Egyptians Condemn Court Order Blocking YouTube In Egypt For 30 Days

The lawsuit, filed in September 2012 by Egyptian attorney Muhammad Hamed Salem against the Egyptian prime minister, information minister and the head of the Regulatory Authority, demands the "the blocking of YouTube and suspension of its activity in Egypt until it removes the film ["Innocence of Muslims"] and all other films offensive to Islam... [and also] the closure of all websites that feature segments of this film. [This is] because disseminating this film or parts of it could have consequences that are difficult to prevent and [could] provoke Egyptians and Muslims... or even push them into sectarian fitna and violent actions."

The lawsuit also claimed that the film harms Muslim children by "distorting their mental image of the honorable Prophet for generations to come, and harming the tenets of Islam and the Prophet's honor." Describing the film as "a filthy Zionist plot and a declaration of war against Islam and the Muslims [that reflects] disdain for the principles of Islam and that aims to spark sectarian fitna in Egypt," it explained that "YouTube's management saw the response to the film in Egypt and throughout the Muslim world, [and] the violent protests [it provoked] in the Arab and Muslim countries... [yet] did not remove the segments of the film [from the site].

It continued, "More than that, YouTube insisted on presenting segments of this film under many different names... [in] a flagrant provocation of the Muslims' feelings, and with the aim of sparking fitna and riots and presenting the film to the widest possible audience..."[3]

The Court Order: The Film, Available On YouTube, Harms Egypt's Supreme National Interests

The order issued by the court requires Egypt's prime minister, information minister and Telecommunication Regulatory Authority to take the necessary steps to block YouTube, and other websites with the film, in Egypt for 30 days.[4] It states: "YouTube continues to carry the film... and Internet providers in Egypt have not complied with the January 9, 2013 letters by Egypt's National Telecommunication Regulatory Authority requesting implementation of the Authority's decision... to remove links to the film... from Google and YouTube and to block access to these links from inside Egypt... [YouTube] continues to carry the film that offends the Prophet in a way that undermines all the unassailable religious tenets and the principles of morality and decency... [Disseminating this film] cannot be [considered part of] free speech, because what is presented on these websites is among the most flagrant examples of harming the supreme interests of the state and of [our] national security and social [stability]..."

The court also explained that while it upholds freedom of speech and freedom of the media, and also calls upon the regime to uphold these values, "it is at the same time required to uphold moral values and principles, and religious beliefs, and to protect the Egyptian community from the spread of worthless things, such as slander against religious symbols and the divine religions..."[5]

YouTube Owner Google: We Are Considering Appealing The Court Order

Sources in Google, which owns YouTube, told the Egyptian daily Al-Yawm Al-Sabi' that the company has yet to receive official notice from the Egyptian court or government regarding blocking YouTube in Egypt.[6] Maha Abouelenein, Google's media and public relations director in the Middle East and North Africa, said that the company was considering appealing the court's ruling, and added: "Google's policy is to respect all court rulings regarding blocking [YouTube]... [However, it] will take no official measure until it is notified by the relevant bodies."[7]

Concern For Freedom Of Speech In Egypt

The court's ruling was condemned by human rights organizations as well as by politicians and artists in the country; they argued that it was a grave impingement on the rights of millions of Internet users in Egypt. Others called it a precedent which could lead to the future banning of newspapers, TV channels, and additional websites.

Angie Hamadi, a human rights activist and a senior figure in the April 6 Movement, expressed concern that the Egyptian authorities could close down the social networks as well. She said: "The Egyptian authorities believe that today, two years after the revolution, the social networking sites have become a tool in the hands of the people... Today, every ordinary citizen has unprecedented freedom to express his opinion on any topic at all via the social networks. [Expressing opinions freely] was illegal [in Egypt] for 30 years under Mubarak's rule; a return [to this situation] is unacceptable and will goad young people to more violence."[8]

SUPPORT OUR WORK

$500 $250 $100 OTHER CryptoCurrency Apple Pay Paypal Credit Card

Free Egyptians Party spokesman Ahmad Khairi demanded that the legislative authority approve amendments that would prohibit broadcast blackouts or the blocking of digital or satellite channels. He went on to claim that the blocking of YouTube, against the backdrop of tensions, oppression, and reprisals against activists, was part of the general denial of freedoms in Egypt, and added that it raised concerns that satellite channels, websites, or civil society organizations could be banned by any citizen displeased with their content.[9]

