law person with the intention of managing of public utility and for showing its intention to adopt the Public law method, which includes a clause or conditions that are unfamiliar to private law contracts.”[2].

Through the performance of Administrative Contracts certain obstacles appeared, some of them are foreseeable and others unforeseeable.

After the announcement by WHO on 13th March 2020, that COVID19 is a pandemic, several states declared the state of emergency due to the outbreak of COVI19 which caused many economical and financial disasters, to both public and private sectors.

In this  research I will focus on the outbreak of COVID 19 as unforeseeable events which led to overturn the financial and economical equilibrium of the Administrative Contract in Egypt.

This is what we will illustrate together in the following pages.

 

 

 

 

Part 1

COVID 19 as an unforeseeable event and the performance of the Administrative Contacts

After the announcement of WHO on 12th of March 2020, that COVID 19 is pandemic [3], following this declaration by WHO, the Egyptian Government issued different decisions [4]   to confront such pandemic

An issue arises, what is next? This issue appears in all the legal, economical, commercial and financial fields all over the world without exception.

With regards to the performance of the Administrative contracts, contractors with the state will find the contract onerous or impossible to be performed, therefore the aforementioned issue arises, what is next?

The Administrative jurist and courts tried to find means to restore the equilibrium of the  contract, which can be ebbed in two main theories as follows[5]:

 

 

 

1)                  Force Majeure

 

A)                 Legal basis of the force majeure in the performance of Administrative contracts

 

Art 373 of the Egyptian Civil code stated that

“the obligation shall be extinguished if the debtor proves that its fulfillment has become impossible for a foreign reason to which it cant prevent”.

The Egyptian court of Cessation held that

“The general rules of civil law require that the obligation extinguished automatically if it becomes impossible to be performed because of a foreign cause where the debtor didn’t intervene in it, and that in contracts binding on both sides, if the obligation extinguished because of the impossibility of its performance, the corresponding obligations also extinguished and the contract is terminated automatically”[6].

The Supreme Administrative court put the basis of the force majeure doctrine in the performance of Administrative contract as follows:

“The terms of the contract liability require that there should be fault  and damage and that there is a causal relationship between fault and damage and that if the debtor is not able to carry out his obligation in kind he is responsible for the compensation for non-fulfillment unless he proved that the impossibility of performance arose from a foreign reason that has no intervene in it, and the impossibility of performance is either an actual impossibility or a legal impossibility at the time of performance. It goes without saying that the actual impossibility is a matter of reality that the judge estimates it which varies according to the circumstances of the case, and if the impossibility is due to the fault of the debtor the contract should not be terminated but still exist and if the performance of the obligations became impossible in –kind it  must be performed through compensation, and therefore the subject of obligation is shifted from the in-kind execution  to compensation, the insurances that ensured the in-kind implementation and turn into a guarantee of compensation, and the duration of the statute of limitations, but if the impossibility is due to the a foreign cause that is not possible or impossible to  obviate  , the availability of these two conditions was a foreign incident of the person who has no intervene in it and must be unable to expect not only by the contractor but by the most vigilant  people. It is not enough for the average person, but it requires that the impossibility be absolutely impossible as the force must be force majeure or sudden accident impossible to obviate  or prevent . In case it  is possible to obviate  the accident- even if it is impossible to expect-   in this case it is not force majeure . The force majeure  should make the performance absolutely  impossible  not only for the contractor  but for anyone who is in the position of contractor . This is what distinguishes the force majeure  from  the hardships  incidents which make the performance onerous rather than impossible”[7]

There are 3 main conditions for force majeure:

1)      The impediment must be occurred due to foreign cause, not related to the contractor, in other words the contractor must not participate in such sudden event by its will or wrongful act, otherwise it is not force majeure, and the contractor is obliged to perform the contractual obligations.

2)       The impediment must be unforeseeable not only by the contractor but also by any contractor, at the time of concluding the contract.

3)      It is impossible to obviate such event Ergo if the force majeure occurred after the contractor perform its obligations or ended before concluding the contract , in these cases it is not force majeure.

4)      It must led to absolute impossibility in the performance of the contract, not just onerous.[8]

 

B) The legal impact of the force majeure on the performance of the Administrative Contracts

1) Exempt the parties from performing the contractual obligation.

This is logic consequence of the force majeure, as it is impossible for the contractor to perform its obligation, it is not realistic to encumber it with impossible obligations unless the parties agreed that the contractor shall be liable for the incidental loss, in this case it is obliged to reimburse the Administration.

It shall be illustrated there is difference between absolute impossibility and temporary impossibility, in the former case the contract is exempted from contractual obligation while in the later case the contractual obligation is SUSPENDED till the termination o the force majeure[9]. Likewise the force majeure exempt the Administration from performing its corresponding  obligation towards the contractor.[10]

2)  Terminate the contract     

Due to the absolute impossibility in performance the  correspondent contractual obligations of both parties and the exemption of contractual obligations in this case the contract shall be terminated.

An issue arises about whether the termination is automatically or require judicial judgment.

Some jurist viewed that the contract shall be terminated automatically by force of law without need to recourse to the court but recourse to the court will be required in case the parties disagreed whether there was force majeure or not , in such case the issue will be determined by the court [11], whilst others viewed that the termination of the contract require judicial judgment, they termed it judicial termination.

With regard to comparative law, different laws adopted the same approach of the Egyptian law [12].

Art. 1218 of the French civil code stated that

“In contractual matters, there is force majeure where an event beyond the control of the debtor, which could not reasonably have been foreseen at the time of the conclusion of the contract and whose effects could not be avoided by appropriate measures, prevents performance of his obligation by the debtor.

If the prevention is temporary, performance of the obligation is suspended unless the delay which results justifies termination of the contract. If the prevention is permanent, the contract is terminated by operation of law and the parties are discharged from their obligations under the conditions provided by articles 1351 and 1351-1.”.

It is clear that the French and Egyptian laws follow the same approach of the force majeure, this is not a surprising issue, as both of them are civil law countries.

In the English law

“The basic principle here is that if after a contract is made , something happens, through no fault of the parties, to make its performance impossible, the contract is said to be frustrated, and the obligations under it come to an end.  Although there are many events which may make performance impossible, only certain limited types will allow a contractor to be frustrated.  Because frustration leads to automatic discharge of the contract, regardless of the wishes of the parties, the courts use it as  a weapon of last resort, which can be used in exceptional circumstances……. If the potential frustration event is dealt with in force majeure clause, then the impact of this event will be determining according to this contractual clause rather than through the doctrine of frustration”[13] 

The House of Lords held that

“Frustration of a contract takes place where there supervenes an event (without default of either party and for which the contract makes no sufficient provision) which so significantly changes the nature (not merely the expense or onerousness) of the outstanding contractual rights and/or obligations from what the parties could reasonably have contemplated at the time of its execution that it would be unjust to hold them to the literal sense of its stipulations in the new circumstances; in such case the law declares both parties to be discharged from further performance.”[14].Recently the High court discussed the effect of BRIXET on the frustration of lease contract, the court ended the contract cant be frustrated by BRIEXT.   [15]

Some jurist stated that the term radical difference or significant change 

“…will include, but not limited to, situations where performance has become impossible. Unfortunately , neither impossibility nor radical difference has a self meaning in this context.”[16]

It is clear from HL aforementioned judgment that if the performance is just onerous, then the frustration principle will not be applied.

Certain impediments raise the application of force majeure in the English law as:

1) Destruction or unavailability of something essential for the performance of the contract.

2) Death of either parties, in contracts which require personal performance, are terminated on the death of either parties.

3) Unavailability of party: as in case of illness or imprisoned.

4) Method of performance impossible.[17]

The problem here is what about change in circumstances, if the performance is not impossible but changed, then agreed at the time of conclusion the contract, according to the previous judgments it is not frustration issue, this means the contract will not be terminated but still exists and the parties are obliged to perform their contractual obligation. Like wise if the performance is onerous, the matter will be simple if there is contractual clause dealing with such issues, but if there is no contractual clause, the English courts do not provide solution to this issue unlike the Civil law system. 

This issue led to some jurist to state that the English law adopt all or nothing approach. Either the contract is terminated automatically due to force majeure or remain bound. There is no notion for partial frustration nor temporary impossibility which excuses performance for certain period of time, therefore there is no clear distinction between breach of contract and impossibility.  [18] 

2)Hardships

A)        The legal basis of Hardships in the performance of Administrative contracts 

Art. 147 of the Egyptian Civil code stated that;

“The contract is the law of the parties ( Pacta sunt servanda). 2- However, if there are exceptional general incidents that could not be expected and result in their occurrence that the performance of the contractual obligations - if it did not become impossible- became onerous for the debtor, so that it threatens him with a heavy loss, the judge may, according to the circumstances and after the balance between the interests of the two parties, return the exhausting obligation to Reasonable limit, and any agreement to the contrary is void.”

The Supreme Administrative court held that;

“That's an application The [sic] theory of emergency circumstances is that during the execution of the contract, certain accidents or natural or economic circumstances or the work of a [sic] Administrative agency other than the contracting agency or the work of another human being, which was not in expected and unforeseeable by the contractor at the time of the conclusion of the contract, and could not prevent or obviate it, and which would incur heavy losses, and turned the performance of the contract more onerous- but not impossible -  to the contractor, with which the economics of the contract are severely disrupted and the structure of the contract is absolutely overturned. In such a case the Administration is required to share the loss that has been occurred throughout the period of the hardship, in order to ensure the implementation of the Administrative contract, and The continuing functioning of public utility. The effect of such impediment is limited to appropriate compensation where the Administration is obliged to reimburse its contractor, without leading to modify the contractual obligations, [sic]”[19].

The supervening events are not limited to economical events, also other general measures as laws and regulations can impose taxes which increase the burdens on the contractor, likewise fluctuation of currency is considered to be hardship.[20]

From this judgment there are several conditions for the application of the hardship doctrine as follows:

1)       The occurrence of supervening events during the performance of the contract.

 The hardship doctrine will be applied where supervening events occurred form the time of concluding the contract till its end in other words through the life cycle of the contract.  However there are certain occasions require more clarifications as:

A)     The occurrence of the supervening events after concluding the contract and before its performance.

In my opinion the hardship doctrine shall be applied as, the contractor usually assess the economical and financial outcome and its ability to perform the contractual obligation from the time of concluding the contract, ergo any disruption to the financial or economical equilibrium of the contract will effect directly the legitimate expectation  from the contract.

B)      The occurrence of the supervening events after the submitting of bids and before concluding the contract.

We have to differentiate between two situations. The first case is when the bidder cant modify its bids or cant withdraw it, in this case the hardship doctrine applied [21]. On the contrary if the bidder can modify the bid or withdraw it, in this case, in my opinion, the hardship will not be applied because the bidder is not obliged to conclude the contract with the Administration. 

C)      The occurrence of the supervening after due time limit to perform the contract.

In a no doubt, after the performance of the contract, there is no need to apply hardship doctrine, as the contractor did not incur any loses.  Though if the supervening events occurred after the due time date and the contractor was delayed in performing its obligations, in this case if the Administration explicitly or implicitly admitted to extend the due time, in this case the hardship doctrine shall be applied, and in case the contractor – by delaying in performing its obligations-committing a wrongful act by breaching the contract, in this case the hardship clause will not be applied, because the contractor could not receive benefit as a result of its breach[22].  

2)      The supervening events must be unforeseeable

As previously mentioned in the force majeure, the supervening events must be unforeseeable to both parties, the Supreme Administrative Court asserted that:

 

“The application of the hardship theory requires that during the period of performance of the administrative contract, accidents or natural or economic conditions arise from the work of an Administrative entity other than the contractor or from any other human being who was not in the contract's expectation at the time of the conclusion of the contract and could not prevent it, would result in heavy losses that would seriously disrupt the equilibrium of the contract.”[23]

3)                  Absolutely overturned  the structure of the contract and disrupt the equilibrium of the contract.

It shall be illustrated  that it is not easy to adopt a common criteria what could considered as absolute overturn of the contract, as the considered loss varied form contractor to another, so what considered huge loss to a contractor, can be viewed as simple loss to another contractor.

 

The Supreme Administrative Court tried to set a rule on who the courts can determine the loss of the contractor as follows;

“….. In estimating the extent of the imbalance of the accident in the contract due to the supervening  circumstances, the court must take into account all its elements affecting its economics, including the full value of the contract and its duration in total as a single unit without identifying one of its elements …..- that the compensation to which the administration is committed is not to cover the profit loss, it only covers portions of  - not all - loss incurred to  the contractor.”[24]

It is clear that the Administration will shall share only on the actual heavy loss of the contractor not the loss of its profits.

In my opinion this approach is not absolutely true, we should distinguish between the sources of supervening events, if it caused due to economical or natural or other human being then the Administration shall reimburse the contractor for his loss not including his profit loss in other words to place him in situation exactly before the occurrence of the impediment otherwise such impediment may cause bankruptcy to the contractor which will indirectly affect the investment atmosphere in the state, whilst if the source was an action committed by Administrative agency other than the contracting agency, in this case the Administration shall reimburse the contractor in his total losses including profit loss, because the Administration as a unite caused such impediment,regardless that the contracting agency itself didn’t participate in such impediment , as finally all  the Administrative agencies  are superseded by Prime minister as Article 163 of the Egyptian Constitution stated that;

“The  government is the supreme executive and administrative body of the state and it consists of the Prime Minister, the Prime Minister’s deputies, the ministers, and their deputies.

The Prime Minister heads the government, oversees its work, and directs it in the performance of its functions”.

And the state budget is one unite as well  , no matter each agency has its own public personality , as every compensation paid by any agency will be calculated in the state budget , moreover every benefits  received from   Administrative contract will be returned to the state budget     . This doesn’t prejudice the right of the Administrative contracting party – if possible - for claiming compensation from the other agency which caused the supervening events . 

B)                  Legal consequences of the hardships doctrine 

1) The contractor is obliged to perform its contractual obligation

As I have illustrated earlier, the hardship  - unlike force majeure -doesn’t discharge the contractor from performing its obligation, the contract is still exist and the parties are obliged by it. On the assumption that the contractor fail to perform its contractual obligation, it shall be considered as breach of contract.

The Supreme Administrative court asserted that

“The supervening events don’t justify the contractor not to perform its obligation under the contract, on the other hand it can claim for compensation from the Administration, in order to continuing the functioning of public utility”[25].

It shall be noticed, as far as the performance of the contract is just onerous to the contractor, it is obliged to perform it unless the performance of the contract  became impossible in this case it turned to be force majeure, in such later case the contract will be terminated [26].

2)The right of the contractor to be reimbursed

As I previously mentioned, the contractor will only be reimbursed partially for its actual losses not including its profits. The legal basis for such compensation is to restore the financial equilibrium of the contract, the common wills of the parties and the continuing function of public utilities [27]

The issue here is, according to the previous legal basis, there is no reason not to totally reimbursement the contractor for its loss, the continuing function of the public utilities is the role of the Administration not the contractor, it mainly conclude the contract with the Administration to gain profits not to perform public service, therefore it is unjust to incur the contractor with any losses caused due to supervening events, in my opinion the Administration shall incur all the losses, it is sufficient the contractor will not receive profits in case the impediment caused by natural or economical reason but if the impediment caused due to action of other Administrative agency, the contractor shall be reimbursed for total loss including its profit loss.

Certain issues shall be considered in determining the losses of the contractor, which don’t include the following:

1)      The profits of the contractor prior to supervening events.

2)      The losses caused due to its wrongful acts[28]

3)      Any peremptory loss which will be incurred regardless the supervening events.

If the performance still onerous after the partial reimbursing, the parties  might renegotiate for a new conditions otherwise the contract shall be terminated.

3)Extending the duration of the contract

One of the basic principles which governed the performance of the Administrative Contract is to be performed according to good faith, as Art 43 of law No. 182/2018 Organizing The Contracts Concluded by Public Bodies ( OCCPB) , stated that

“Contracts shall be performed in accordance with their provisions, in good faith, within the limits and in accordance with the conditions, rules and procedures set out in this Law and its Executive Regulations.”

Accordingly if the contractor  failed to  perform the  contract on the agreed  time limit due to:

“Supervening circumstances beyond its control, some of which are due to the Administration. In this case the Administration is obliged To [sic] the extend the duration of the contract and to grant the contractor additional time to perform its obligation, in light of the investment atmosphere and the surrounding booms and pitfalls, in order not to waste a lot of money spent on the project, and wasted strenuous efforts made to complete it - in application of this: if the Administrative agency terminate the contract, without taking this consideration In applying the principle of good faith, its decision is against the law, and it must be quashed”[29].

4)      Discharging from delay fines

The Egyptian law give the Administration the right to impose penalties on the contractor to pay a delay fine once it delays in performing its contractual obligation, such penalties are considered to be contractual compensation[30]. However if the contractor delayed in performing its contractual obligations as a result of supervening events in such cases the Administration MAY discharge it from such penalties, pursuant to Art 48 of the OCCPB law

“If the contracting party is late in performing  the contract beyond either the date set in the implementation timeline or the implementation period set out in the contract, the Competent Authority may- for public interest considerations- grant the contracting party a time extension to complete the implementation without charging a delay penalty, if such delay is attributable to a reason beyond its own control………. In all cases of collecting the delay penalty, exemption shall be granted under a decision of the Competent Authority, if it is proven that the delay has occurred due to reasons beyond the control of the contracting party”.

The Supreme Administrative Court held that

Whereas, the judiciary of this court has repeatedly stated that the delay fine is a penalty that the administration will impose on its contractor if it delays in implementing its obligations for the date specified in the proportions and limits specified in Article No. 81 of the Executive Regulations of the Tenders and Auctions Law No. 9 of 1983 issued by Minister of Finance Resolution No. 157 The year 1983 does not include in the calculation of the delay period the periods that are proven for the Administration to arise from supervening reasons, the delay periods that are due to the Administrative authority itself,…...”[31]

In my opinion the Administration has no discretionary power to discharge the contractor from delay fines, it MUST discharge it, as the purpose of the delay fine is to encourage the contractor to perform its obligation at the due time, and reimburse the Administration from its delay, both reasons can’t logically applied in the supervening events, as the contractor CAN’T perform its obligations, and CAN’T prevent and obviate such events.

There is radical difference between delaying as wrongful act and can’t perform as a result of overturned the structure of the contract.

 

With regard to comparative legal systems  Art 6.2.1 of UNDROIT asserted that

“ARTICLE  6.2.1 (Contract to be observed) Where the performance of a contract becomes more onerous for one of the parties, that party is nevertheless bound to perform its obligations subject to the following provisions on hardship”

Art 6.2.2.

“ARTICLE  6.2.2 (Definition of hardship) There is hardship where the occurrence of events fundamentally alters the equilibrium of the contract either because the cost of a party’s performance has increased or because the value of the performance a party receives has diminished, and (a) the events occur or become known to the disadvantaged party after the conclusion of the contract; (b) the events could not reasonably have been taken into account by the disadvantaged party at the time of the conclusion of the contract; (c) the events are beyond the control of the disadvantaged party; and (d) the risk of the events was not assumed by the disadvantaged party.

Art 6.2. 3 (Effects of hardship) (1) In case of hardship the disadvantaged party is entitled to request renegotiations [sic]. The request shall be made without undue delay and shall indicate the grounds on which it is based. (2) The request for renegotiation does not in itself entitle the disadvantaged party to withhold performance. (3) Upon failure to reach agreement within a reasonable time either party may resort to the court. (4) If the court finds hardship it may, if reasonable, (a) terminate the contract at a date and on terms to be fixed, or (b) adapt the contract with a view to restoring its equilibrium”.[32]

In the French law Art 1195 of the new civil code asserted that:

“If a change of circumstances was unforeseeable at the time of conclusion of  the contract, renders performance excessively onerous for a party who had not accepted to assume the risk of such change , that party may ask its co-contractor for renegotiation of the contract. It shall continue performing its obligations during the renegotiation.

