Previous 52 / 63 Next

(~C"'f.)AC H P R .'. < African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights Human Rights our Collective Responsibility woman has had sex, as the appearance of a girl's or a woman's hymen cannot prove whether they have had sexual intercourse, or are sexually active or not. It is therefore a position that Virginity testing reinforces stereotypes and gender inequality. In addition, the Commission finds that it is a violation of the rights of girls and women, which can be detrimental to their physical, psychological, and social well-being, to leave alone, the painful, humiliating and traumatic notion it reinforces. 217. In the upshot, the acts accompanied by violence, threats and use of force, in the precinct of this case amounted to rape and torture. 218. On the issue of investigation, the Commission considers Articles 17 and 19 of the Guidelines and Measures for the Prohibition of Torture, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment in Africa (the Robben Island Gu,idelines)182and holds accordingly that States have respective obligations to ensure the establishment of readily accessible and fully independent mechanisms to which all persons can bring their allegations of torture and ill-treatment and to ensure that investigation of all allegations of torture or ill-treatment, is conducted promptly, impartially and effectively. 219. Furthermore, it considers Article 4(c) of the Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women, adopted by the General Assembly Which provides that States should, "Exercise due diligence to prevent, investigate and, following national legislation, punish acts of violence against women, whether those acts are perpetrated by the State or by private persons."183 220. Finding the illegal and unjustifiable acts in the present communication, it is Suffice to say that the Respondent State failed to conduct an effective investigation into the alleged acts of inhuman and degrading treatment and no diligent attempts were made to hold anyone accountable. The Commission would also like to accentuate the fact that, being a party to the African Charter, the Respondent State should prohibit inhuman and degrading treatment under Article 5 of the Charter. Furthermore, since the Respondent 182 Adopted by the African Commission during its 32nd Ordinary Session in 2002 183 Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women, General Assembly resolu . December 1993, UN Doc. A/12175/48/104, 23 February 1994 511 P age Afncan, Union ,'J 7 hllPs:lachpr.au.lnVO 0 a

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Communication 424/12 - Samira Ibrahim Mohamed Mahmoud and Rasha Ali Abdel-Rahman (Represented by the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights and Interights) v. The Arabic Republic of Egypt

ACHPR Decision

Preview

Type of Document

Decision

Keywords

Cruel and Degrading Treatment
Equality
Equality Before the Law
Freedom of Expression / Digital Rights
Sexual and Gender Based Violence
Sexual Offences
Torture and Ill Treatment
Women's Rights

Case Head Notes: The complainants were arrested after they participated in a sit-in protest. Along with other detainees they were then transported to a military prison where they were subjected to beatings, abuse, electrocution, forced genital examination, and other forms of humiliating treatment. The Commission found a violation of Article 2, and cited the sexual nature of the violations against the complainants, noting that the victims were exclusively women, and that the violations were perpetrated on the women because of their gender. Specifically, they stated that the "virginity test", can only be directed at women, and stated that the accusations of prostitution, and other verbal slurs further demonstrated gender-based discrimination. Consequently, the Commission also found a violation of 18(3) because the violence was gender-specific and discriminatory. The Commission also found a violation of Article 5, and stated that the genital examination the Complainants were subjected to amounted to torture, and that the virginity testing was humiliating, degrading and torturous treatment. The Commission also affirmed that sexual violence and rape are a distinct form of torture. The Commission found a violation of Article 26 because the Egyptian military courts, where the complainants were tried, did not satisfy the requirements of impartiality and independence. The Commission found a violation of Article 3 because they observed that the Complainants were treated differently than people who were tried at a civilian court, and therefore they did not benefit from the equal protection of the law. The Commission found violations of Articles 9 and 11, stating that a reasonable inference would suggest that the authorities measures (arrest, detention, and subsequent ill-treatment), were designed to punish, intimidate and discourage the victims from exercising their freedom of expression and assembly. The Commission states that these measures were unnecessary to preserve national security, and disproportionate, and, therefore, a violation of Articles 9 and 11. On account of the existence of other violations of the African Charter, the Commission also found that Article 1 had been violated. The Commission urged the Respondent State to prosecute the perpetrators of the sexual violations, to reform the military prison procedures, and to ensure that the civil courts have exclusive jurisdiction to investigate and adjudicate allegations of violations by military personnel against civilians. They also requested the state to financially compensate the victims and urged the state to report on the measures taken to implement the decision.

Country

Egypt

Outcome: Decided on Merits

Year Decided: May 23, 2023

Rights Alleged to be Violated (ACHPR Provisions)

ACHPR 9: Right to Receive Information and Free Expression
ACHPR 1: General Obligations
ACHPR 11: Right to Freedom of Assembly
ACHPR 18: Protection of the Family and Vulnerable Groups
ACHPR 18.3: Protection of Rights of Women and Children
ACHPR 2: Freedom from Discrimination
ACHPR 26 : Duty to Guarantee Independence of Courts
ACHPR 3: Right to Equality before the Law and Equal Protection of the Law
ACHPR 5: Cruel Inhuman and Degrading Treatment
ACHPR 9.2: Right to Express and Disseminate Opinions Within the law

Rights Violated (ACHPR Provisions)

ACHPR 7: Right to Fair Trial
ACHPR 9: Right to Receive Information and Free Expression
ACHPR 1: General Obligations
ACHPR 11: Right to Freedom of Assembly
ACHPR 18.3: Protection of Rights of Women and Children
ACHPR 2: Freedom from Discrimination
ACHPR 26 : Duty to Guarantee Independence of Courts
ACHPR 3: Right to Equality before the Law and Equal Protection of the Law
ACHPR 5: Cruel Inhuman and Degrading Treatment
ACHPR 9.2: Right to Express and Disseminate Opinions Within the law

Duration of Procedure

Sep 11, 2012 ~ May 23, 2023

Country Geolocation

Latitude: 26.820553

Longitude: 30.802498

Country Geolocation (linked ACHPR Decision): Egypt

Primary Documents

Samira Ibrahim Mahmoud and Rasha Ali.pdf
English
ML TOC
Download View

African Human Rights CLA 2.0

Select target paragraph3

Communication 424/12 - Samira Ibrahim Mohamed Mahmoud and Rasha Ali Abdel-Rahman (Represented by the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights and Interights) v. The Arabic Republic of Egypt

Primary Documents

Notifications