Ihad Radhi, head of the legal department of the Egyptian Association for Community Participation Enhancement, claimed that the ruling reflected the Islamicization of Egypt following the Muslim Brotherhood's rise to power. He said that the ruling "corresponds to the position of the sheikhs [who run] the religious state in which we have begun to live. These sheikhs believe that freedom of thought and expression is a [form of] rudeness... and that democracy is heresy. It is, therefore, no surprise that the State Council, which was the last stronghold [protecting our] freedoms, has become yet another forum issuing rulings in line with the opinion of those in power." He too predicted that Egypt would soon be witnessing similar rulings ordering shutdowns of newspapers, TV channels, and the like.[10]

The Court Order Harms Internet Users In Egypt

Some critics termed the court order a collective punishment harming the freedoms of all Egyptian citizens and Internet users. The Arab Network for Human Rights Information condemned it and called for the court to reconsider it, issuing a statement noting: "The decision of the Administrative Court overreached its goal, because YouTube contains millions of videos featuring art, documentaries, and tutorials – and blocking it will deny Egyptian [Internet] users their right to access this content, causing more harm than good."

The organization claimed further that the court's ruling violates the personal freedom of Internet users who, as competent adults, are fully capable of choosing for themselves what and what not to view. It added, "Such [court] decisions demonstrate the urgent need for establishing clear laws to limit the authority's [ability] to infringe on citizens' rights and freedoms – especially with respect to their right to access information and to the personal freedoms of information consumers."[11]

The Creativity Front, established in January 2012 by Egyptian artists to defend freedom of expression against the growing power of the Islamists in the country, issued a statement "firmly condemning" the court order and calling it a "disaster." The statement continued: "[We] are not trying to defend the offensive film ["Innocence of Muslims"], which we condemned when it first came out... The [court order] uses this film as a pretext for suppressing free speech – especially since [the order] is directed not at the filmmakers, or the film itself, but at a website which is a platform for visual documentation [that] is used freely by millions of Egyptians and by billions of people worldwide."

The statement added that the court order ignores the fact that YouTube "includes hundreds of [videos] by [Muslim] preachers on dubious religious channels that offend religions and all humanity... Everyone knows the important role played by visual documentation on YouTube in exposing the crimes against [Egyptian] demonstrators, from the beginning of the revolution to date... Does this court ruling reflect the future of freedom of expression in Egypt? Will the Egyptian regime use it to protect itself [by] keeping the people in the dark about the crimes it is perpetrating daily against the opposition?..."[12]

Only Totalitarian Countries Block Websites – And Implementing The Order Is Impossible

Several human rights activists who criticized the court ruling also pointed to the difficulty of enforcing it. Egyptian Human Rights Organization chairman Hafez Abu Sa'da said that implementing the order was technically impossible, since most frequent Internet users know how to bypass obstacles and access any site. He added: "Blocking websites is only done by the most totalitarian countries – China, Iran or North Korea – and Egypt could invite international attacks [i.e. censure] if it blocks [YouTube]." He added that implementing the order could also deter foreign investment.[13]

The Court Order Is A Political Move

Some critics also said that the regime intervened with the court so as to get the order issued, with the aim of appeasing the Salafis in Egypt and also keeping Egyptians from viewing videos exposing its crimes. Egyptian Social Democratic Party political bureau member Mustafa Al-Wakil claimed that the Muslim Brotherhood regime had interfered in the lawsuit and was responsible for the ruling.

He said: "The Salafis are accusing the Muslim Brotherhood of not defending the shari'a, and the court order was issued following regime intervention, in order to present the Muslim Brotherhood as defending the shari'a... The ruling's aim is to reassure the Salafis."[14]

Former Al-Nour party official Margaret 'Azer pointed out the many negative aspects of the court order – the most obvious of which, she said, was the suppression of videos documenting the Muslim Brotherhood's missteps. Hinting that the regime had something to do with the court's decision, she noted, "There are pressures on the court system aimed at steering it in a particular direction."[15]

The Egyptian Human Rights Organization also said that the court order was aimed at concealing crimes perpetrated by the Egyptian regime against the homeland.[16]