In the event of refusal or failure of the renegotiation, the parties may agree to terminate the contract, at the date and on such conditions as they shall determine, or by mutual agreement ask the judge to proceed to its adjustment. In the absence of agreement within a reasonable time, the judge may, on one party’s request, amend the contract or terminate it, at the date and on such conditions as he shall determine.”[33]

It is clear that UNDROIT and the French have the same approach of the Egyptian law , with a slight difference.

With regards to the English law, it didn’t follow the approach of the aforementioned legal systems, there is no doctrine of hardships in the English law.  The issue will be easy of the parties incorporate hardship clause in their contract, however the difficulty arises from the absence of such article, the English courts refuse to modify or alter the contractual obligations of the parties due to supervening events. As the House of Lords refuse to recognize the financial hardships alone as reason to terminate the contract based on frustration doctrine [34], the English courts adopted narrow view of frustration which rarely succeeded, therefore where the contract is still able to be performed – even if onerous- the parties are still obliged by it.[35]

The issue before the English courts is whether the performance of the contract impossible or radically different or not, in the first case- rarely occurred -  the contract is terminated automatically, in the second case the contract still exist even if the performance is onerous. The object of the test is the contract itself, not the its cost. Unlike the French law, the English law doesn’t impose a duty on the parties to renegotiate or impose a duty on the court to restore the equilibrium of the contract  [36].

After all the previously mentioned theories, COVID 19 is certainly unforeseeable and supervening events which could not be expected by the parties. Both parties could not prevent or obviate it and it led to disturbance of the contract.

The question is, whether COVID 19 is force majeure or hardship, this what we are going to realize in the next pages.

 

 

Part 2

COVID 19 force majeure vs hardships.

This is the question of all the contractors with the Administration in Egypt.  

Before answering this question some French judiciary judgments consider COVID19 as force majeure as in several decisions from March 2020, the Douai Court of Appeal ruled that the cancellation of flights by the Italian authorities, due to the Covid-19 sanitary crisis, constituted a force majeure event for the French authorities (4 March 2020, n° 20/00395; 5 March 2020, n° 20/00400 and 20/00401);

  • In a decision dated 12 March 2020 (n° 20/01098), the Colmar Court of Appeal considered that the current Covid-19 epidemic was a force majeure event preventing a person held in administrative detention from appearing before the court, as another person held in the same detention center had been tested positive for Covid-19. The same Court of Appeal adopted a similar solution in several subsequent decisions, even in the absence of a direct link between the detainees and infected persons (16 March 2020, n° 20/01142 and 20/01143; 23 March 2020, n° 20/01206 and 20/01207).[37]

It is clear that the French Courts recognize COVID19 as force majeure.  Till now the Egyptian Courts has not announced its approach towards COVID 19.

In my opinion the matter can not be classified without reference to the impact of COVID19 on the equilibrium of the contract, therefore if COVID19 overturned the contract and the performance of the Administrative contract became absolute  impossible in this case, the force majeure doctrine shall be applied, and in case the performance of the contract is just onerous and the hardship doctrine shall be applied.

The contractor- to evaluate whether performance is impossible or onerous  - must take consider the impact of the previously mentioned governmental measures to confront COVID19, for example in supply contracts to Administrative agencies where the contractor import goods and supply it to the Administration, which affected directly by the governmental measure which closing the Egyptian airspace in front of all international and domestic flights [38].Like wise if the government adopt total curfew measure for a long period of time – not just temporary measure – the contract in this case can be terminated. 

Another type of Administrative contracts is construction contract, usually the performance of such contract became onerous, but not impossible, therefore the contractor must perform its obligation under the contract and claim for reimbursement.

Ergo there is no final classification for COVID19, it is case by case analysis according to the provisions of every contract,  the surrounding circumstances and the impact on the performance of every contract.

It could be regarded as force majeure in some contracts, and could be regarded as hardship in others.

Conclusion

COVID 19 is supervening events, disrupted the economical equilibrium of the Administrative contracts, and overturned the structure of the contract.

There is no final classification of its impact on the contracts, it can regarded as force majeure in certain contracts which in this case will led to terminate the contract automatically, in other contracts it can be regarded as hardship, accordingly the contractor is obliged to perform its contractual obligations and claim for reimbursement  from the Administration.

Author

Maged M.Shebaita 

Cell phone No.:+2 01094100147                   Home Address

Office phone No.:+201118942720               

Email: magedshoby@yahoo.com

Website:  www.maged-shebaita.com

 

Education

LLM, University of London.

PHD, Cairo university.

Area of expertise

Public law,  Arbitration.

 

Bio

  • 06/2000 –present, Judge at the State Council.
  • Previous member of the Constituent Assembly drafted the Egyptian Constitution 2012.
  • Vice president of the Egyptian State Council 2016 – present.
  •  Member at The Administrative Court of Appeal 2017
  • An Arbitrator in the Panel of Cairo Regional Center of International Commercial Arbitration ( CRCICA )    Nov 2019.
  • Member at the Charted Institute Of Arbitrators ( CIArb )  - London- UK, August 2017.
  • Memeber at London Court of International Arbitration ( LCIA), October 2017.
  • Member at the International Society of Public Law ICON-S 2018.
  • Seminar at SOAS University, School of Law from March 2017.
  • Lecturer at British University in Cairo. School of Law, Nov 2016.
  • Lecturer at ASSTMT, Cairo, School of Law, March 2020.


[1] In Common law system , the jurists termed  Public contracts whilst in the Civil Law contracts , the jurists termed  Administrative contracts  , I will explain this later.

[2] Case No. 576 /11 judiciary session date 30/12/1967

Case No. 21979 /54 judiciary session date 27/11/2012 

[3] www.who.int/csr/disease/covid19 / report 52

 

 

[4] Decision council of ministers No. 154/2020 date 14/3/2020 “Inclusion of the disease resulting from infection with the "emerging corona" virus, among the infectious diseases shown in the table attached to Law No. 137 of 1958”

Decision No. 768 /2020 date 24/3/2020 “Citizens are prohibited, in all parts of the Republic, to move or move on all roads from seven in the evening until six in the morning, to ward off any possible repercussions of the emerging corona virus.”

Decision No. 717 /2020 date 14/3/2020 “The study is suspended in all schools, institutes, and universities of any kind, as well as any gatherings of students with the aim of receiving knowledge under any name, and children's immunities [sic] of any kind for a period of two weeks from Sunday, March 15, 2020 until Saturday, corresponding to March 28, 2020 as a measure The framework of the country's comprehensive plan to deal with any possible consequences of the emerging corona virus.”

Decision No. 606/2020 date 9/6/2020 “In order to take the state to some precautionary measures to confront the Corona virus and to preserve the health of citizens, all activities that require the presence of any large gatherings of citizens or that require their transportation between governorates [sic} with large gatherings such as (artistic parties, popular celebrations, birthdays, fairs and festivals) are temporarily suspended. Else”

www.alamiria.com

 

[5] There are another two theories , the Act of Prince and unpredictable difficulties, but in this article I chose only force majeure and hardship because they are closely related to COVI19.

[6] Case No. 450  /35 judiciary, session date 25/3/1972

[7] Case N.O 689/4 judiciary, session date 12/12/1959 , Case N.O 5560/43judicairy , session date 18/3/2003 

[8] Judge Hamdy Y. Okshaa , The problems in the performance of the Administrative contract , Dar Babou Majed , 2015 , third Book , p 109 -118

[9] Supreme Administrative court Case N.O 689/4 judiciary, session date 12/12/1959,ibid

[10] Judge Hamdy Okassha, ibid, 123-125

[11] Dr Sooad EL Sharkawy, The Administrative Law, Dar El Nahda, 201, p 437, Dr Ayman Fathy, ibid, p 204

[12] the United Nation Convention On Contract for International Sale Of Goods,  Art 79  stated that (((1)  A party is not liable for a failure to perform any of his obligations  if he proves that the failure was due to an impediment beyond his   control and that he could not reasonably be expected to have taken the impediment  into account at the time of the conclusion of the contract or to have avoided  or overcome it, or its consequences.

(2)  If the party’s failure is due to the failure by a third person whom  he has engaged to perform the whole or a part of the contract, that party is  exempt from liability only if:

                (a)  he is exempt under the preceding paragraph; and  

                (b) the person whom he has so engaged would be so exempt if the  provisions of that  paragraph were applied to him.

                (3)  The exemption provided by this article has effect for the period  during which the  impediment exists.

(4)  The party who fails to perform must give notice to the other party  of the impediment and its effect on his ability to perform. If the notice is  not received by the other party within a reasonable time after the party who  fails to perform knew or ought to have known of the impediment, he is    liable for damages resulting from such non-receipt.

(5)  Nothing in this article prevents either party from exercising any  right other than to claim damages under this Convention))

Like wise Art 7-1-7 of UNIDROIT (((1) Non-performance by a party is excused if that party proves that the non-performance was due to an impediment beyond its control and that it could not reasonably be expected to have taken the impediment into account at the time of the conclusion of the contract or to have avoided or overcome it or its consequences. (2) When the impediment is only temporary, the excuse shall have effect for such period as is reasonable having regard to the effect of the impediment on the performance of the contract. (3) The party who fails to perform must give notice to the other party of the impediment and its effect on its ability to perform. If the notice is not received by the other party within a reasonable time after the party who fails to perform knew or ought to have known of the impediment, it is liable for damages resulting from such non-receipt. (4) Nothing in this Article prevents a party from exercising a right to terminate the contract or to withhold performance or request interest on money due.

[13] Catherine Elliott& Frances Quinn , Contract Law , Pearson , Eleventh Edition  ,2017 , p 313-315

JANET O , Sullivan &JONATHAN HILLIARD , The  Law of Contract , Oxford , 6th Edition , 2014 , p 335

Richard Stone , The modern law of contract , Routledge , tenth edition , 2013 , p 411

[15] Canary Wharf (BP4) T1 Limited v European Medicines Agency [2019] EWHC 335 (Ch)

[16] Richard Stone , ibid , p 413

[17] Catherine Elliott& Frances Quinn, ibid , p 313

[18] HUGH BEALE , BENEDICTE FAUVRQUE-COSSON, JACOBIEN RUTGERS &STEFAN VOGENAUER, Contract Law, HART, Third Edition, 2019, p 1185

[19] Case No. 12606/52 judiciary, session date 27/11/2012

[20] Dr Soliman Tamawy, The General Principles of Administrative Contracts , Dar El Faker El Arabi , 1991, fifth edition, p 674

[21] Judge Hamdy Y., ibid, p 296

[22] Supreme Administrative court, case No. 22367/53 judiciary, session date 30/11/2010

[23] Case No. 1590 /54 judiciary, session date 15/1/2002

[24] Case No. 3652/29judiciary, session date 16/5/1987

[25] Case N.O2541/29 judiciary , session date 30/11/1985

[26] Judge Hamdy Y. Okaasah , ibid , p 317

[27] Dr Soliman Tamawy , ibid , p 696

[28] Dr Soliman Tamaway , ibid , p 699

[29] Case No.10782/49 judiciary session date 21/2/2009

[30] Dr Atef Abd El Latif, ibid, p 129

[31] Case No. 5291 /51  judiciary session date 6/4/2010

[32] www.unidroit.org › instruments ,2016 .

[33] www.redsmith .com

Huge Beale &others , ibid , p 1218

[34] Elizabeth Macdonald & Ruth Atkins , ibid , p 476

[35] Davis Contractors Ltd v Fareham Urban, ibid

[36] Huge Beale &others , ibid , p 1218

[37] www.linklaters.com › insights › march

[38] Decision No. 718   /2020, dated1 6/3/2020

More

COVID 19 and state of emergency in Egypt

COVID 19 and state of emergency in Egypt

 

                                   By Judge Dr. / Maged M.Shebaita ([1])

              Abstract

The nightmare of "COVID-19" widely spread all…

COVID 19 and state of emergency in Egypt

 

                                   By Judge Dr. / Maged M.Shebaita ([1])

              Abstract

The nightmare of "COVID-19" widely spread all over the world by the announcement of WHO on March 14th, 2020 that "COVID-19" is a pandemic,  followed by announcing the state of emergency by the Egyptian president([2]), and  the severe measures adopted by the Egyptian government to confront that nightmare which swept the world.

It is clear that "COVID-19" is constitutes a threat to public health, which considers one of the elements of public order, that justifies the declaration of the state of emergency and all its consequences.

It is the role of the government to protect the community from any infringements to public order, including its elements and the public (security, health, morals, and peace).

Such aforementioned measures have espoused by the Prime minister upon the approval of the Council of Minister ([3]). Laterally, the ministry of health used its power pursuant to law No. 137/1958 by considering "COVID-19" as a contagious disease.

The overarching target of this research is to highlight the measures, espoused by the Egyptian government to confront "COVID-19" and the constitutional restrictions over its power.

Introduction

Article (1) of the Egyptian law NO.162 /1958([4]) defines the state of emergency as: ((the state of emergency may be declared, whenever the public security or order in the lands of the republic or in an area of it, is endangered, whether due to war, disturbances, public disasters, or a pandemic)).

It shall be illustrated that the Egyptian constitution didn’t define the state of emergency, which has been delegated to the law, the above mentioned law (the state of emergency Act No. 162/1958) defines the state of emergency whenever the public order or security is endangered and gave examples to what can be considered as a threat to the public order as wars, pandemics, or demonstrations.

Some jurist viewed that the events stated in Article (1) of the law of emergency are exclusively determined; ergo, the Administration (President) can't add any other events to declare the state of emergency. As such exclusively events showed to be the highest risk to any country. ([5])

It shall be asserted that the police administration (the President) can only use the aforementioned measure to confront the threats to the public order and security. Accordingly, the police administration has no power to use the emergency measures to achieve any other purposes, even if compromised with the general public interest or to confront other events.

The President only has the power to declare the state of emergency - till notify the Parliament – and evaluates whether there is a real emergency state or not ([6]).

There are certain justifications to declare the state of emergency as wars, threat of wars, demonstrations and pandemics ([7]).

In my opinion, such determination is not actually needed. It is self evident that a war either occurred in the Egyptian territory or not, affects directly the Egyptian interest even if it occurred abroad due to being entwined with states interests. However, the word war must include the use of military forces, not just economical, political, or commercial wars.

 The Presidential announcement of the state of emergency is not free from restrictions; he MUST espouse:

1)    The Event That Led to Declare the State of Emergency 

It is a matter of sense that the declaration of the state of emergency must show the events and reasons that led to its announcement whether there is a war, threats, or pandemics… etc.([8])

This is for the supervisory institutions to scrutinize whether the actions, taken by the president, correspond with the state of emergency or not ([9]).

2)    Area It Covers

The Presidential declaration shall determine the area subject to the state of emergency. Such area could be all the territory of the state or only a part of it. Usually in cases of wars and pandemics, the state of emergency covers the whole state, whilst other cases as military demonstrations, riots, or insurrections could be determined by a specific area or province.([10])

3)    Duration of the State of Emergency

According to the Constitution and law, the President must determine the duration of the state of emergency (its start and end by using the normal time unit ([11])). Basically, the declaration of the state of emergency is entwined with the danger to the public order; therefore, some may dispute that it is illogical to restrain the President to determine the duration of the state of emergency.

In my opinion, the President only evaluates when its measures can confront the state of emergency, in case the duration wasn’t sufficient to confront the situation, the President can ask the parliament for its extension.

B)   Restrictions on the announcement of  State of Emergency in the Egyptian Law

Due to the fact that the state of emergency directly and heavily affects the human rights since the president can impose several restrictions as stated in Article (3) and the wide discretionary authority of the President; consequently, there should be very strong supervision from the judiciary and the parliament. The strength of such supervision will be illustrated in the following pages:

1) The Judicial Review on the announcement of the State of Emergency

At the beginning, the courts were reluctant to review the announcement of the state of emergency as the Supreme Constitutional Court consider the announcement of state of emergency as political actions which fall beyond the jurisdiction of the court ([12]), however it shall be illustrated that indeed the announcement of the state of emergency in itself is not subject to judicial review but the other measures followed such announcement are subject to judicial review ([13]).  

2) The Parliamentary Supervision

Pursuant to Article (154) of the Constitutional amendment in 2014, stated that

 ((The President of the Republic declares, after consultation with the Cabinet, a state of emergency in the manner regulated by law. Such declaration must be submitted to the House of Representatives within the following seven days to consider it.

If the declaration takes place when the House of Representatives is not in regular session, a session is called immediately in order to consider the declaration.

In all cases, the declaration of a state of emergency must be approved by a majority of members of the House of Representatives. The declaration shall be for a specified period not exceeding three months, which can only be extended by another similar period upon the approval of two-thirds of House members. In the event the House of Representatives is dissolved, the matter is submitted to the new House in its first session)).

The Egyptian law obliged the President to present the declaration of the state of emergency, its justifications, and the adopted measures to the parliament; such a presentation means to provide it for discussion and questioning by the deputies of the parliament ([14]).

After aforementioned providence, the Parliament can take one of the following procedures:

1)    Expressly Admitted the Declaration of the State of Emergency

The first and easiest procedure is that the Parliament approves the Presidential declaration of the state of emergency; such approval is by simple majority.

2)    Expressly Rejected the Declaration of the State of Emergency

The Parliament might reject the declaration; consequently, the declaration will be quashed. Neither the Constitution nor the law explains whether such quashing will be from the date of quashing or will be a retroactive effect.

Some jurists viewed that such quashing will have only an immediate effect ([15]).

In my opinion, such rejection will have retroactive effect. It is not just quashing; it is abolishing the declaration, which means that the declaration was unconstitutional since the beginning. In addition, due to the exceptional nature of the state of emergency, this must not be analog by it or expands it.

3)    Remain Silence

The last option for the Parliament is to remain silent. This situation has not been explained in the Constitution. In this case, the Parliament doesn’t admit or reject the declaration of emergency.

Some jurist may argue that it can be considered as implied admission from the Parliament to the declaration. In my opinion, this could not be considered as implied admission as the law designated only two ways either to accept or reject as long as the Parliament doesn’t expressly admits the declaration, whatever the action took by it, cannot be regarded as admission. On the contrary to this view, it is closer to be implied rejection since the emergency is an exceptional case.

According to the aforementioned, the state of emergency can only be declared by the President; however, his power is not without restrictions. On the contrary, it is subjected to judicial and parliamentary supervision.

 

 

 

Conclusion

COVID-19 is an undisputable pandemic which justifies the declaration of the state of emergency, and all the previously mentioned governmental measures to confront it are legitimate even if it affects rights and liberties as a result of the state of emergency. As resented above, the same measures are adopted by other governments; however, such measures are not free from restrictions, but it subjected to a strong judicial review from the State Council.    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Law No. 22 of the year 2020

On Amendments of some provisions of law No.162 of the year 1958

Regarding State of Emergency

 

In the name of the people

President of Republic

The House of Representatives approved the following act, and it is hereby enacted:

Article (1)

Article (4) Paragraph 1of law No.162 of 1958 regarding State of Emergency, shall be replaced by the following provisions:

Article (4) Paragraph 1:

The security forces or military shall execute orders issued by the President or his deputy. If the armed forces carried out executing such orders, this gives military personnel judicial police power over civilians.

The military prosecution has jurisdiction to investigate all events and crimes that are caught by military officers.

Without prejudice to the military prosecution powers, the public prosecution shall, in all cases, carry out the investigations.

Article (2)

New items beginning from 7 to 24 shall be added to the text of article (3) of Law No. 162 of 1958, and they are as follows:

(7) Suspension of classes, partially or totally at schools, universities, institutes, and any other educational organizations, and banning any gathering for studying.   And taking all necessary measures regarding the exams, and suspending Nurseries

(13)  Banning all forms of public gatherings, demonstrations and celebrations and other forms of assembles, and limiting private meeting.

(14) Compelling Egyptian expatriates returning home to undergo necessary health and quarantine measures according to health requirements established by the competent authorities.

(15) Banning the export of certain goods and products to abroad.

(16) Imposing restrictions on handling, transferring, selling, or possessing of some goods and products.

(17) Pricing some services, goods, or products.

(18) Set the rules of funding and allocating the cash and in-kind donations to confront the emergency state, and regulate methods of allocating such donations and how to spend it.

(19) Allocating cash and in-kind assistance to individuals and families, and set the rules of spending from it.

(20) Offering financial support for medical research, and taking the necessary measures for preserving the health care system and its continuation.

(21) Obligating, all or some, of private hospitals, specialized medical centers, and laboratories in case of medical emergencies, for certain period, to work with all their medical stuff and operational capacity to provide health care services in general or medical cases suspected of having specific diseases. And that's under the full supervision of the administrative body which determined by the President of the Republic, and this body determines the provisions of operation and management, and the requirements and procedures that private hospitals, specialized medical centers and laboratories shall adhere and the mechanisms to monitor them in their implementation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 



[1] - Vice president of the Egyptian  State Council  ( Administrative Court )

LLM UNIVERITY OF LONDON

PHD ( CAIRO UNIVERSITY )

Former Member of the Egyptian Constituent Assembly, 2012

 

[2]- Presidential decree N.O 168/2020 announcing the state of emergency in Egypt for 3 months from 28/4/2020 till 28/7/2020.

[3]-  Decision council of ministers N.O 154/2020 date 14/3/2020 ((Inclusion of the disease resulting from infection with the "emerging corona" virus, among the infectious diseases shown in the table attached to Law No. 137 of 1958)) , Decision N.O 768 /2020 date 24/3/2020  ( Citizens are prohibited, in all parts of the Republic, to move or move on all roads from seven in the evening until six in the morning, to ward off any possible repercussions of the emerging corona virus.))

Decision N.O 717 /2020 dated on 14/3/2020 ((The study is suspended in all schools, institutes, and universities of any kind, as well as any gatherings of students with the aim of receiving knowledge under any name, and children's immunities of any kind for a period of two weeks from Sunday, March 15, 2020 until Saturday, corresponding to March 28, 2020 as a measure The framework of the country's comprehensive plan to deal with any possible consequences of the emerging corona virus.))

Decision N.O 606/2020 date 9/6/2020 ((In order to take the state to some precautionary measures to confront the Corona virus and to preserve the health of citizens, all activities that require the presence of any large gatherings of citizens or that require their transportation between governorates with large gatherings such as (artistic parties, popular celebrations, birthdays, fairs and festivals) are temporarily suspended. else))

www.alamiria.com

 

[4]- This law is  still in force and applied

[5]-Dr. Samy Gamal El Din , The statutes of emergency and the judicial review ,published by Monsa'at el M'arraf , 2003 , p 323 

[6]-DR. Rafaat Fouda ,  The checks  and balances on the Presidential power at the state of emergency ,Dar El Nahda , 2000 , p 495 , Dr. Safwat M. Salah , The judicial review on the presidential power at the  state of emergency, Dar, El Nahda , 2016 , p 116

[7]-Dr. Sami Gamal , ibid 324

[8]-Dr. Sami Gamal , ibid , p 330

[9]- DR. Ibrahim A.Shiha , Analyzing the Egyptian Constitutional system  Monsaa Marraf , 2003 , p 271

[10]- The presidential decree N.O 366/2014 declaring the state of emergency  in the north of Sinai due to the military demonstrations and terrorism 

[11]-Dr. Ibrahim A .Shiha , ibid , p 272

[12]- Case N.O 6/22 Judiciary , session date 5/2/1977  and Case N.O 295 /24   judiciary session date11/4/2010

[13] - the Administrative Court of Appeal held that ((Whereas, Law No. 162 of 1958 on the State of Emergency granted in the third article of it the President of the Republic the authority to arrest homeless and suspicious persons, as well as those who threaten security and public order, and what was meant by suspicion is the terminological meaning of this phrase contained in Law No. 98 of 1945 regarding displaced persons and suspects, likewise those who are dangerous to security and public order are the people you are threatening to security. They are based on factual facts produced in indicating this meaning, and these facts must be specific acts that prove a person’s committing to it and are directly related to what is intended to be inferred by it, just as a person’s affiliation - if true - to a group with extremist principles or deviates from the constitution or the system Social does not necessarily imply that it is considered one of the threats to security within the meaning of this word, according to the provisions of martial law, as long as it does not commit a personal act and things that would truly describe it in this description.

As the administrative authority did not disclose specific material facts committed by the plaintiff and was fixed against him so that it can be included among the suspects or risk to security and public order as determined by the court’s rulings of the necessity of relying the seriousness on real facts produced in indicating this meaning. The decision to arrest the plaintiff is a violation of the provisions of Article (3) of the previous emergency law that has been referred to in a way that provides the corner for the error on the side of the administrative authority.

Case N.o18909 /56  judiciary , session date 23/10/2005.

It shall be illustrated that the government, during its confrontation COVID-19, is acting as Police Administration, which defines as ((The right of the state to restrict the freedoms of the individuals by undertaking certain protection measures to secure the public order)) ( ).

The public order regulations are required to preserve, secure, and maintain the public interest in its broadest definition which includes: public security, public health, public peace and public morals.

What we are focusing here on is the violation of public health as one of the elements of public order.

                Despite the Constitutional restrictions on the presidential declaration of the state of emergency, there are other restrictions on the governmental measures as police administration.

Owing to the dangerous effects of the police administration, the administration doesn't have not unlimited power or very wide discretionary power. On the contrary, it has limited the discretionary powers as the police administration affects the liberties of the people, so the administration is not working in outer space; instead, it is subjecting to laws as well as the judicial review of its actions.

1)            The Doctrine of Legality ( rule of law )

According to this doctrine, the state and all of its entities are subject to the law with its different hierarchy (Constitution, statutes, regulations, and individual decrees) ).

Therefore, the Administration in the course of performing its powers to confront COVID-19 - as described in the police administration laws and regulations - shall not violate the aforementioned laws and regulations; otherwise, it shall be liable for such illegal actions.

The administration can only act within the laws and regulations, not beyond them( ).

2)            Restricted  by   Objects and Purposes  of the Police   Administration

 As we have previously mentioned, the police administration has a main object or a purpose which is to protect and preserve the public order with its elements: public safety, security, health, and morals. This object or purpose is the only justification for police administration for its interference on the scope of human rights and liberties which can only be banned for the protection of public order.

Ergo, in case the administration – during performing its police administration powers - doesn’t consider the objects or purposes of police administration aiming to achieve private interest or other public interest other than those determined in the police administrative laws and regulation, or its actions and activities are considered to be null and void and the Administrative Court could quash its decisions, additionally, it shall be liable for indemnity. This is the principle of ((Specialized purposes)).( )

Moreover, it held that ((Whereas, the Supreme Administrative Court’s judiciary has settled that the administrative decision is the administration’s disclosure of its binding will with its authority under the laws and regulations with the intent to cause a specific legal effect whenever that is possible and permissible, and the motivator has sought it for a public interest. The jurisprudence and Administrative justice have also settled that the abuse of power does not occur only when the decision is issued targeting private purposes aimed at revenge or the achievement of personal benefit, but is achieved, if the decision was issued contrary to the spirit of the law. The law is not only satisfied with achieving the public interest in its broadest sense, but also with achieving the specified purposes.

The Administrative Court, when it enacted the purposes of the law, didn’t evade from the scope of legality, taking into account that every purpose designated by the law and evaded by regulations or decrees will be quashed by the Court).( )

Therefore, the government, through resisting “COVID-19”, is bound by this object and purpose only and can't use such measures to achieve other public interests. So, the governmental measures will be legitimate as long as they are attached to confront this pandemic and will be regarded as illegal measures even though they achieve public order away from preserving public health.

3)            Reasons of Police Administration

 The police administration is considered to be restricted by human rights and liberties; therefore, there must be factual and legal reasons to justify the police administration. Such reasons must be serious, hence, there must be a serious threat to public order; in other words a real danger immanent to public order.

In this instance, the Supreme Administrative Court held that ((Law No. 533 of 1954 defines cases requiring the declaration of martial law as the transfer of most of the powers of the civil authority in exercising the function of police administration to the authority based on the making of martial law - granting the legislator the authority based on martial law exceptional powers - the general military ruler may take measures aggravating, including the order to arrest and detained those suspected or dangerous to security and public order, putting them in a safe place - the authority of the government in this field is not free from every restriction but rather subject to rules and checks -  there must be a realistic or legal case  to call  for intervention, and the government's behavior is necessary to confront this situation as the only way to confront the situation and its purpose to protect the public interest  - subject to judicial  review…))( ).

Balancing between Powers and Liberties

The State Council ((Administrative Courts)) recognized to the administration wide and dynamic discretionary authority to protect the public order which varied according to importance of liberties in question and the circumstances of the case; therefore, the judiciary put in one side of the sale the liberty in question and in the other hand the circumstances of the case.( )

The powers of the administration will be widened in case of emergencies as wars, pandemics ... etc. and it will be narrowed in ordinary cases.

The Supreme Administrative Court held that ((It is recognized that the Administrative authority, supervising public security, must always take, in cases of necessity similar to the advanced case, temporary measures to maintain security and public order even if, in taking them, prejudices the rights or freedoms of private individuals.))( )

Ergo, the courts will assess every single governmental measure and balance between it and other rights and liberties. In case the scale moves towards the rights and liberties, then the measure will be quashed. On the contrary, if the scale moves towards the measure, then the measure will be recognized.

In the case of balancing, the court will take into account all the surrounding circumstances, the importance of rights, and the harshness of measures.

[14]-Dr. Sami Gamal , ibid , p 351

[15]-Dr. Sami Gamal , ibid , p 352, Dr. Adellah Seif Aly , The extraordinary powers of the head of state in Kuwait comparative study , Dar El Nahda , 2020 , p 577

More

الرسومات المسيئة للاسلام و حرية التعبير عن الرأى

الرسومات المسيئة للاسلام و حرية التعبير عن الرأى

                            اعداد

         المستشار الدكتور / ماجد ممدوح شبيطة

             نائب رئيس مجلس الدولة

الرسومات المسيئة للاسلام و حرية التعبير عن الرأى

                            اعداد

         المستشار الدكتور / ماجد ممدوح شبيطة

             نائب رئيس مجلس الدولة

         ماجستير فى القانون من جامعة لندن

          دكتوراة فى القانون من جامعة القاهرة

 

المقدمة

هذا مخلص بحث كنت قد كتبته باللغه الانجليزية ردا على الرسومات المسيئة من الاسلام و رمز الاسلام صلى الله عليه و سلم فمن اراد الرجوع الى تفاصيل هذا البحث

تتبع الرابط اسفل الصفحة .

نشرت مجلة شارلي إبدو الفرنسية الشهيرة رسومات ساخرة للنبي محمد - نبي الإسلام - أعقبها غضب هائل في جميع أنحاء العالم الإسلامي وحتى في دول أوروبية أخرى تدعو إلى مقاطعة جميع البضائع الفرنسية  على الجانب الآخر ، دافع الرئيس الفرنسي إيمانويل ماكرون عن قرار مجلة شارلي إيبدو بإعادة نشر رسوم كاريكاتورية مسيئة لنبي الإسلام محمد ، قائلاً "لدينا حرية التعبير وحرية المعتقد" ، مما أدى إلى مزيد من الجدل مع القادة الآخرين في العالم.

و في هذا المقال  سنوضح ما إذا كانت هذه الرسوم الكاريكاتورية يمكن اعتبارها حرية التعبير عن الراى وفقا لاحكام الاتفاقية الأوروبية لحقوق الإنسان (ECHR) التي دخلت حيز التنفيذ في 3 سبتمبر 1953 وصدقت عليها فرنسا و بالتالى تعتبر جزءا من القانون الفرنسى 

تنص المادة 10 من الاتفاقية الأوروبية لحقوق الإنسان  على ما يلي: ((لكل إنسان الحق في حرية التعبير. هذا الحق يشمل حرية اعتناق الآراء وتلقى وتقديم المعلومات والأفكار دون تدخل من السلطة العامة، وبصرف النظر عن الحدود الدولية. وذلك دون إخلال بحق الدولة في تطلب الترخيص بنشاط مؤسسات الإذاعة والتلفزيون والسينما.

- هذه الحريات تتضمن واجبات ومسؤوليات. لذا يجوز إخضاعها لشكليات إجرائية، وشروط، وقيود، وعقوبات محددة في القانون حسبما تقتضيه الضرورة في مجتمع ديمقراطي، لصالح الأمن القومي، وسلامة الأراضي، وأمن الجماهير وحفظ النظام ومنع الجريمة، وحماية الصحة والآداب، واحترام حقوق الآخرين، ومنع إفشاء الأسرار، أو تدعيم السلطة وحياد القضاء))

كما تنص المادة 9 من ذات الاتفاقية على ما يلى ((لكل إنسان الحق في حرية التفكير والضمير والعقيدة. هذا الحق يشمل حرية تغيير الدين أو العقيدة، وحرية إعلان الدين أو العقيدة بإقامة الشعائر والتعليم والممارسة والرعاية، سواء على انفراد أو بالاجتماع مع آخرين، بصفة علنية أو في نطاق خاص.
2-
تخضع حرية الإنسان في إعلان ديانته أو عقيدته فقط للقيود المحددة في القانون والتي تكون ضرورية في مجتمع ديمقراطي لصالح أمن الجمهور وحماية النظام العام والصحة والآداب أو لحماية حقوق الآخرين وحرياتهم.))

و  تعد حرية التعبير من أهم الحقوق و لهذا قضت المحكمة الاوربيه لحقوق لانسان ان حرية التعبير تعتبر من  ((... الأسس الأساسية لمثل هذا المجتمع ، وهي من الشروط الأساسية لتقدمه وتطور كل إنسان. مع مراعاة الفقرة 2 من المادة 10 ، لا ينطبق فقط على المعلومات أو الأفكار التي يتم تلقيها أو اعتبارها غير مؤذية أو باعتبارها مسألة لا مبالاة فحسب ، بل تنطبق أيضًا على تلك التي تسيء إلى الدولة أو أي قطاع من السكان أو تصدمها أو تزعجها. هذه هي مطالب ذلك التعددية والتسامح ورحابة الأفق التي بدونها لا يوجد "مجتمع ديمقراطي". وهذا يعني ، من بين أمور أخرى ، أن كل "إجراء شكلي" أو شرط أو قيد أو عقوبة مفروضة في هذا المجال يجب أن تكون متناسبة مع الهدف المشروع المنشود))[1].

غير انه كثيرا ما يحدث التشابك بين حرية التعبير و حرية العقيدة , و قد حدث هذا فى اكثر من مناسبة بسبب اصرار جانب من الكتاب او المفكرين الاوروبيين على التدخل و السخرية من الجانب العقدى سواء لدى المسلمين او حتى من غيرهم و قد صرحت المحكمة الاوروبيه لحقوق الانسان فى اكثر من حكم ان حرية التعبير لا تعنى المساس بحرية العقيدة , و ان السخرية من الدين لا يتمتع بالحماية القانونية [2].

و بخصوص الرسوم المسيئة للنبى عليه الصلاة و السلام فقد سبق للمحكمة الاوروبية لحقوق الانسان فى حكم حديث لها متعلق بقيام كاتبه فى النمسا بنشر كلام مسىء  عن النبى عليه الصلاةو السلام  فقامت المحاكم المحلية بالنمسا الى ادانة الكاتبة فطعنت امام المحكمة الاوروبيه لحقوق الانسان  ,فقضت المحكمة (( ....ان  المحاكم المحلية قامت بتقييم شامل للسياق الأوسع لتصريحات المدعية ، ووازنت بعناية حقها في حرية التعبير مع حقوق الآخرين في حماية مشاعرهم الدينية والحفاظ على السلام الديني في المجتمع النمساوي. وناقشت الحدود المسموح بها لانتقاد المذاهب الدينية مقابل استخفافهم ، ووجدوا أن تصريحات الطاعنه  من المحتمل أن تثير استياءً مبررًا لدى المسلمين. بالإضافة إلى ذلك ، تعتبر المحكمة أن التصريحات المطعون فيها لم تتم صياغتها بطريقة محايدة تهدف إلى تقديم مساهمة موضوعية في نقاش عام يتعلق بزواج الأطفال ، ولكنها ترقى إلى التعميم دون اسانيد موضوعيه وهكذا ، من خلال اعتبارها تجاوزت الحدود المسموح بها للنقاش الموضوعي وتصنيفها على أنها هجوم مسيء على نبي الإسلام ، كان من شأنه إثارة التحيز وتعريض السلم الديني للخطر ، توصلت المحاكم المحلية إلى نتيجة مفادها: احتواء  الوقائع موضع البحث على عناصر تحريض على التعصب الديني. تقبل المحكمة أنها بذلك قدمت أسبابًا كافية وذات صلة وتجد أن التدخل في حقوق المدعي بموجب المادة 10 يتوافق بالفعل مع حاجة اجتماعية ملحة وكان متناسبًا مع الهدف المشروع المنشود))[3].

و انتهت المحكمة انه عقوبة الطاعنه لا تتعارض مع حرية التعبير .

و كذلك ذهبت المحكمة فى دعوى اخرى  متعلقه بقيام كاتب تركى بنشر عبارات مسيئة للنبى عليه الصلاة و السلام   فقامت الحكومة التركية بمصادرة ادوات النشر و معاقبة الجانى فطعن امام المحكمة الاوروبيه لحقوق الانسان والتى ايدت موقف الحكومة التركية فقضت  ((....إن القضية الحالية لا تتعلق فقط بالتعليقات المهينة أو الصادمة ، أو الرأي "الاستفزازي" ، بل تتعلق أيضًا بالاعتداء التعسفي على نبي الإسلام. على الرغم من حقيقة أن هناك تسامحًا معينًا مع نقد العقيدة الدينية داخل المجتمع التركي ، والذي يرتبط ارتباطًا وثيقًا بمبدأ العلمانية ، فقد يشعر المؤمنون بأنفسهم بشكل شرعي بأنهم هدف لهجمات  غير مبررة ...... لذلك ترى المحكمة أن الإجراء المتخذ فيما يتعلق بالبيانات قيد البحث كان يهدف إلى توفير الحماية من الهجمات  على الأمور التي يعتبرها المسلمون مقدسة. وفي هذا الصدد ، وجدت أن التدبير قد يكون معقولاً أنه يلبي "حاجة اجتماعية ملحة"...))[4]

و من جميع ما سبق أن المحكمة طبقت  عدة معايير بشكل تبادلى  في الموازنة بين الحقين- الحق فى حرية التعبير و حرية العقيدة -  و التى بناء عليها يتم تقييد حرية التعبير بحيث لا تنطو على مساس بحرية العقيدة وهذه المعايير هى :

: 1) عندما يجد المؤمنون أنفسهم هدفا لهجوم عدواني لا مبرر له.

-2 إذا كان الكلام يثير الكراهية.

3 )عندما يعرض الخطاب  السلم الديني للخطر.

4 )عندما يكون الكلام دون مبرر مسيئًا و مهينا  للآخرين.

(5اذا كان الخطاب قد تمت صياغته بشكل عام دون اية اسس موضوعيه .

. 6) عندما يتسبب الخطاب في التحريض على التعصب الدينى.

7) إذا تسبب الخطاب في هجوم مسيء على شخصية رمزية دينية.

و من ثم  ، ومن خلال تطبيق  السوابق القضائية للمحكمة الأوروبية لحقوق الإنسان على الرسوم الكاريكاتورية الساخرة لشارلي إيبدو والتي أظهرت نبي الإسلام كرجل يرتدي قنابل إرهابية في رأسه ، وتعتبر هذه الرسوم غير مبررة وهجومية بالإضافة إلى أنها عامة  بدون أي أساسً موضوعيه  ، فضلا عن كونها هجوم مسيء على نبي الإسلام صلى الله عليه و سلم ، وتؤدى الى اثارة التعصب الدينى و  الكراهية في المجتمع الأوروبي بالكامل وبالتالى لا تتمتع بالحماية القانونية المقرره لحرية التعبير و لا تعتبر كذلك اصلا و انما هى محض رسوم تدعو للكراهيه كما سبق و اسلفنا .

 

 

 


[1] ECHR, Handyside v UK A24 (1976):1 EHRR 737 para 49 PC.

[2] MURPHY v. IRELAND (Application no. 44179/98)JUDGMENT ,of 10 July 2003 ,38 E.H.R.R.13

 https://hudoc.echr.coe.int

وقائع هذه الدعوى تتخلص فى سخرية بعض الكتاب فى ايرلندا من العقيدة الكاثوليكية , فقامت ايرلندا بمصادرة الكتاب و توقيع عقوبات على الناشر و هذا ما ايدته المحكمة الاوروبيه لحقوق الانسان على اساس ان حرية التعبير يجب الا تتناول الاديان 

[3]E.S. v. AUSTRIA. (Application no. 38450/12),18/03/2019,

 

[4] CASE OF I.A. v. TURKEY (Application no. 42571/98) Judgment 13 September 2005

 

More

Research

Home

طريقة اختيار رئيس الدولة وآثرها على أداء السلطات العامة في النظام الدستوري دراسة مقارنة بين النظامين المصري والأمريكي دراسة لنيل درجة الدكتوراه فى القانون

    كلية الحقوق
قسم القانون العام

طريقة اختيار رئيس الدولة

وآثرها على أداء السلطات العامة
في النظام الدستوري

دراسة مقارنة بين…

    كلية الحقوق
قسم القانون العام

طريقة اختيار رئيس الدولة

وآثرها على أداء السلطات العامة
في النظام الدستوري

دراسة مقارنة بين النظامين المصري والأمريكي

دراسة لنيل درجة الدكتوراه فى القانون

مقدمة من الباحث

ماجد ممدوح كامل شبيطة
عضو مجلس الدولة

لجنة الحكم على الرسالة

1/الأستاذ الدكتور/ ثروت بدوي          "مشرفاً ورئيساً"

    أستاذ القانون العام - كلية الحقوق - جامعة القاهرة

2/ الأستاذ الدكتور/ محمد أنس جعفر       "عضواً"

 أستاذ القانون العام - كلية الحقوق – جامعة بنى سويف

3/ الأستاذ الدكتور/ محمد محمد بدران     "عضواً"

    أستاذ القانون العام - كلية الحقوق - جامعة القاهرة

4/ الأستاذ الدكتور/ جابر جاد نصار     "مشرفاً وعضواً"

    أستاذ القانون العام - كلية الحقوق - جامعة القاهرة


المقدمة

تعتبر الديمقراطية  هدفا سميا تسعى مختلف الدول و المجتمعات  للوصول إليه باعتبارها صمام أمان يصون الدولة من التيارات العاصفة التى قد تودى بحياة الدولة كلها أو على الأقل تأتى على ثمارها التى جنتها على مر السنين و الأيام.

و لهذا , فقد اعتنت النظم المختلفة بتحديد العلاقة بين الحكام والمحكومين وبين الجهات الحاكمة بعضها والبعض , ولم يكن هذا الاعتناء من قبل النظم الحديثة فقط بل إن النظم القديمة كان لها قدم السبق فى هذا المقام , فعلى سبيل المثال لا الحصر في الشريعة الإسلامية الغراء  زخرت مؤلفات  الفقهاء المسلمين ببيان هذه العلاقة و طبيعتها وحدودها وضوابطها, و هذا لم يكن من قبيل الترف الفقهى و إنما وصولا بالمجتمع إلى أسمى درجات الرقى و السمو([1]) ,وإذا كانت هذه المجتمعات على بساطتها فى سبل حياتها قد اعتنت جل الاعتناء بقضية الديمقراطية فنحن وصولا إلى هذا الهدف أحوج .

To Down

More
Home

The President at the American Constitution

تعتبر الديمقراطية  هدفا سميا تسعى مختلف الدول والمجتمعات للوصول إليه باعتبارها صمام أمان يصون الدولة من التيارات العاصفة التي قد تودى بحياة الدولة كلها أو على الأقل تأتى على…

تعتبر الديمقراطية  هدفا سميا تسعى مختلف الدول والمجتمعات للوصول إليه باعتبارها صمام أمان يصون الدولة من التيارات العاصفة التي قد تودى بحياة الدولة كلها أو على الأقل تأتى على ثمارها التي جنتها على مر السنين و الأيام.
http://wasfmisr.com/dr/uploads/files/book.pdf

 

More
Home

arbitration in administrative contracts

 

أحكام القضاء الادارى المتعلقة ببطلان بيع  شركات قطاع الاعمال العام و كيفية معالجة اثارها .

اعداد / المستشار الدكتور

 

أحكام القضاء الادارى المتعلقة ببطلان بيع  شركات قطاع الاعمال العام و كيفية معالجة اثارها .

اعداد / المستشار الدكتور

ماجد ممدوح شبيطة

وكيل مجلس الدولة

 

 

 

 

 

 

تمهيد و تقسيم

لا شك ان الاحكام الصادرة من محكمة القضاء الإداري و من وراءها المحكمة الادارية ببطلان عقود بيع شركات قطاع الاعمال العام –فى اطار سياسة الخصخصة – على الرغم من وجود شرط تحكيم فى العقد , كان له بالغ الاثر سواء على المستويين المحلى او الدولى سيما فى تعاقدات الدولة المستقبلية لجذب استثمارات جديدة .

و فى هذه الدراسة لن يتم التعرض للأحكام القضائية بالنقد باعتبار ان الحكم عنوان الحقيقية  و انما غاية ما فى هذا البحث هو محاولة وضع تصور لمعالجة الاثار المترتبة على صدور هذه الاحكام , مع الاخذ فى الاعتبار ان القاضي الإداري ليس رجل اقتصاد  و لا رجل استثمار و انما هو قاضى القانون العام , فهو يحكم وفقا لنصوص القانون التى امامه فحسب دون التعرض  الى النواحي الاقتصادية و الاستثمارية لحكمه , و لذا فقد يترتب على حكم المحكمة اثارا اقتصادية و مالية خطيرة قد يتعذر احيانا تداركها مما يوقع الدولة المصرية فى حرج امام الرأي العام العالمي , سيما و ان تقديرات المبالغ المرفوع بها قضايا تحكيم دولية تتجاوز 20 مليار دولار [1], بحيث تزيد على الاحتياطي النقدي لمصر اصلا [2] , و لذا فان موضوع البحث ليس من قبيل الترف العلمي و انما محاولة لوضع المشكلة فى حجمها الحقيقي ووضع تصور لكيفية علاجها. 

و سوف نقوم بتقسيم البحث الى المباحث الاتية :

المبحث الاول / القضاء الإداري و التحكيم بين القبول و الرفض .

المبحث الثانى / الاسس التى قامت عليها احكام بطلان عقود بيع قطاع الاعمال العام .

المبحث الثالث / كيفية معالجة اثار احكام بطلان عقود بيع قطاع الاعمال العام .

المبحث الاول / القضاء الإداري و التحكيم بين القبول و الرفض

قد يرى البعض ان مسالة العلاقة بين القضاء الإداري و التحكيم اصبحت من الماضي  و ذلك بصدور القانون رقم 27 لسنة 1994 بشأن التحكيم التجارى الدولى و تعديله بالقانون رقم 9 لسنة 1997 و الذى اجاز التحكيم فى العقود الادارية , الا ان الامر ليس كذلك , فلابد لمعرفة كيفية اصدار حكم القضاء الإداري  لابد من كشف  الخلفية الذهنية للقاضي الإداري عن التحكيم , فهو ليس بمعزل عن تاريخه الدستوري و القانوني .

بداية نقول ان الراي الغالب فى الفقه الإداري  المصري كان يرى عدم جواز التحكيم فى العقود الادارية – قبل صدور قانون التحكيم رقم 27 لسنة 1994 – و استند هذا الرأي الى عدة حجج لعل من أهمها :

1)  مساس التحكيم بسيادة الدولة: باعتبار ان التحكيم يتعارض مع مبدأ سيادة الدولة من الاساس لأنه بناء على اتفاق التحكيم يتم تسوية النزاع بعيدا عن القضاء الوطني ,بواسطة محكم قد يكون اجنبي و يطبق قانون غالبا ما يكون قانون اجنبي .

2)  اللجوء للتحكيم يمثل اعتداء على اختصاص القضاء الوطني :

و ذلك على اساس ان المادة 10 من قانون مجلس الدولة رقم 47 لسنة 1972 نصت على فى فقترتها الحادية عشر (( تختص محاكم مجلس الدولة دون غيرها بالفصل فى المنازعات الخاصة بعقود الالتزام و الاشغال العامة و التوريد او بأي عقد ادارى اخر ..))

و ان العقود الادارية لها طبيعة خاصة تختلف فيه عن العقود المدنية كما ان لها احكام مميزة لها تخالف الشريعة العامة و هذه الاحكام قضائية النشأة من خلق و ابداع القضاء الإداري فى المقام الاول و من ثم يصعب التسليم بخضوع منازعات تلك العقود للتحكيم .

3)  اللجوء للتحكيم يتعارض مع النظام العام للدولة :

قد تبدو هذه العبارة صادمة الا ان هذا الرأي حقيقة يرى ان اللجوء للتحكيم يمثل عدوانا ليس فقط على القضاء الوطني و انما على ان النظام العام للدولة على سند ان القاعدة فى القانون الإداري هو تغليب المصلحة العامة على المصلحة الخاصة , و من ثم لا يجوز اللجوء للتحكيم فى عقود ادارية تغلب فيها ارادة الدولة على ارادة غيرها من الافراد او الشركات الخاصة .[3]

و هذا الرأي قد لاقى قبول القضاء الإداري فى مصر حيث قضت المحكمة الادارية العليا - فى دعوى الشهيرة بعقد امتياز هضبة الاهرام و الذى وقعته وزارة الاسكان و التعمير مع الشكرة المصرية المساهمة للتعمير و الانشاءات السياحية , و قد تضمن العقد فى البند الخامس منه على ان (كل خلاف بين الطرفين على تفسير او تنفيذ الاحكام التى ضمنها الاتفاق و عقد 9 من نوفمبر سنة 1954 و شروط التنازل يفصل فيه عن طريق التحكيم ..)-

(( و من  حيث ان اتفاق 14 من ابريل سنة 1955 الملحق يعتبر استغلال منطقة قصر المنتزه و استصلاح و تعمير منطقة جبل المقطم المبرم فى 9 من نوفمبر سنة 1954 صدر فى ظل احكام القانون رقم 165 لسنة 1955 فى شأن مجلس الدولة و الساري اعتبارا من 26/3/1955 و قد نصت المادة العاشرة فيه على ان( يفصل مجلس الدولة بهيئة قضاء ادارى دون غيره فى المنازعات الخاصة بعقود الالتزام و الاشغال العامة وو التوريد او بأي عقد ادارى اخر ) و من ثم يتعين تفسير نص البند الخامس من الاتفاق المشار اليه بما لا يتعارض مع أحكام المادة 10  سالفة الذكر .

ثم قامت بتبرير التناقض الفج بين قانون منح الامتياز للشركة و بين قانون مجلس الدولة رقم 165 لسنة 1955 بان قانون مجلس الدولة قانون موضوعي فى حين ان قانون منح امتياز المرافق العامة يعد من قبيل الاعمال الادارية التي تقوم بها السلطة التشريعية كنوع من الوصاية على السلطة التنفيذية و هذه الاعمال ليست قوانين من حيث الموضوع و ان كانت تأخذ شكل القانون )[4]

فى حكم اخر صريح لمحكمة القضاء الإداري قضت المحكمة فى الدعوى الخاصة بنفق الشهيد احمد حلمى حينما دفعت الشركة بعدم اختصاص المحكمة لوجود شرط التحكيم بالعقد الا ان المحكمة رفضت الدفع و قضى صراحة بانه لا يجوز التحكيم فى العقود الادارية لكونه يسلب اختصاص محاكم مجلس الدولة المقرر بالمادة 10 من قانون مجلس الدولة رقم 47 لسنة 1972[5].

و على العكس من هذا ذهبت الجمعية العمومية لقسمي الفتوى و التشريع الى موقف اكثر مرونة حيث افتت بجواز التحكيم فى العقود الادارية , و ان اللجوء الى التحكيم لا يتعارض مع الروابط الادارية , و انه لا وجه للاحتجاج بنص المادة 10 من قانون مجلس الدولة لقصر الفصل فى منازعات العقود الادارية على محاكم مجلس الدولة لان غاية النص هو بين الحد الفاصل للاختصاص بين القضاء العادي و مجلس الدولة .[6]

و نخلص من هذا ان موقف القضاء الإداري متمثلا فى احكام المحكمة الادارية يرى عدم جواز التحكيم فى العقود الادارية باعتبارها تمثل اعتداء على اختصاصه الدستوري بنظر المنازعات الادارية و بالقطع مثل هذا الامر يعتبر اخلالا بالنظام العام للدولة المصرية .

هذه هى الخلفية الذهنية للقاضي الإداري حيال نظره اى دعوى تحتوى  على شرط تحكيم , و لا يظن ظان ان صدور قانون التحكيم فى المواد المدنية و التجارية رقم 27 لسنة 1994 و تعديله بالقانون رقم 9 لسنة 1997 – على الرغم من النص الصريح فيه على جواز التحكيم فى العقود الادارية بشرط موافقة الوزير المختص – قد انهى هذه المرحلة , فانه و بالرغم من صدور القانون رقم 9 لسنة 1997 الا ان القاضي الإداري  ينظر الى جواز التحكيم في منازعات العقود الادارية نظرة قلق بالنظر الى ما تنفرد به من خصوصية اتصالها بسير المرفق العام ضمانا لحسن سيرها بانتظام و اضطراد مع حفظ التوازن المالي فى تنفيذ العقود [7].

و على هذا فان البحث عن معاجلة اثار احكام القضاء الإداري ببطلان عقود بيع قطاع الاعمال العام و المتضمنة شرط تحكيم بعيدا عن القاضي الإداري نفسه سيكون ضربا من العبث على نحو ما سنرى لاحقا .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

المبحث الثانى: الاسس التى قامت عليها احكام بطلان عقود بيع قطاع الاعمال العام .

المتتبع للأحكام محكمة القضاء الادارى و من وراءها المحكمة الادارية العليا بخصوص بطلان عقود بيع قطاع الاعمال العام , انها قامت على عدة أسس – بعيدا عما انطوت عليه بعض الدعاوى من خصوصية معينة – و لعل من أهم هذه الاسباب المشتركة للأحكام و هو التوسع فى مفهوم شرط المصلحة ,فقد ذهبت المحكمة الادارية العليا الى انه ( و لما كانت المادة 30 من الدستور الحالى تنص على ان الملكية العامة هى ملكية الشعب و تتمثل ملكية الدولة و الاشخاص الاعتبارية العامة ) كما تنص المادة 33 منه على ان ( للملكية العامة حرمة و حمايتها و دعمها واجب على كل مواطن وفقا للقانون )

و من حيث ان مفاد ذلك ان الملكية العامة تتمثل فى الاموال المملوكة للدولة او للأشخاص الاعتبارية العامة و منها الهيئات العامة ,و ان هذه الاموال مملوكة للشعب بكل افراده ملكية شيوع , الامر الذى يجعل لكل مواطن من افراد هذا الشعب حقا فى هذه الاموال له- بل عليه -ان يهب للدفاع عنه وفق ما يقرره القانون ))[8]

و قد تكرر ذات فى العديد من احكام بيع القطاع العام مثل حكم بطلان بيع شركة المراجل البخارية,  فعلى هذا الحكم تكفى صفة المواطنة للقول بتوافر شرط المصلحة فى الدعوى , و هذا في تقديري اقرب ما يكون الى دعوى الحسبة .

من الاسس المشتركة كذلك بين هذه الاحكام هو القول بوجود فساد مالي  فى تقييم الشركة المبيع او القول بوجود تدخل اجنبى بهدف بيع مقدرات الشعب المصري .

و فى هذا تقول محكمة القضاء الادارى (( فان الثابت من الاوراق ان تقييم اصول شركة النصر للمراجل البخارية وأوعية الضغط و اعادة التقييم قد تم وفقا لاسس باطلة و مهدرة للمال العام على النحو السالف بيانه و تتمثل اهم مخالفات التقييم فيما يلى :

المخالفة الاولى: ان تقييم شركة النصر للمراجل البخارية و اوعية الضغط الى اعده المكتب الاستشاري (كوبرز اند ليبرنت ) قد شابه عيب فنى و مالى تبنيته لجنة مراجعة اسس تقييم الشركة المشكلة بالقرار رقم 109 لسنة 1993 .....تمثل ان المكتب الاستشاري اتخذ من بعض طرق التقييم وسيلة لتحديد قيمة الشركة حال كونها لا تصلح و هى التقييم بأسلوب القيمة الدفترية و هى قيمة تاريخية و اسلوب القيمة الاستبدالي و هي قيمة غير واقعية .

المخالفة الثانية :ان تقييم المكتب الاستشارى للشركة على اساس قيمة التدفقات النقدية قد تم باحتساب القيمة على اساس 25 عاما من عام 1993 حتى عام 2017 الا ان الدراسة بينت اسس التقديرات حتى عام 2000 و لم تبين اسس التقديرات من عام 2001 و حتى عام 2017  وانما كررت ذات تقديرات عام 2000 على باقى السنوات بما اثر على التقييم و اورد لها قيمة غير حقيقية ...

المخالفة الثالثة مخالفة التقييم للقيمة الحقيقية لأصول الشركة لقيامة على تقديرات لا اساس لها نتيجة لعدم ورود البيانات الاساسية للتقييم و المتمثلة فى بيانات مراجل محطات القوى و الاستثمارات الاضافية و حجم الايرادات و هو ما يؤثر بالسلب على نتائج الدراسة و على تحديد القيمة .

المخالفة الرابعة ان التقييم اخذ فى الاعتبار تخفيض العمالة بمعدل من 25%الى 50% بينما الثابت ان عددا من العروض اشتملت على تشغيل العمالة بالكامل .

المخالفة الخامسة ان تقييم المكتب الاستشارى للشركة تم على اساس القيمة السوقية على اساس ميزانية 1991 و كان من المتعين اتمامها على اسس اخر ميزانية معتمدة عند التقييم و هى ميزانية 1993 .........))[9]

 

 اما بخصوص التدخل الاجنبى فقد ذهبت محكمة القضاء الادارى الى ( و مفاد ما تقدم انه تخير الشركات لإخضاعها للخصخصة لم تكن قائمة على الدراسة و التنظيم و انما كانت اختيارا عشوائيا لا ضابط له , فلم تكن ثمة ضرورة ملحة اوجبت التصرف فى المال العام المملوك للدولة ببيع شركة مصر شبين الكوم للغزل و النسيج ,اذ لم تكن عبئا على خزانة الدولة يعوق اداءها لواجباتها المقررة قانونا سيما و قد ثبت انها كانت شركة رابحة الامر الذى يضحى معه تخير اللجنة الوزارية للخصخصة لشركة مصر شبين الكوم للغزل و النسيج لخصخصتها اختيارا لا يبرره اى سند من القانون و لا تكون خصخصة تلك الشركة الا استجابة لمتطلبات تمويل الجهات الاجنبية لقرارات الخصخصة فى مصر و التى كانت خير شاهد على التدخل السافر فى الشؤون الاقتصادية الداخلية للبلاد و تسخير اموال المنح و الهبات المشروطة للمساس بسيادة الوطن و تحقيق غايات الخصخصة دون النظر لأية اعتبارات اجتماعية , و ذلك على نحو ما تكشف عنه اتفاقية منحة مشروع الخصخصة بين حكومتى مصر و الولايات المتحدة الامريكية ......))[10]

و فى حكم اخر لها قالت المحكمة (( و حيث و لئن كانت العولمة دفاعا لخصخصة الشركات و الملكية العامة فى مصر و فان هذه المحكمة قد هالها ما انطوت عليه الدعوى من معالم الفساد الذى عاث فى املاك الدولة و اموالها فاستباحها و اهدرها لتنوه تمويل الجهات الاجنبية لقرارات الخصخصة فى مصر الذى جاء ضمن حزمة من الاجراءات التزمت بها مصر للوصول الى اتفاق مع البنك الدولى و صندوق النقد الدولى للتخلص من نصف ديونها الخارجية مطلع تسعينات القرن الماضى و التى كانت خير شاهد على التدخل السافر فى الشؤون الاقتصادية الداخلية للبلاد و تسخير اموال المنح و الهبات المشروطة للمساس بسيادة الوطن و تحقيق غايات الخصخصة دون النظر لاية اعتبارات اجتماعية ...))[11]

ليس عذا فحسب بل ان المحكمة احيانا تحدد الاسلوب الامثل للمعاملة بدلا من البيع و فى هذا تقول محكمة القضاء الإداري (( عملية بيع شركة المراجل البخارية لم تكن الاسلوب الامثل للخصخصة و انما الاكثر جدوى هو *المشاركة* , بطلان البيع لعدم استهدافه لأى مصلحة عامة سوى الرغبة المحمومة للتخلص من هذه الصناعة و تلك الشركة , و ان الجهاز المركزى للمحاسبات قد عاب على كراسة الشروط تضمنها امكانية بيع اصول الشركة بالكامل بالمخالفة للإعلان عن المزايدة بالصحف اليومية ....))[12]

-        السبب الثالث التى اقامت عليها المحكمة قضاءها هو بطلان شرط التحكيم حال عدم موافقة الوزير المختص بيد ان المحكمة بخصوص التحكيم فى العقود الادارية قد قررت بعض المبادئ و منها الاتى :

المبدأ الاول : ان منازعات العقود الادارية يكون الاتفاق على التحكيم فيها بموافقة الوزير المختص او من يتولى اختصاصه بالنسبة للاشخاص الاعتبارية العامة و لا يجوز التفويض فى ذلك .

المبدأ الثانى : عدم جواز الاتفاق على التحكيم الا للشخص الطبيعي او الاعتبارى الذى يملك التصرف فى حقوقه .

المبدأ الثالث : الاصل هو عدم جواز التحكيم فى  منازعات  العقود الادارية , و ان موافقة الوزير على شرط التحكيم فى منازعات العقود  الادارية هى شرط جوهري يترتب على تخلفه بطلان الشرط ذاته , و ان موافقة الوزير المختص الممثل لوزارته على شرط التحكيم من النظام العام اذ لا يصح شرط التحكيم فى منازعات العقد الادارى الا بوجودها و ضوابطها المقررة قانونا  و ان  تخلفها على  اى  نحو يبطل الشرط و يصير عدما لا تتغير به ولاية او اختصاص  و يبطل كل اجراء جرى حال تخلف تلك الموافقة .

المبدأ الرابع : ان الخطاب التشريعى بمضمون القاعدة القانونية موجه لطرفى العقد ممن رغبوا فى ادراج شرط التحكيم فى منازعات العقود الادارية المبرمة بينهما , فليس لطرف ان يلقى بعبء التأكد من تحقق الموافقة على الطرف الاخر .[13]

و تجدر الملاحظة ان محكمة القضاء الادارى و من وراءها المحكمة الادارية العليا قد  اقرتا ان الاصل هو عدم جواز التحكيم فى العقود الادارية –و ليس العكس – و ان موافقة الوزير المختص على شرط هو سبب الاباحة و فى حال تخلف هذا الشرط –اى موافقة الوزير المختص – فان ذلك لا يرفع اختصاص محكمة القضاء الإداري بنظر الدعوى بحسبان ان اختصاص المحكمة المقرر دستوريا و كذا موافقة الوزير المختص يعتبران من النظام العام و بالتالي على المحكمة التصدي من تلقاء نفسها دون دفع من اى طرف لبحث مدى توافر شرط موافقة الوزير من عدمه .

بيد ان الجمعية العمومية لقسمي الفتوى و التشريع كان لها رأى مخالف فافتت (( استقر القضاء على ان ثبوت واقعة الغلط من مسائل الواقع التى تستقل بتقديرها محكمة الموضوع فى كل حالة على حده –لما كان شرط التحكيم يعتبر اتفاقا مستقلا عن شروط العقد الاخرى فانه يلزم لنفاذة توافر الاركان و الشروط المتطلبة قانونا من رضا صريح غير مشوب بعيب من العيوب و محل قابل للتعامل فيه و سبب مشروع , فاذا ثبت ان قبول جهة الادارة لشرط التحكيم كان نتيجة لغلط فى القانون , و كان المتعاقد الاخر على صلة بهذه الغلط فان كان مشتركا فيه او عالما به او كام من السهل عليه ان يتنبه فان هذا الشرط يكون قابلا للأبطال بعد ثبوت الغلط على الوجه الذى تسفر عنه الحقيقة القضائية عند النزاع و شأن الغلط فى القانون شأن الغلط فى الواقع من حيث انجراح الادارة و ما يترتب عليه ذلك من قابلية العقد للأبطال اما اذا لم يكن هناك غلط شاب قبول جهة الادارة لهذا الشرط او كان هناك غلط لم يتصل به المتعاقد معها على اى وجه من الوجوه سالفة الاشارة فان الشرط يكون لازما اعماله لما تلاقت عليه ارادة الطرفين  .....  ))[14].

و فى مسالة مشابهه قضت محكمة النقض بان مخالفة جهة الادارة لقانون مجلس الدولة بشأن الحصول على استفتاء ادارة الفتوى المختصة بمجلس الدولة قبل ابرام اتفاق تحكيم لا يترتب عليه بطلان البطلان لعدم النص الصريح على هذا الجزاء و بالتالي لا يعدو ان يكون الجزاء المترتب على تلك المخالفة جزاء تأديبيا يتحمله الموظف الإداري المعنى بالمخالفة .[15]

و جدير بالذكر فان التزام الدولة بتعاقداتها يعتبر من قبيل النظام الدولي  , فلا يجوز للدولة الاحتجاج بقانون داخلي للتنصل من التزاماتها الدولية و هذا ما قضت به محكمة استئناف القاهرة صراحة بان الدفع ببطلان شرط التحكيم بعد الاتفاق عليه فى احد العقود الادارية فضلا عن انعدام سنده القانونى – يتنافى مع مبدا وجوب تنفيذ الالتزامات بحسن نية الذى يميز بين عقود مدنية و ادارية , كما انه يخالف المستقر عليه فى فقه و قضاء التحكيم التجارى الدولى من عدم جواز تحلل الدولة او الاشخاص العامة من شرط التحكيم الذى ادرجته فى عقودها استنادا الى اى قيود تشريعية حتى و ان كانت حقيقية ))[16]

و لهذا فانه طبقا لحكم محكمة القضاء الادارى و المؤيد من قبل العليا فاننا نجد انفسنا امام تعارض بين النظام العام الداخلى و النظام العام الدولى , و هو موقف شديد التعقيد من حيث كيفية علاج هذا التعارض , و هذا ما سنحاول الاجابة عنه فى النقاط التالية  .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

المبحث الثالث / كيفية معالجة اثار احكام بطلان عقود بيع قطاع الاعمال العام .

انتهينا فى المبحث السابق من بيان ان احكام محكمة القضاء الادارى باعتبار موافقة الوزير المختص من النظام العام ستؤدى الى وجود حالة من التعارض بين النظام العام الداخلى و النظام العام الدولى و المتمثل فى التزام الدولة بتنفيذ تعاقداتها و عدم الاحتجاج بقانون داخلى للتنصل من هذا الالتزام .

و قبل الولوج فى معترك معالجة الاثار اشير الى ان بداية معالجة الاثار تبدأ من القاضي الإداري نفسه , و اى حل بعيدا عن القاضي الادارى مصيره الفشل , فهذا القاضى الجليل يحتاج الى الاطلاع على تجارب الدول المختلفة فى التحكيم , و معرفة جوانبه الدقيقة , وان علاقته بالتحكيم لا تقوم على سبيل المنافسة بل على سبيل التكامل لما فيه مصلحة البلاد.

و عند معالجتنا لكيفية معالجة اثار هذه الاحكام لابد من التفرقة بين حالتين  كل على حده .

الحالة الاولى :و هى النزاعات التى صدر فيها احكاما بالفعل من محكمة القضاء الادارى ببطلان عقود بيع هذه الشركات .

و هذه الاحكام الصادرة من القضاء الادارى و المؤيد من قبل المحكمة الادارية العليا  تعتبر حجة على الكافة , و تلتزم الدولة بتنفيذها فورا , الا ان القاعدة انه اذا استحال التنفيذ العينى فانه ينتقل على التنفيذ بطريق التعويض , و هذا ما افتت به الجمعيه العمومية لقسمى الفتوى و التشريع حديثا  بخصوص كيفية تنفيذ الحكم الصادر من محكمة القضاء الادارى بجلسة 21/9/2011 فى الدعوى رقم 34248 لسنة 65ق بشأن شركة طنطا للكتان و الزيوت و كذا حكمها بجلسة 17/12/2011 فى الدعوى رقم 37452 لسنة 65ق بشأن شركة النيل لحليج الاقطان و المؤيدين بحكمى المحكمة الادارية العليا الصادرين برفض الطعون القمامة ضدهما -بعد ان استعرضت المادتين  رقمى  203 , 215 من القانون المدنى و كذا المادة 52 من قانون مجلس الدولة -  بان (( الاحكام القضائية القطعيه الصادرة عن محاكم مجلس الدولة تفرض نفسها كعنوان للحقيقة , و يلزم تنفيذها نزولا على  قوة الامر المقضى الثابته لها قانونا و التى تشمل على نحو ما تقدم الحجية لكون الامر المقضى التى اكتسبها الحكم تعلو على اعتبارات النظام العام بما لا يسوغ معه قانونا – مع نهائية الحكم – اعادة مناقشته , و انما التسليم بما قضى , لانه هو عنوان الحقيقة , و ان مقتضى تنفيذ الحكم الحائز على لقوة الامر المقضى , ان يتم تنفيذه بالمدى الذى عينه الحكم , فيجب ان يكون التنفيذ كاملا غير منقوص على الاساس الذى اقام عليه الحكم قضاءه و من هذا كان لزاما ان يكون التنفيذ موزونا بميزان القانون من جميع النواحى و الاثار , حتى يعاد وضع الامور فى نصابها القانونى الصحيح وصولا الى الترضية القضائية التى يبتغيها من يلجأ لمحاكم مجلس الدولة .

كما استظهرت – و على نحو ما هو مستقر عليه فقها و قضاء فى تفسير حكم المادتين 215,203 من القانون المدنى – و ان الاصل هو تنفيذ الالتزام عينا حتى لو كان ذلك جبرا على المدين به متى كان خذا التنفيذ ممكنا , و ان التنفيذ بطريق التعويض لا يكون الا عوضا عن التنفيذ العينى اذا استحال هذا التنفيذ , او اذا اتفق الدائن و المدين على استبدال التعويض بالتنفيذ العينى سواء كان ذلك صراحة او ضمنا .

و يتعين ان يشمل التعويض طبقا للقواعد العامة ما لحق المضرور من خسارة و ما فاته من كسب متى كان الضرر مباشرا و يستوى فى ذلك ان يكون هذا الضرر ماديا او ادبيا حالا او مستقبلا و ان تنفيذ الحكم عينا او تنفيذه بطريق التعويض قسيمان متكافئان قدرا و متحدان موضوعا يندمج كل منهما فى الاخر و يتقاسمان معا تنفيذ الالتزام الأصلي .

و ترتيبا على ما تقدم و لما كان الثابت من الاوراق , ان تنفيذ الحكم فى الحالة المعروضة عينا و ذلك برد شركة النيل لحليج الاقطان بجميع اصولها و ممتلكاتها و فروعها مطهرة مما تم عليها من تصرفات الى الدولة قد اضحى مستحيلا ,نظرا لان الشركة المذكورة تم بيعها بالكامل –بموجب القرار المقضي بإلغائه بالحكم المشار اليه – من خلال طرح اسهمها فى بورصة الاوراق المالية خلال عامى 1998,1997 و تحولت من شركة تابعة للشركة القابضة للقطن و التجارة الدولية تخضع لأحكام قانون شركات قطاع الاعمال العام الصادر بالقانون رقم 203 لسنة 1991 الى شركة مساهمة مصرية تحت مظلة احكام قانون الشركات الصادر بالقانون رقم 159 لسنة 1981 ,و قد اجريت عمليات بيع و شراء على هذه الاسهم فاقت المليون عملية منذ عام 1997 حتى عام 2011 , مما يكون المساهمين الحاليين حسنى النية حق تعلق بالشركة تعلقا قانونيا يحول دون انتزاعها منهم , كما ان الشركة المذكورة و قد اندمجت فيها شركة النيل للاستثمارات التجارية و العقارية 0 شركة مساهمة مصرية ) بموجب عقد اندماج ابرم فى غضون عام 2003 , و أصبحت الشركة الدامجة خلفا عاما للشركة المندمجة تحل محلها فيما لها من حقوق وما عليها من التزاما ..... و لا مناص و الحالة هذه من تحول الالتزام بالرد العينى الى التزام بإداء التعويض الذى تقتضية الدولة من شركة النيل لحليج الاقطان , و ليس فى ذلك اخلالا بقوة الامر المقضى الثابتة للحكم لان التنفيذ العينى له او تنفيذه بطريق التعويض قسيمان متكافئتان على نحو ما تقدم بيانه ..))[17].

وعلى هذا فان الدعاوى التى صدر فيها احكاما حازت حجية الامر المقضى و التى لا مناص من تنفيذها , فانه يتم التنفيذ بطريق التعويض دون التنفيذ العيني  الذى اصبح مستحيلا فى  عموم هذه الحالات .

الحالة الثانية  :و هى النزاعات التى  لم يصدر فيها احكاما من محكمة القضاء الادارى ببطلان عقود البيع .

و هى المنازعات  التى لا تزال منظورة امام القضاء الادارى او لم يرفع بشأنها دعوى قضائية , فمثل هذه الحالات فان معالجة اوضاعهم فى الواقع يحتاج الى تدخل  تشريعى يضمن حماية المتعاقد حسن النية الذى لا يعلم شىء عن وقائع الفساد التى احاطت بجوانب العقد المختلفة, و ذلك على نحو ما جاء باتفاقية الامم المتحدة لمكافحة الفساد الصادرة فى 31/10/2003- و التى انضمت اليه مصر – حيث تنص المادة   34 على انه ((عواقب أفعال الفساد  مع إيلاء الاعتبار الواجب لما اكتسبته الأطراف الثالثة من حقوق بحسن نية ، تتخذ كل دولة طرف ، وفقا للمبادئ الأساسية لقانونها الداخلي ، تدابير تتناول عواقب الفساد. وفي هذا السياق ، يجوز للدول الأطراف أن تعتبر الفساد عاملا ذا أهمية في اتخاذ إجراءات قانونية لإلغاء أو فسخ عقد أو سحب امتياز أو غير ذلك من الصكوك المماثلة أو اتخاذ أي إجراء انتصافي آخر.))[18]

هذا بالإضافة الى ان القاعدة المستقرة فى الفقه و القضاء الاداريين ان العقد الادارى يتم تنفيذه على نحو ما يتفق مع مبدا حسن النية , و بناء على ذلك فان المتعاقد مع جهة الادارة الاصل فيه حسن نيته و ليس الاصل فيه التخابر و التأمر على مصلحة البلاد الى ان يثبت العكس بمقتضى حكم قضائي و ليس بمجرد شبهات تثور هنا او هناك سواء بحق او بغير حق, بحيث لا يجوز وفقا لهذا القانون ان يتم بطلان العقد المبرم بين الدولة و بين المتعاقد معها بزعم وجود وقائع فساد طالما لم يتصل علم المتعاقد بهذه الوقائع و لم يشارك فيها .

  التعديل التشريعي الاخر هو تعديل المادة الاولى من قانون التحكيم بعدم جواز تمسك جهة الادارة بعدم توقيع الوزير المختص , اذ ان الاصل ان جهة الادارة هي التي يقع عليها عاتق الحصول على موافقة الوزير و ليس المتعاقد معها اذ لا سبيل له للحصول عليه , و لا يجوز للإدارة التمسك بعدم قيامها بواجبها فى الحصول على موافقة الوزير فهى اما قصرت فى اداء واجبها و اما تدلس على المتعاقد معها فى الحصول عليه و كلاهما فساد من جانب الادارة , و القول بغير ذلك مؤداه تشجيع الادارة على غش المتعاقد معها بان تدعى حصولها على توقيع الوزير ثم يتبين عكس ذلك و تتمسك امام المحكمة بعدم توقيع الوزير المختص و هذا لا شك انه نوع من الفساد الذى يتعين درؤه .

و فى الختام فإنني امل ان يكون هذا البحث قد ساهم على نحو او اخر فى محاولة علاج مشكلة معالجة اثار احكام القضاء الادارى ببطلان عقود بيع شركات القطاع العام .



[1] www.egyarbitration.com-

[2] بحسب ما اعلن مؤخرا من البنك المركزى المصرى .

[3] لمزيد من التفاصيل راجع ,د/عبد العزيز عبد المنعم خليفة , التحكيم فى منازعات العقود الادارية الداخلية و الدولية , المركز القومى للاصدارات القانونية , الطبعة الاولى , 2008 ص 70 ما بعدها , الدكتور جابر جاد نصار , التحكيم فى العقود الادارية ,دراسة مقارنة , دار النهضة , ص 59 و ما بعدها

[4] الطعن رقم 3049 لسنة 37ق ع جلسة 20/2/1990 مشار اليه فى د/جابر نصار , مرجع سابق الاشاره اليه ص 63 و ما بعدها

[5] الدعوى رقم 5439 لسنة 43ق جلسة 30/1/1991 مشار اليه جابر نصار ذات المرجع ص 66

[6] فتوى الجمعيه العمومية لقسمى الفتوى و التشريع رقم 54/1/265 جلسة 17/5/1989 مشار اليه فى جابر نصار , مرجع سابق الاشاره اليه ص 81 .

[7] المستشار محمد امين المهدى رئيس مجلس الدولة الاسبق , الرقابة القضائية على عقود الدولة التى تتضمن شرط تحكيم , بحث مقدم فى مؤتمر شرم الشيخ الخامس تحت عنوان دور محاكم الدولة فى التحكيم الدولى , 16,17نوفمبر 2014

[8][8][8] الطعنين رقمى 30952,31314 لسنة 56 ق ع جلسة 14/9/2010 و حكم محكمة القضاء الادارى فى بطلان بيع شركة النيل لحليج الافطان رقم 37542لسنة 65 ق جلسة 17/12/2011 مشار اليه فى المستشار حمدى ياسين عكاشة , الخصخصة الفاسدة و مخططات بيع مصر , دار ابو المجد للطباعة , طبعة 2014 ص 334

[9] حكمها فى الدعوى رقم 40510لسنة 65ق جلسة 21/9/2011 بخصوص شركة المراجل البخارية

[10] حكمها فى الدعوى رقم 34517 لسنة 65ق جلسة 21/9/2011 بخصوص شركة شبين الكوم للغزل و النسيج

[11] حكمها فى الدعوى رقم 34248 لسنة 65ق جلسة 21/9/2011 بخصوص  شركة طنطنا للكتان و الزيوت

 

[12] فى هذا المعنى حكم بطلان بيع شركة المراجل البخارية فى الدعوى رقم 40501 لسنة 65 ق جلسة 21/9/2011 مشار اليه فى حمدى ياسين عكاسة , مرجع سابق الاشارة اليه ص670 و ما بعدها

[13] فى هذا المعنى حكم محكمة القضاء الادارى فى الدعوى رقم 11492لسنة 65ق جلسة 5/7/2011 حكم بطلان بيع شركة عمر افندي , و كذلك الدعوى رقم 40510لسنة 65ق جلسة 21/9/2011 حكم بيع شركة المراجل البخارية , مؤيدا بحكم المحكمة الادارية العليا فى الطعون ارقام 1976,2677,2688,2699 لسنة 58ق جلسة 17/12/2013 مشار اليهم فى حمدى ياسين عكاشة , مرجع سابق الاشاره اليه 684 و ما بعدها

[14] فتوى رقم 28 بتاريخ 11/1/1998 ملف رقم 54/1/343 جلسة 10/12/1997 مشار اليه فى د/ محمد ماهر ابو العينين ,د/ عاطف محمد  عبد اللطيف , قضاء التحكيم دراسة تحليلية لاتجاهات الفقه و احكام المحكمة الدستورية و محكمة النقض و المحكمة الادارية العليا و محكمة القضاء الادارى و محاكم الاستئناف فى خصوص التحكيم التجارى الدولى , طبعة 2010 , المجلد الثانى , ص 558

[15] نقض 24/9/1994 س15 ص 856 مشار اليه د/ماهر ابو العينين مرجع سابق الاشاره اليه ص 561

[16] استئناق القاهرة , 19/3/1997 فى القضية رقم 64 /113 تحكيم منشور فى مجلة التحكيم فرنسا العدد الثانى 1997 ص 282 مشار اليه فى د/ماهر ابو العينين مرجع شابق الاشارة اليه ص  561

[17] فتوى الجمعيه العمومية لقسمى الفتوى و التشريع , ملف رقم 58/1/314 جلسة 30/6/2014

[18] Article 34: Consequences of acts of corruption

With due regard to the rights of third parties acquired in good faith, each

State Party shall take measures, in accordance with the fundamental principles

of its domestic law, to address consequences of corruption. In this context, States

Parties may consider corruption a relevant factor in legal proceedings to annul

or rescind a contract, withdraw a concession or other similar instrument or take

any other remedial action.

 

More
Home

the lecture of SOAS university about the Islamic articles in the Egyptian constitution

this lecture was given in the campus of the uuniversity of SOAS 

to download the resarch click here 

this lecture was given in the campus of the uuniversity of SOAS 

to download the resarch click here 

More
Home

the bicameralism in the Egyptian constitution

this resarch was in the conference of the arab organization of the constitutional law 

to download clich here 

 

 

this resarch was in the conference of the arab organization of the constitutional law 

to download clich here 

 

 

More
Home

THE IMPACT OF COVID 19 ON THE PERFORMANCE OF ADMINISTRATIVE CONTRACTS IN EGYPT

 

THE IMPACT OF COVID 19

ON THE PERFORMANCE OF ADMINISTRATIVE CONTRACTS IN EGYPT

COMPARATIVE STUDY

BY

JUDGE…

 

THE IMPACT OF COVID 19

ON THE PERFORMANCE OF ADMINISTRATIVE CONTRACTS IN EGYPT

COMPARATIVE STUDY

BY

JUDGE DR/ MAGED M.SHEBAITA

THE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE EGYPTIAN STATE COUNCIL

LLM (UNIVERSITY OF LONDON)

PHD ( CAIRO UNIVERSITY )

MAY 2020

 

 

 

Abstract

Any country undertakes several actions to fulfill the public needs of it’s people or to achieve economical and financial targets. One of the most famous actions is CONTRACTS, the state is usually engaged in several contractual relationships to achieve the aforementioned targets.

In Civil Law countries, the Administration concludes two types of contracts, Public  Law Contracts[1] and Private Law Contracts.

The overwhelming opinion in the Egyptian Administrative Law, jurists and judgments are that there are 3 main criterion to distinguish administrative contract from civil and commercial contracts, which had been explained in the judgment of the Supreme Administrative Court

“It is recognized that the Administrative Contract is the contract concluded by a public law person with the intention of managing of public utility and for showing its intention to adopt the Public law method, which includes a clause or conditions that are unfamiliar to private law contracts.”[2].

Through the performance of Administrative Contracts certain obstacles appeared, some of them are foreseeable and others unforeseeable.

After the announcement by WHO on 13th March 2020, that COVID19 is a pandemic, several states declared the state of emergency due to the outbreak of COVI19 which caused many economical and financial disasters, to both public and private sectors.

In this  research I will focus on the outbreak of COVID 19 as unforeseeable events which led to overturn the financial and economical equilibrium of the Administrative Contract in Egypt.

This is what we will illustrate together in the following pages.

 

 

 

 

Part 1

COVID 19 as an unforeseeable event and the performance of the Administrative Contacts

After the announcement of WHO on 12th of March 2020, that COVID 19 is pandemic [3], following this declaration by WHO, the Egyptian Government issued different decisions [4]   to confront such pandemic

An issue arises, what is next? This issue appears in all the legal, economical, commercial and financial fields all over the world without exception.

With regards to the performance of the Administrative contracts, contractors with the state will find the contract onerous or impossible to be performed, therefore the aforementioned issue arises, what is next?

The Administrative jurist and courts tried to find means to restore the equilibrium of the  contract, which can be ebbed in two main theories as follows[5]:

 

 

 

1)                  Force Majeure

 

A)                 Legal basis of the force majeure in the performance of Administrative contracts

 

Art 373 of the Egyptian Civil code stated that

“the obligation shall be extinguished if the debtor proves that its fulfillment has become impossible for a foreign reason to which it cant prevent”.

The Egyptian court of Cessation held that

“The general rules of civil law require that the obligation extinguished automatically if it becomes impossible to be performed because of a foreign cause where the debtor didn’t intervene in it, and that in contracts binding on both sides, if the obligation extinguished because of the impossibility of its performance, the corresponding obligations also extinguished and the contract is terminated automatically”[6].

The Supreme Administrative court put the basis of the force majeure doctrine in the performance of Administrative contract as follows:

“The terms of the contract liability require that there should be fault  and damage and that there is a causal relationship between fault and damage and that if the debtor is not able to carry out his obligation in kind he is responsible for the compensation for non-fulfillment unless he proved that the impossibility of performance arose from a foreign reason that has no intervene in it, and the impossibility of performance is either an actual impossibility or a legal impossibility at the time of performance. It goes without saying that the actual impossibility is a matter of reality that the judge estimates it which varies according to the circumstances of the case, and if the impossibility is due to the fault of the debtor the contract should not be terminated but still exist and if the performance of the obligations became impossible in –kind it  must be performed through compensation, and therefore the subject of obligation is shifted from the in-kind execution  to compensation, the insurances that ensured the in-kind implementation and turn into a guarantee of compensation, and the duration of the statute of limitations, but if the impossibility is due to the a foreign cause that is not possible or impossible to  obviate  , the availability of these two conditions was a foreign incident of the person who has no intervene in it and must be unable to expect not only by the contractor but by the most vigilant  people. It is not enough for the average person, but it requires that the impossibility be absolutely impossible as the force must be force majeure or sudden accident impossible to obviate  or prevent . In case it  is possible to obviate  the accident- even if it is impossible to expect-   in this case it is not force majeure . The force majeure  should make the performance absolutely  impossible  not only for the contractor  but for anyone who is in the position of contractor . This is what distinguishes the force majeure  from  the hardships  incidents which make the performance onerous rather than impossible”[7]

There are 3 main conditions for force majeure:

1)      The impediment must be occurred due to foreign cause, not related to the contractor, in other words the contractor must not participate in such sudden event by its will or wrongful act, otherwise it is not force majeure, and the contractor is obliged to perform the contractual obligations.

2)       The impediment must be unforeseeable not only by the contractor but also by any contractor, at the time of concluding the contract.

3)      It is impossible to obviate such event Ergo if the force majeure occurred after the contractor perform its obligations or ended before concluding the contract , in these cases it is not force majeure.

4)      It must led to absolute impossibility in the performance of the contract, not just onerous.[8]

 

B) The legal impact of the force majeure on the performance of the Administrative Contracts

1) Exempt the parties from performing the contractual obligation.

This is logic consequence of the force majeure, as it is impossible for the contractor to perform its obligation, it is not realistic to encumber it with impossible obligations unless the parties agreed that the contractor shall be liable for the incidental loss, in this case it is obliged to reimburse the Administration.

It shall be illustrated there is difference between absolute impossibility and temporary impossibility, in the former case the contract is exempted from contractual obligation while in the later case the contractual obligation is SUSPENDED till the termination o the force majeure[9]. Likewise the force majeure exempt the Administration from performing its corresponding  obligation towards the contractor.[10]

2)  Terminate the contract     

Due to the absolute impossibility in performance the  correspondent contractual obligations of both parties and the exemption of contractual obligations in this case the contract shall be terminated.

An issue arises about whether the termination is automatically or require judicial judgment.

Some jurist viewed that the contract shall be terminated automatically by force of law without need to recourse to the court but recourse to the court will be required in case the parties disagreed whether there was force majeure or not , in such case the issue will be determined by the court [11], whilst others viewed that the termination of the contract require judicial judgment, they termed it judicial termination.

With regard to comparative law, different laws adopted the same approach of the Egyptian law [12].

Art. 1218 of the French civil code stated that

“In contractual matters, there is force majeure where an event beyond the control of the debtor, which could not reasonably have been foreseen at the time of the conclusion of the contract and whose effects could not be avoided by appropriate measures, prevents performance of his obligation by the debtor.

If the prevention is temporary, performance of the obligation is suspended unless the delay which results justifies termination of the contract. If the prevention is permanent, the contract is terminated by operation of law and the parties are discharged from their obligations under the conditions provided by articles 1351 and 1351-1.”.

It is clear that the French and Egyptian laws follow the same approach of the force majeure, this is not a surprising issue, as both of them are civil law countries.

In the English law

“The basic principle here is that if after a contract is made , something happens, through no fault of the parties, to make its performance impossible, the contract is said to be frustrated, and the obligations under it come to an end.  Although there are many events which may make performance impossible, only certain limited types will allow a contractor to be frustrated.  Because frustration leads to automatic discharge of the contract, regardless of the wishes of the parties, the courts use it as  a weapon of last resort, which can be used in exceptional circumstances……. If the potential frustration event is dealt with in force majeure clause, then the impact of this event will be determining according to this contractual clause rather than through the doctrine of frustration”[13] 

The House of Lords held that

“Frustration of a contract takes place where there supervenes an event (without default of either party and for which the contract makes no sufficient provision) which so significantly changes the nature (not merely the expense or onerousness) of the outstanding contractual rights and/or obligations from what the parties could reasonably have contemplated at the time of its execution that it would be unjust to hold them to the literal sense of its stipulations in the new circumstances; in such case the law declares both parties to be discharged from further performance.”[14].Recently the High court discussed the effect of BRIXET on the frustration of lease contract, the court ended the contract cant be frustrated by BRIEXT.   [15]

Some jurist stated that the term radical difference or significant change 

“…will include, but not limited to, situations where performance has become impossible. Unfortunately , neither impossibility nor radical difference has a self meaning in this context.”[16]

It is clear from HL aforementioned judgment that if the performance is just onerous, then the frustration principle will not be applied.

Certain impediments raise the application of force majeure in the English law as:

1) Destruction or unavailability of something essential for the performance of the contract.

2) Death of either parties, in contracts which require personal performance, are terminated on the death of either parties.

3) Unavailability of party: as in case of illness or imprisoned.

4) Method of performance impossible.[17]

The problem here is what about change in circumstances, if the performance is not impossible but changed, then agreed at the time of conclusion the contract, according to the previous judgments it is not frustration issue, this means the contract will not be terminated but still exists and the parties are obliged to perform their contractual obligation. Like wise if the performance is onerous, the matter will be simple if there is contractual clause dealing with such issues, but if there is no contractual clause, the English courts do not provide solution to this issue unlike the Civil law system. 

This issue led to some jurist to state that the English law adopt all or nothing approach. Either the contract is terminated automatically due to force majeure or remain bound. There is no notion for partial frustration nor temporary impossibility which excuses performance for certain period of time, therefore there is no clear distinction between breach of contract and impossibility.  [18] 

2)Hardships

A)        The legal basis of Hardships in the performance of Administrative contracts 

Art. 147 of the Egyptian Civil code stated that;

“The contract is the law of the parties ( Pacta sunt servanda). 2- However, if there are exceptional general incidents that could not be expected and result in their occurrence that the performance of the contractual obligations - if it did not become impossible- became onerous for the debtor, so that it threatens him with a heavy loss, the judge may, according to the circumstances and after the balance between the interests of the two parties, return the exhausting obligation to Reasonable limit, and any agreement to the contrary is void.”

The Supreme Administrative court held that;

“That's an application The [sic] theory of emergency circumstances is that during the execution of the contract, certain accidents or natural or economic circumstances or the work of a [sic] Administrative agency other than the contracting agency or the work of another human being, which was not in expected and unforeseeable by the contractor at the time of the conclusion of the contract, and could not prevent or obviate it, and which would incur heavy losses, and turned the performance of the contract more onerous- but not impossible -  to the contractor, with which the economics of the contract are severely disrupted and the structure of the contract is absolutely overturned. In such a case the Administration is required to share the loss that has been occurred throughout the period of the hardship, in order to ensure the implementation of the Administrative contract, and The continuing functioning of public utility. The effect of such impediment is limited to appropriate compensation where the Administration is obliged to reimburse its contractor, without leading to modify the contractual obligations, [sic]”[19].

The supervening events are not limited to economical events, also other general measures as laws and regulations can impose taxes which increase the burdens on the contractor, likewise fluctuation of currency is considered to be hardship.[20]

From this judgment there are several conditions for the application of the hardship doctrine as follows:

1)       The occurrence of supervening events during the performance of the contract.

 The hardship doctrine will be applied where supervening events occurred form the time of concluding the contract till its end in other words through the life cycle of the contract.  However there are certain occasions require more clarifications as:

A)     The occurrence of the supervening events after concluding the contract and before its performance.

In my opinion the hardship doctrine shall be applied as, the contractor usually assess the economical and financial outcome and its ability to perform the contractual obligation from the time of concluding the contract, ergo any disruption to the financial or economical equilibrium of the contract will effect directly the legitimate expectation  from the contract.

B)      The occurrence of the supervening events after the submitting of bids and before concluding the contract.

We have to differentiate between two situations. The first case is when the bidder cant modify its bids or cant withdraw it, in this case the hardship doctrine applied [21]. On the contrary if the bidder can modify the bid or withdraw it, in this case, in my opinion, the hardship will not be applied because the bidder is not obliged to conclude the contract with the Administration. 

C)      The occurrence of the supervening after due time limit to perform the contract.

In a no doubt, after the performance of the contract, there is no need to apply hardship doctrine, as the contractor did not incur any loses.  Though if the supervening events occurred after the due time date and the contractor was delayed in performing its obligations, in this case if the Administration explicitly or implicitly admitted to extend the due time, in this case the hardship doctrine shall be applied, and in case the contractor – by delaying in performing its obligations-committing a wrongful act by breaching the contract, in this case the hardship clause will not be applied, because the contractor could not receive benefit as a result of its breach[22].  

2)      The supervening events must be unforeseeable

As previously mentioned in the force majeure, the supervening events must be unforeseeable to both parties, the Supreme Administrative Court asserted that:

 

“The application of the hardship theory requires that during the period of performance of the administrative contract, accidents or natural or economic conditions arise from the work of an Administrative entity other than the contractor or from any other human being who was not in the contract's expectation at the time of the conclusion of the contract and could not prevent it, would result in heavy losses that would seriously disrupt the equilibrium of the contract.”[23]

3)                  Absolutely overturned  the structure of the contract and disrupt the equilibrium of the contract.

It shall be illustrated  that it is not easy to adopt a common criteria what could considered as absolute overturn of the contract, as the considered loss varied form contractor to another, so what considered huge loss to a contractor, can be viewed as simple loss to another contractor.

 

The Supreme Administrative Court tried to set a rule on who the courts can determine the loss of the contractor as follows;

“….. In estimating the extent of the imbalance of the accident in the contract due to the supervening  circumstances, the court must take into account all its elements affecting its economics, including the full value of the contract and its duration in total as a single unit without identifying one of its elements …..- that the compensation to which the administration is committed is not to cover the profit loss, it only covers portions of  - not all - loss incurred to  the contractor.”[24]

It is clear that the Administration will shall share only on the actual heavy loss of the contractor not the loss of its profits.

In my opinion this approach is not absolutely true, we should distinguish between the sources of supervening events, if it caused due to economical or natural or other human being then the Administration shall reimburse the contractor for his loss not including his profit loss in other words to place him in situation exactly before the occurrence of the impediment otherwise such impediment may cause bankruptcy to the contractor which will indirectly affect the investment atmosphere in the state, whilst if the source was an action committed by Administrative agency other than the contracting agency, in this case the Administration shall reimburse the contractor in his total losses including profit loss, because the Administration as a unite caused such impediment,regardless that the contracting agency itself didn’t participate in such impediment , as finally all  the Administrative agencies  are superseded by Prime minister as Article 163 of the Egyptian Constitution stated that;

“The  government is the supreme executive and administrative body of the state and it consists of the Prime Minister, the Prime Minister’s deputies, the ministers, and their deputies.

The Prime Minister heads the government, oversees its work, and directs it in the performance of its functions”.

And the state budget is one unite as well  , no matter each agency has its own public personality , as every compensation paid by any agency will be calculated in the state budget , moreover every benefits  received from   Administrative contract will be returned to the state budget     . This doesn’t prejudice the right of the Administrative contracting party – if possible - for claiming compensation from the other agency which caused the supervening events . 

B)                  Legal consequences of the hardships doctrine 

1) The contractor is obliged to perform its contractual obligation

As I have illustrated earlier, the hardship  - unlike force majeure -doesn’t discharge the contractor from performing its obligation, the contract is still exist and the parties are obliged by it. On the assumption that the contractor fail to perform its contractual obligation, it shall be considered as breach of contract.

The Supreme Administrative court asserted that

“The supervening events don’t justify the contractor not to perform its obligation under the contract, on the other hand it can claim for compensation from the Administration, in order to continuing the functioning of public utility”[25].

It shall be noticed, as far as the performance of the contract is just onerous to the contractor, it is obliged to perform it unless the performance of the contract  became impossible in this case it turned to be force majeure, in such later case the contract will be terminated [26].

2)The right of the contractor to be reimbursed

As I previously mentioned, the contractor will only be reimbursed partially for its actual losses not including its profits. The legal basis for such compensation is to restore the financial equilibrium of the contract, the common wills of the parties and the continuing function of public utilities [27]

The issue here is, according to the previous legal basis, there is no reason not to totally reimbursement the contractor for its loss, the continuing function of the public utilities is the role of the Administration not the contractor, it mainly conclude the contract with the Administration to gain profits not to perform public service, therefore it is unjust to incur the contractor with any losses caused due to supervening events, in my opinion the Administration shall incur all the losses, it is sufficient the contractor will not receive profits in case the impediment caused by natural or economical reason but if the impediment caused due to action of other Administrative agency, the contractor shall be reimbursed for total loss including its profit loss.

Certain issues shall be considered in determining the losses of the contractor, which don’t include the following:

1)      The profits of the contractor prior to supervening events.

2)      The losses caused due to its wrongful acts[28]

3)      Any peremptory loss which will be incurred regardless the supervening events.

If the performance still onerous after the partial reimbursing, the parties  might renegotiate for a new conditions otherwise the contract shall be terminated.

3)Extending the duration of the contract

One of the basic principles which governed the performance of the Administrative Contract is to be performed according to good faith, as Art 43 of law No. 182/2018 Organizing The Contracts Concluded by Public Bodies ( OCCPB) , stated that

“Contracts shall be performed in accordance with their provisions, in good faith, within the limits and in accordance with the conditions, rules and procedures set out in this Law and its Executive Regulations.”

Accordingly if the contractor  failed to  perform the  contract on the agreed  time limit due to:

“Supervening circumstances beyond its control, some of which are due to the Administration. In this case the Administration is obliged To [sic] the extend the duration of the contract and to grant the contractor additional time to perform its obligation, in light of the investment atmosphere and the surrounding booms and pitfalls, in order not to waste a lot of money spent on the project, and wasted strenuous efforts made to complete it - in application of this: if the Administrative agency terminate the contract, without taking this consideration In applying the principle of good faith, its decision is against the law, and it must be quashed”[29].

4)      Discharging from delay fines

The Egyptian law give the Administration the right to impose penalties on the contractor to pay a delay fine once it delays in performing its contractual obligation, such penalties are considered to be contractual compensation[30]. However if the contractor delayed in performing its contractual obligations as a result of supervening events in such cases the Administration MAY discharge it from such penalties, pursuant to Art 48 of the OCCPB law

“If the contracting party is late in performing  the contract beyond either the date set in the implementation timeline or the implementation period set out in the contract, the Competent Authority may- for public interest considerations- grant the contracting party a time extension to complete the implementation without charging a delay penalty, if such delay is attributable to a reason beyond its own control………. In all cases of collecting the delay penalty, exemption shall be granted under a decision of the Competent Authority, if it is proven that the delay has occurred due to reasons beyond the control of the contracting party”.

The Supreme Administrative Court held that

Whereas, the judiciary of this court has repeatedly stated that the delay fine is a penalty that the administration will impose on its contractor if it delays in implementing its obligations for the date specified in the proportions and limits specified in Article No. 81 of the Executive Regulations of the Tenders and Auctions Law No. 9 of 1983 issued by Minister of Finance Resolution No. 157 The year 1983 does not include in the calculation of the delay period the periods that are proven for the Administration to arise from supervening reasons, the delay periods that are due to the Administrative authority itself,…...”[31]

In my opinion the Administration has no discretionary power to discharge the contractor from delay fines, it MUST discharge it, as the purpose of the delay fine is to encourage the contractor to perform its obligation at the due time, and reimburse the Administration from its delay, both reasons can’t logically applied in the supervening events, as the contractor CAN’T perform its obligations, and CAN’T prevent and obviate such events.

There is radical difference between delaying as wrongful act and can’t perform as a result of overturned the structure of the contract.

 

With regard to comparative legal systems  Art 6.2.1 of UNDROIT asserted that

“ARTICLE  6.2.1 (Contract to be observed) Where the performance of a contract becomes more onerous for one of the parties, that party is nevertheless bound to perform its obligations subject to the following provisions on hardship”

Art 6.2.2.

“ARTICLE  6.2.2 (Definition of hardship) There is hardship where the occurrence of events fundamentally alters the equilibrium of the contract either because the cost of a party’s performance has increased or because the value of the performance a party receives has diminished, and (a) the events occur or become known to the disadvantaged party after the conclusion of the contract; (b) the events could not reasonably have been taken into account by the disadvantaged party at the time of the conclusion of the contract; (c) the events are beyond the control of the disadvantaged party; and (d) the risk of the events was not assumed by the disadvantaged party.

Art 6.2. 3 (Effects of hardship) (1) In case of hardship the disadvantaged party is entitled to request renegotiations [sic]. The request shall be made without undue delay and shall indicate the grounds on which it is based. (2) The request for renegotiation does not in itself entitle the disadvantaged party to withhold performance. (3) Upon failure to reach agreement within a reasonable time either party may resort to the court. (4) If the court finds hardship it may, if reasonable, (a) terminate the contract at a date and on terms to be fixed, or (b) adapt the contract with a view to restoring its equilibrium”.[32]

In the French law Art 1195 of the new civil code asserted that:

“If a change of circumstances was unforeseeable at the time of conclusion of  the contract, renders performance excessively onerous for a party who had not accepted to assume the risk of such change , that party may ask its co-contractor for renegotiation of the contract. It shall continue performing its obligations during the renegotiation.

In the event of refusal or failure of the renegotiation, the parties may agree to terminate the contract, at the date and on such conditions as they shall determine, or by mutual agreement ask the judge to proceed to its adjustment. In the absence of agreement within a reasonable time, the judge may, on one party’s request, amend the contract or terminate it, at the date and on such conditions as he shall determine.”[33]

It is clear that UNDROIT and the French have the same approach of the Egyptian law , with a slight difference.

With regards to the English law, it didn’t follow the approach of the aforementioned legal systems, there is no doctrine of hardships in the English law.  The issue will be easy of the parties incorporate hardship clause in their contract, however the difficulty arises from the absence of such article, the English courts refuse to modify or alter the contractual obligations of the parties due to supervening events. As the House of Lords refuse to recognize the financial hardships alone as reason to terminate the contract based on frustration doctrine [34], the English courts adopted narrow view of frustration which rarely succeeded, therefore where the contract is still able to be performed – even if onerous- the parties are still obliged by it.[35]

The issue before the English courts is whether the performance of the contract impossible or radically different or not, in the first case- rarely occurred -  the contract is terminated automatically, in the second case the contract still exist even if the performance is onerous. The object of the test is the contract itself, not the its cost. Unlike the French law, the English law doesn’t impose a duty on the parties to renegotiate or impose a duty on the court to restore the equilibrium of the contract  [36].

After all the previously mentioned theories, COVID 19 is certainly unforeseeable and supervening events which could not be expected by the parties. Both parties could not prevent or obviate it and it led to disturbance of the contract.

The question is, whether COVID 19 is force majeure or hardship, this what we are going to realize in the next pages.

 

 

Part 2

COVID 19 force majeure vs hardships.

This is the question of all the contractors with the Administration in Egypt.  

Before answering this question some French judiciary judgments consider COVID19 as force majeure as in several decisions from March 2020, the Douai Court of Appeal ruled that the cancellation of flights by the Italian authorities, due to the Covid-19 sanitary crisis, constituted a force majeure event for the French authorities (4 March 2020, n° 20/00395; 5 March 2020, n° 20/00400 and 20/00401);

  • In a decision dated 12 March 2020 (n° 20/01098), the Colmar Court of Appeal considered that the current Covid-19 epidemic was a force majeure event preventing a person held in administrative detention from appearing before the court, as another person held in the same detention center had been tested positive for Covid-19. The same Court of Appeal adopted a similar solution in several subsequent decisions, even in the absence of a direct link between the detainees and infected persons (16 March 2020, n° 20/01142 and 20/01143; 23 March 2020, n° 20/01206 and 20/01207).[37]

It is clear that the French Courts recognize COVID19 as force majeure.  Till now the Egyptian Courts has not announced its approach towards COVID 19.

In my opinion the matter can not be classified without reference to the impact of COVID19 on the equilibrium of the contract, therefore if COVID19 overturned the contract and the performance of the Administrative contract became absolute  impossible in this case, the force majeure doctrine shall be applied, and in case the performance of the contract is just onerous and the hardship doctrine shall be applied.

The contractor- to evaluate whether performance is impossible or onerous  - must take consider the impact of the previously mentioned governmental measures to confront COVID19, for example in supply contracts to Administrative agencies where the contractor import goods and supply it to the Administration, which affected directly by the governmental measure which closing the Egyptian airspace in front of all international and domestic flights [38].Like wise if the government adopt total curfew measure for a long period of time – not just temporary measure – the contract in this case can be terminated. 

Another type of Administrative contracts is construction contract, usually the performance of such contract became onerous, but not impossible, therefore the contractor must perform its obligation under the contract and claim for reimbursement.

Ergo there is no final classification for COVID19, it is case by case analysis according to the provisions of every contract,  the surrounding circumstances and the impact on the performance of every contract.

It could be regarded as force majeure in some contracts, and could be regarded as hardship in others.

Conclusion

COVID 19 is supervening events, disrupted the economical equilibrium of the Administrative contracts, and overturned the structure of the contract.

There is no final classification of its impact on the contracts, it can regarded as force majeure in certain contracts which in this case will led to terminate the contract automatically, in other contracts it can be regarded as hardship, accordingly the contractor is obliged to perform its contractual obligations and claim for reimbursement  from the Administration.

Author

Maged M.Shebaita 

Cell phone No.:+2 01094100147                   Home Address

Office phone No.:+201118942720               

Email: magedshoby@yahoo.com

Website:  www.maged-shebaita.com

 

Education

LLM, University of London.

PHD, Cairo university.

Area of expertise

Public law,  Arbitration.

 

Bio

  • 06/2000 –present, Judge at the State Council.
  • Previous member of the Constituent Assembly drafted the Egyptian Constitution 2012.
  • Vice president of the Egyptian State Council 2016 – present.
  •  Member at The Administrative Court of Appeal 2017
  • An Arbitrator in the Panel of Cairo Regional Center of International Commercial Arbitration ( CRCICA )    Nov 2019.
  • Member at the Charted Institute Of Arbitrators ( CIArb )  - London- UK, August 2017.
  • Memeber at London Court of International Arbitration ( LCIA), October 2017.
  • Member at the International Society of Public Law ICON-S 2018.
  • Seminar at SOAS University, School of Law from March 2017.
  • Lecturer at British University in Cairo. School of Law, Nov 2016.
  • Lecturer at ASSTMT, Cairo, School of Law, March 2020.


[1] In Common law system , the jurists termed  Public contracts whilst in the Civil Law contracts , the jurists termed  Administrative contracts  , I will explain this later.

[2] Case No. 576 /11 judiciary session date 30/12/1967

Case No. 21979 /54 judiciary session date 27/11/2012 

[3] www.who.int/csr/disease/covid19 / report 52

 

 

[4] Decision council of ministers No. 154/2020 date 14/3/2020 “Inclusion of the disease resulting from infection with the "emerging corona" virus, among the infectious diseases shown in the table attached to Law No. 137 of 1958”

Decision No. 768 /2020 date 24/3/2020 “Citizens are prohibited, in all parts of the Republic, to move or move on all roads from seven in the evening until six in the morning, to ward off any possible repercussions of the emerging corona virus.”

Decision No. 717 /2020 date 14/3/2020 “The study is suspended in all schools, institutes, and universities of any kind, as well as any gatherings of students with the aim of receiving knowledge under any name, and children's immunities [sic] of any kind for a period of two weeks from Sunday, March 15, 2020 until Saturday, corresponding to March 28, 2020 as a measure The framework of the country's comprehensive plan to deal with any possible consequences of the emerging corona virus.”

Decision No. 606/2020 date 9/6/2020 “In order to take the state to some precautionary measures to confront the Corona virus and to preserve the health of citizens, all activities that require the presence of any large gatherings of citizens or that require their transportation between governorates [sic} with large gatherings such as (artistic parties, popular celebrations, birthdays, fairs and festivals) are temporarily suspended. Else”

www.alamiria.com

 

[5] There are another two theories , the Act of Prince and unpredictable difficulties, but in this article I chose only force majeure and hardship because they are closely related to COVI19.

[6] Case No. 450  /35 judiciary, session date 25/3/1972

[7] Case N.O 689/4 judiciary, session date 12/12/1959 , Case N.O 5560/43judicairy , session date 18/3/2003 

[8] Judge Hamdy Y. Okshaa , The problems in the performance of the Administrative contract , Dar Babou Majed , 2015 , third Book , p 109 -118

[9] Supreme Administrative court Case N.O 689/4 judiciary, session date 12/12/1959,ibid

[10] Judge Hamdy Okassha, ibid, 123-125

[11] Dr Sooad EL Sharkawy, The Administrative Law, Dar El Nahda, 201, p 437, Dr Ayman Fathy, ibid, p 204

[12] the United Nation Convention On Contract for International Sale Of Goods,  Art 79  stated that (((1)  A party is not liable for a failure to perform any of his obligations  if he proves that the failure was due to an impediment beyond his   control and that he could not reasonably be expected to have taken the impediment  into account at the time of the conclusion of the contract or to have avoided  or overcome it, or its consequences.

(2)  If the party’s failure is due to the failure by a third person whom  he has engaged to perform the whole or a part of the contract, that party is  exempt from liability only if:

                (a)  he is exempt under the preceding paragraph; and  

                (b) the person whom he has so engaged would be so exempt if the  provisions of that  paragraph were applied to him.

                (3)  The exemption provided by this article has effect for the period  during which the  impediment exists.

(4)  The party who fails to perform must give notice to the other party  of the impediment and its effect on his ability to perform. If the notice is  not received by the other party within a reasonable time after the party who  fails to perform knew or ought to have known of the impediment, he is    liable for damages resulting from such non-receipt.

(5)  Nothing in this article prevents either party from exercising any  right other than to claim damages under this Convention))

Like wise Art 7-1-7 of UNIDROIT (((1) Non-performance by a party is excused if that party proves that the non-performance was due to an impediment beyond its control and that it could not reasonably be expected to have taken the impediment into account at the time of the conclusion of the contract or to have avoided or overcome it or its consequences. (2) When the impediment is only temporary, the excuse shall have effect for such period as is reasonable having regard to the effect of the impediment on the performance of the contract. (3) The party who fails to perform must give notice to the other party of the impediment and its effect on its ability to perform. If the notice is not received by the other party within a reasonable time after the party who fails to perform knew or ought to have known of the impediment, it is liable for damages resulting from such non-receipt. (4) Nothing in this Article prevents a party from exercising a right to terminate the contract or to withhold performance or request interest on money due.

[13] Catherine Elliott& Frances Quinn , Contract Law , Pearson , Eleventh Edition  ,2017 , p 313-315

JANET O , Sullivan &JONATHAN HILLIARD , The  Law of Contract , Oxford , 6th Edition , 2014 , p 335

Richard Stone , The modern law of contract , Routledge , tenth edition , 2013 , p 411

[15] Canary Wharf (BP4) T1 Limited v European Medicines Agency [2019] EWHC 335 (Ch)

[16] Richard Stone , ibid , p 413

[17] Catherine Elliott& Frances Quinn, ibid , p 313

[18] HUGH BEALE , BENEDICTE FAUVRQUE-COSSON, JACOBIEN RUTGERS &STEFAN VOGENAUER, Contract Law, HART, Third Edition, 2019, p 1185

[19] Case No. 12606/52 judiciary, session date 27/11/2012

[20] Dr Soliman Tamawy, The General Principles of Administrative Contracts , Dar El Faker El Arabi , 1991, fifth edition, p 674

[21] Judge Hamdy Y., ibid, p 296

[22] Supreme Administrative court, case No. 22367/53 judiciary, session date 30/11/2010

[23] Case No. 1590 /54 judiciary, session date 15/1/2002

[24] Case No. 3652/29judiciary, session date 16/5/1987

[25] Case N.O2541/29 judiciary , session date 30/11/1985

[26] Judge Hamdy Y. Okaasah , ibid , p 317

[27] Dr Soliman Tamawy , ibid , p 696

[28] Dr Soliman Tamaway , ibid , p 699

[29] Case No.10782/49 judiciary session date 21/2/2009

[30] Dr Atef Abd El Latif, ibid, p 129

[31] Case No. 5291 /51  judiciary session date 6/4/2010

[32] www.unidroit.org › instruments ,2016 .

[33] www.redsmith .com

Huge Beale &others , ibid , p 1218

[34] Elizabeth Macdonald & Ruth Atkins , ibid , p 476

[35] Davis Contractors Ltd v Fareham Urban, ibid

[36] Huge Beale &others , ibid , p 1218

[37] www.linklaters.com › insights › march

[38] Decision No. 718   /2020, dated1 6/3/2020

 

THE IMPACT OF COVID 19

ON THE PERFORMANCE OF ADMINISTRATIVE CONTRACTS IN EGYPT

COMPARATIVE STUDY

BY

JUDGE DR/ MAGED M.SHEBAITA

THE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE EGYPTIAN STATE COUNCIL

LLM (UNIVERSITY OF LONDON)

PHD ( CAIRO UNIVERSITY )

MAY 2020

 

 

 

Abstract

Any country undertakes several actions to fulfill the public needs of it’s people or to achieve economical and financial targets. One of the most famous actions is CONTRACTS, the state is usually engaged in several contractual relationships to achieve the aforementioned targets.

In Civil Law countries, the Administration concludes two types of contracts, Public  Law Contracts[1] and Private Law Contracts.

The overwhelming opinion in the Egyptian Administrative Law, jurists and judgments are that there are 3 main criterion to distinguish administrative contract from civil and commercial contracts, which had been explained in the judgment of the Supreme Administrative Court

“It is recognized that the Administrative Contract is the contract concluded by a public law person with the intention of managing of public utility and for showing its intention to adopt the Public law method, which includes a clause or conditions that are unfamiliar to private law contracts.”[2].

Through the performance of Administrative Contracts certain obstacles appeared, some of them are foreseeable and others unforeseeable.

After the announcement by WHO on 13th March 2020, that COVID19 is a pandemic, several states declared the state of emergency due to the outbreak of COVI19 which caused many economical and financial disasters, to both public and private sectors.

In this  research I will focus on the outbreak of COVID 19 as unforeseeable events which led to overturn the financial and economical equilibrium of the Administrative Contract in Egypt.

This is what we will illustrate together in the following pages.

 

 

 

 

Part 1

&a
More
Home

COVID 19 and state of emergency in Egypt

COVID 19 and state of emergency in Egypt

 

                                   By Judge Dr. / Maged M.Shebaita ([1])

              Abstract

The nightmare of "COVID-19" widely spread all…

COVID 19 and state of emergency in Egypt

 

                                   By Judge Dr. / Maged M.Shebaita ([1])

              Abstract

The nightmare of "COVID-19" widely spread all over the world by the announcement of WHO on March 14th, 2020 that "COVID-19" is a pandemic,  followed by announcing the state of emergency by the Egyptian president([2]), and  the severe measures adopted by the Egyptian government to confront that nightmare which swept the world.

It is clear that "COVID-19" is constitutes a threat to public health, which considers one of the elements of public order, that justifies the declaration of the state of emergency and all its consequences.

It is the role of the government to protect the community from any infringements to public order, including its elements and the public (security, health, morals, and peace).

Such aforementioned measures have espoused by the Prime minister upon the approval of the Council of Minister ([3]). Laterally, the ministry of health used its power pursuant to law No. 137/1958 by considering "COVID-19" as a contagious disease.

The overarching target of this research is to highlight the measures, espoused by the Egyptian government to confront "COVID-19" and the constitutional restrictions over its power.

Introduction

Article (1) of the Egyptian law NO.162 /1958([4]) defines the state of emergency as: ((the state of emergency may be declared, whenever the public security or order in the lands of the republic or in an area of it, is endangered, whether due to war, disturbances, public disasters, or a pandemic)).

It shall be illustrated that the Egyptian constitution didn’t define the state of emergency, which has been delegated to the law, the above mentioned law (the state of emergency Act No. 162/1958) defines the state of emergency whenever the public order or security is endangered and gave examples to what can be considered as a threat to the public order as wars, pandemics, or demonstrations.

Some jurist viewed that the events stated in Article (1) of the law of emergency are exclusively determined; ergo, the Administration (President) can't add any other events to declare the state of emergency. As such exclusively events showed to be the highest risk to any country. ([5])

It shall be asserted that the police administration (the President) can only use the aforementioned measure to confront the threats to the public order and security. Accordingly, the police administration has no power to use the emergency measures to achieve any other purposes, even if compromised with the general public interest or to confront other events.

The President only has the power to declare the state of emergency - till notify the Parliament – and evaluates whether there is a real emergency state or not ([6]).

There are certain justifications to declare the state of emergency as wars, threat of wars, demonstrations and pandemics ([7]).

In my opinion, such determination is not actually needed. It is self evident that a war either occurred in the Egyptian territory or not, affects directly the Egyptian interest even if it occurred abroad due to being entwined with states interests. However, the word war must include the use of military forces, not just economical, political, or commercial wars.

 The Presidential announcement of the state of emergency is not free from restrictions; he MUST espouse:

1)    The Event That Led to Declare the State of Emergency 

It is a matter of sense that the declaration of the state of emergency must show the events and reasons that led to its announcement whether there is a war, threats, or pandemics… etc.([8])

This is for the supervisory institutions to scrutinize whether the actions, taken by the president, correspond with the state of emergency or not ([9]).

2)    Area It Covers

The Presidential declaration shall determine the area subject to the state of emergency. Such area could be all the territory of the state or only a part of it. Usually in cases of wars and pandemics, the state of emergency covers the whole state, whilst other cases as military demonstrations, riots, or insurrections could be determined by a specific area or province.([10])

3)    Duration of the State of Emergency

According to the Constitution and law, the President must determine the duration of the state of emergency (its start and end by using the normal time unit ([11])). Basically, the declaration of the state of emergency is entwined with the danger to the public order; therefore, some may dispute that it is illogical to restrain the President to determine the duration of the state of emergency.

In my opinion, the President only evaluates when its measures can confront the state of emergency, in case the duration wasn’t sufficient to confront the situation, the President can ask the parliament for its extension.

B)   Restrictions on the announcement of  State of Emergency in the Egyptian Law

Due to the fact that the state of emergency directly and heavily affects the human rights since the president can impose several restrictions as stated in Article (3) and the wide discretionary authority of the President; consequently, there should be very strong supervision from the judiciary and the parliament. The strength of such supervision will be illustrated in the following pages:

1) The Judicial Review on the announcement of the State of Emergency

At the beginning, the courts were reluctant to review the announcement of the state of emergency as the Supreme Constitutional Court consider the announcement of state of emergency as political actions which fall beyond the jurisdiction of the court ([12]), however it shall be illustrated that indeed the announcement of the state of emergency in itself is not subject to judicial review but the other measures followed such announcement are subject to judicial review ([13]).  

2) The Parliamentary Supervision

Pursuant to Article (154) of the Constitutional amendment in 2014, stated that

 ((The President of the Republic declares, after consultation with the Cabinet, a state of emergency in the manner regulated by law. Such declaration must be submitted to the House of Representatives within the following seven days to consider it.

If the declaration takes place when the House of Representatives is not in regular session, a session is called immediately in order to consider the declaration.

In all cases, the declaration of a state of emergency must be approved by a majority of members of the House of Representatives. The declaration shall be for a specified period not exceeding three months, which can only be extended by another similar period upon the approval of two-thirds of House members. In the event the House of Representatives is dissolved, the matter is submitted to the new House in its first session)).

The Egyptian law obliged the President to present the declaration of the state of emergency, its justifications, and the adopted measures to the parliament; such a presentation means to provide it for discussion and questioning by the deputies of the parliament ([14]).

After aforementioned providence, the Parliament can take one of the following procedures:

1)    Expressly Admitted the Declaration of the State of Emergency

The first and easiest procedure is that the Parliament approves the Presidential declaration of the state of emergency; such approval is by simple majority.

2)    Expressly Rejected the Declaration of the State of Emergency

The Parliament might reject the declaration; consequently, the declaration will be quashed. Neither the Constitution nor the law explains whether such quashing will be from the date of quashing or will be a retroactive effect.

Some jurists viewed that such quashing will have only an immediate effect ([15]).

In my opinion, such rejection will have retroactive effect. It is not just quashing; it is abolishing the declaration, which means that the declaration was unconstitutional since the beginning. In addition, due to the exceptional nature of the state of emergency, this must not be analog by it or expands it.

3)    Remain Silence

The last option for the Parliament is to remain silent. This situation has not been explained in the Constitution. In this case, the Parliament doesn’t admit or reject the declaration of emergency.

Some jurist may argue that it can be considered as implied admission from the Parliament to the declaration. In my opinion, this could not be considered as implied admission as the law designated only two ways either to accept or reject as long as the Parliament doesn’t expressly admits the declaration, whatever the action took by it, cannot be regarded as admission. On the contrary to this view, it is closer to be implied rejection since the emergency is an exceptional case.

According to the aforementioned, the state of emergency can only be declared by the President; however, his power is not without restrictions. On the contrary, it is subjected to judicial and parliamentary supervision.

 

 

 

Conclusion

COVID-19 is an undisputable pandemic which justifies the declaration of the state of emergency, and all the previously mentioned governmental measures to confront it are legitimate even if it affects rights and liberties as a result of the state of emergency. As resented above, the same measures are adopted by other governments; however, such measures are not free from restrictions, but it subjected to a strong judicial review from the State Council.    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Law No. 22 of the year 2020

On Amendments of some provisions of law No.162 of the year 1958

Regarding State of Emergency

 

In the name of the people

President of Republic

The House of Representatives approved the following act, and it is hereby enacted:

Article (1)

Article (4) Paragraph 1of law No.162 of 1958 regarding State of Emergency, shall be replaced by the following provisions:

Article (4) Paragraph 1:

The security forces or military shall execute orders issued by the President or his deputy. If the armed forces carried out executing such orders, this gives military personnel judicial police power over civilians.

The military prosecution has jurisdiction to investigate all events and crimes that are caught by military officers.

Without prejudice to the military prosecution powers, the public prosecution shall, in all cases, carry out the investigations.

Article (2)

New items beginning from 7 to 24 shall be added to the text of article (3) of Law No. 162 of 1958, and they are as follows:

(7) Suspension of classes, partially or totally at schools, universities, institutes, and any other educational organizations, and banning any gathering for studying.   And taking all necessary measures regarding the exams, and suspending Nurseries

(13)  Banning all forms of public gatherings, demonstrations and celebrations and other forms of assembles, and limiting private meeting.

(14) Compelling Egyptian expatriates returning home to undergo necessary health and quarantine measures according to health requirements established by the competent authorities.

(15) Banning the export of certain goods and products to abroad.

(16) Imposing restrictions on handling, transferring, selling, or possessing of some goods and products.

(17) Pricing some services, goods, or products.

(18) Set the rules of funding and allocating the cash and in-kind donations to confront the emergency state, and regulate methods of allocating such donations and how to spend it.

(19) Allocating cash and in-kind assistance to individuals and families, and set the rules of spending from it.

(20) Offering financial support for medical research, and taking the necessary measures for preserving the health care system and its continuation.

(21) Obligating, all or some, of private hospitals, specialized medical centers, and laboratories in case of medical emergencies, for certain period, to work with all their medical stuff and operational capacity to provide health care services in general or medical cases suspected of having specific diseases. And that's under the full supervision of the administrative body which determined by the President of the Republic, and this body determines the provisions of operation and management, and the requirements and procedures that private hospitals, specialized medical centers and laboratories shall adhere and the mechanisms to monitor them in their implementation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 



[1] - Vice president of the Egyptian  State Council  ( Administrative Court )

LLM UNIVERITY OF LONDON

PHD ( CAIRO UNIVERSITY )

Former Member of the Egyptian Constituent Assembly, 2012

 

[2]- Presidential decree N.O 168/2020 announcing the state of emergency in Egypt for 3 months from 28/4/2020 till 28/7/2020.

[3]-  Decision council of ministers N.O 154/2020 date 14/3/2020 ((Inclusion of the disease resulting from infection with the "emerging corona" virus, among the infectious diseases shown in the table attached to Law No. 137 of 1958)) , Decision N.O 768 /2020 date 24/3/2020  ( Citizens are prohibited, in all parts of the Republic, to move or move on all roads from seven in the evening until six in the morning, to ward off any possible repercussions of the emerging corona virus.))

Decision N.O 717 /2020 dated on 14/3/2020 ((The study is suspended in all schools, institutes, and universities of any kind, as well as any gatherings of students with the aim of receiving knowledge under any name, and children's immunities of any kind for a period of two weeks from Sunday, March 15, 2020 until Saturday, corresponding to March 28, 2020 as a measure The framework of the country's comprehensive plan to deal with any possible consequences of the emerging corona virus.))

Decision N.O 606/2020 date 9/6/2020 ((In order to take the state to some precautionary measures to confront the Corona virus and to preserve the health of citizens, all activities that require the presence of any large gatherings of citizens or that require their transportation between governorates with large gatherings such as (artistic parties, popular celebrations, birthdays, fairs and festivals) are temporarily suspended. else))

www.alamiria.com

 

[4]- This law is  still in force and applied

[5]-Dr. Samy Gamal El Din , The statutes of emergency and the judicial review ,published by Monsa'at el M'arraf , 2003 , p 323 

[6]-DR. Rafaat Fouda ,  The checks  and balances on the Presidential power at the state of emergency ,Dar El Nahda , 2000 , p 495 , Dr. Safwat M. Salah , The judicial review on the presidential power at the  state of emergency, Dar, El Nahda , 2016 , p 116

[7]-Dr. Sami Gamal , ibid 324

[8]-Dr. Sami Gamal , ibid , p 330

[9]- DR. Ibrahim A.Shiha , Analyzing the Egyptian Constitutional system  Monsaa Marraf , 2003 , p 271

[10]- The presidential decree N.O 366/2014 declaring the state of emergency  in the north of Sinai due to the military demonstrations and terrorism 

[11]-Dr. Ibrahim A .Shiha , ibid , p 272

[12]- Case N.O 6/22 Judiciary , session date 5/2/1977  and Case N.O 295 /24   judiciary session date11/4/2010

[13] - the Administrative Court of Appeal held that ((Whereas, Law No. 162 of 1958 on the State of Emergency granted in the third article of it the President of the Republic the authority to arrest homeless and suspicious persons, as well as those who threaten security and public order, and what was meant by suspicion is the terminological meaning of this phrase contained in Law No. 98 of 1945 regarding displaced persons and suspects, likewise those who are dangerous to security and public order are the people you are threatening to security. They are based on factual facts produced in indicating this meaning, and these facts must be specific acts that prove a person’s committing to it and are directly related to what is intended to be inferred by it, just as a person’s affiliation - if true - to a group with extremist principles or deviates from the constitution or the system Social does not necessarily imply that it is considered one of the threats to security within the meaning of this word, according to the provisions of martial law, as long as it does not commit a personal act and things that would truly describe it in this description.

As the administrative authority did not disclose specific material facts committed by the plaintiff and was fixed against him so that it can be included among the suspects or risk to security and public order as determined by the court’s rulings of the necessity of relying the seriousness on real facts produced in indicating this meaning. The decision to arrest the plaintiff is a violation of the provisions of Article (3) of the previous emergency law that has been referred to in a way that provides the corner for the error on the side of the administrative authority.

Case N.o18909 /56  judiciary , session date 23/10/2005.

It shall be illustrated that the government, during its confrontation COVID-19, is acting as Police Administration, which defines as ((The right of the state to restrict the freedoms of the individuals by undertaking certain protection measures to secure the public order)) ( ).

The public order regulations are required to preserve, secure, and maintain the public interest in its broadest definition which includes: public security, public health, public peace and public morals.

What we are focusing here on is the violation of public health as one of the elements of public order.

                Despite the Constitutional restrictions on the presidential declaration of the state of emergency, there are other restrictions on the governmental measures as police administration.

Owing to the dangerous effects of the police administration, the administration doesn't have not unlimited power or very wide discretionary power. On the contrary, it has limited the discretionary powers as the police administration affects the liberties of the people, so the administration is not working in outer space; instead, it is subjecting to laws as well as the judicial review of its actions.

1)            The Doctrine of Legality ( rule of law )

According to this doctrine, the state and all of its entities are subject to the law with its different hierarchy (Constitution, statutes, regulations, and individual decrees) ).

Therefore, the Administration in the course of performing its powers to confront COVID-19 - as described in the police administration laws and regulations - shall not violate the aforementioned laws and regulations; otherwise, it shall be liable for such illegal actions.

The administration can only act within the laws and regulations, not beyond them( ).

2)            Restricted  by   Objects and Purposes  of the Police   Administration

 As we have previously mentioned, the police administration has a main object or a purpose which is to protect and preserve the public order with its elements: public safety, security, health, and morals. This object or purpose is the only justification for police administration for its interference on the scope of human rights and liberties which can only be banned for the protection of public order.

Ergo, in case the administration – during performing its police administration powers - doesn’t consider the objects or purposes of police administration aiming to achieve private interest or other public interest other than those determined in the police administrative laws and regulation, or its actions and activities are considered to be null and void and the Administrative Court could quash its decisions, additionally, it shall be liable for indemnity. This is the principle of ((Specialized purposes)).( )

Moreover, it held that ((Whereas, the Supreme Administrative Court’s judiciary has settled that the administrative decision is the administration’s disclosure of its binding will with its authority under the laws and regulations with the intent to cause a specific legal effect whenever that is possible and permissible, and the motivator has sought it for a public interest. The jurisprudence and Administrative justice have also settled that the abuse of power does not occur only when the decision is issued targeting private purposes aimed at revenge or the achievement of personal benefit, but is achieved, if the decision was issued contrary to the spirit of the law. The law is not only satisfied with achieving the public interest in its broadest sense, but also with achieving the specified purposes.

The Administrative Court, when it enacted the purposes of the law, didn’t evade from the scope of legality, taking into account that every purpose designated by the law and evaded by regulations or decrees will be quashed by the Court).( )

Therefore, the government, through resisting “COVID-19”, is bound by this object and purpose only and can't use such measures to achieve other public interests. So, the governmental measures will be legitimate as long as they are attached to confront this pandemic and will be regarded as illegal measures even though they achieve public order away from preserving public health.

3)            Reasons of Police Administration

 The police administration is considered to be restricted by human rights and liberties; therefore, there must be factual and legal reasons to justify the police administration. Such reasons must be serious, hence, there must be a serious threat to public order; in other words a real danger immanent to public order.

In this instance, the Supreme Administrative Court held that ((Law No. 533 of 1954 defines cases requiring the declaration of martial law as the transfer of most of the powers of the civil authority in exercising the function of police administration to the authority based on the making of martial law - granting the legislator the authority based on martial law exceptional powers - the general military ruler may take measures aggravating, including the order to arrest and detained those suspected or dangerous to security and public order, putting them in a safe place - the authority of the government in this field is not free from every restriction but rather subject to rules and checks -  there must be a realistic or legal case  to call  for intervention, and the government's behavior is necessary to confront this situation as the only way to confront the situation and its purpose to protect the public interest  - subject to judicial  review…))( ).

Balancing between Powers and Liberties

The State Council ((Administrative Courts)) recognized to the administration wide and dynamic discretionary authority to protect the public order which varied according to importance of liberties in question and the circumstances of the case; therefore, the judiciary put in one side of the sale the liberty in question and in the other hand the circumstances of the case.( )

The powers of the administration will be widened in case of emergencies as wars, pandemics ... etc. and it will be narrowed in ordinary cases.

The Supreme Administrative Court held that ((It is recognized that the Administrative authority, supervising public security, must always take, in cases of necessity similar to the advanced case, temporary measures to maintain security and public order even if, in taking them, prejudices the rights or freedoms of private individuals.))( )

Ergo, the courts will assess every single governmental measure and balance between it and other rights and liberties. In case the scale moves towards the rights and liberties, then the measure will be quashed. On the contrary, if the scale moves towards the measure, then the measure will be recognized.

In the case of balancing, the court will take into account all the surrounding circumstances, the importance of rights, and the harshness of measures.

[14]-Dr. Sami Gamal , ibid , p 351

[15]-Dr. Sami Gamal , ibid , p 352, Dr. Adellah Seif Aly , The extraordinary powers of the head of state in Kuwait comparative study , Dar El Nahda , 2020 , p 577

More

Photo Gallary

Videos

Maged Shebaita

There is No trend that dominate on the Constitution Assembly


interview with Dr Maged shebita

interview with Dr Maged shebaita 


Maged Shebaita, Egypt Constitution on Masr 25 Channel, Part 1

Maged Shebaita, Egypt Constitution on Masr 25 Channel, Part 1


Mubasher Mn Masr

#


Maged Shebaita, Egypt Constitution on Masr 25 Channel, Part 2

Maged Shebaita, Egypt Constitution on Masr 25 Channel, Part 2


Maged Shebaita, Egypt Constitution on Masr 25 Channel, Part 3

Maged Shebaita, Egypt Constitution on Masr 25 Channel, Part 3


Hadota Masria 12/02/2012

Hadota Masria 12/02/2012


News

news

the membership of the charted institute of arbitrators

Judge/DR Maged shebaita got the membership degree of the charted inistitute of arbitrators 

More

news

قريبا: كتاب الدكتور ماجد شبيطة

                                                           …

More

news

لقاء د/ ماجد شبيطة بفقهاء القانون

التقى المستشار الدكتور "ماجد شبيطة" خلال زيارته الأخيرة للولايات المتحدة الامريكية بالعديد من فقهاء القانون من مختلف الجامعات الامريكية .

More

news

انضمام د/ ماجد شبيطة كعضو استشارى للمنظمة الدولية للقانون الدستورى

تلقى المستشار الدكتور "ماجد شبيطة"  دعوة من المنظمة الدولية للقانون الدستورى لانضمام اليها كعضو استشارى وذلك للاستفادة من الخبرات والاراء الدستورية والقانونية التى يقدمها المستشار.

More

news

“IDEA” لقاء د/ ماجد شبيطة بالمدير التنفيذى لمنظمة

  التقى الدكتور "ماجد شبيطة" بالاستاذ الدكتور" زياد أبو على " المدير التنفيذى لمنظمة “IDEA”  بمدينة  “Washointon DC”

حيث تناول اللقاء تصورات واقتراحات المستشار الدكتور " ماجد شبيطة "…

More

news

د/ ماجد شبيطة فى جامعة جورج واشنطن الامريكية

تلقى الدكتور" ماجد شبيطة " دعوة لزيارة كلية العلوم السياسية بجامعة جورج واشنطن الأمريكية حيث التقى بالعديد من أساتذة وطلاب العلوم السياسية وعلى رأسهم الأستاذ الدكتورالخبير الدستورى العالمى  .“Nathon…

More

news

شبيطة: مشروع قانون استرداد الأموال المهربة مخالف للدستور

قال المستشار ماجد شبيطة، أستاذ القانون الدستوري، إن مجلس الدولة وجد أن مشروع قانون استرداد الأموال المنهوبة من الخارج، مخالف للدستور ولذلك تم رفضه.

وأضاف “شبيطة” لـ”البديل” اليوم، أن من…

More

news

مستشار وزير المالية الدكتور ماجد شبيطة‏: اقتراحات لحل مشكلات عمر أفندي والمراجل و‏4‏ شركات أخري

تدرس وزارة المالية في الوقت الراهن عددا من المقترحات القانونية لعلاج آثار رد عدد من الشركات العامة التي تم بيعها بنظام الخصخصة وحكم بردها للدولة مؤخرا‏.

كما…

More

news

مستشار وزير المالية: قانون المصالحات لا يزال قائمًا.. وحل مشاكل 18 مستثمرًا

قال الدكتور ماجد شبيطة، المستشار القانوني لوزير المالية المشرف العام على المبادرة المصرية لإصلاح مناخ الأعمال «إرادة»، إن إعداد تشريع جديد للتصالح مع رجال الأعمال لا يزال قائمًا،…

More

Dr Maged Shebaita

Judge at the Egyptian State Council and professor of constitutional law