Appeal to the House of Representatives Law 2012 (dissolving the Muslim Brotherhood Parliament)

Type Constitutional
Public title Appeal to the House of Representatives Law 2012 (dissolving the Muslim Brotherhood Parliament)
Case no. no. 20 judiciary year 34
Case year 2012
Court Supreme Constitutional Court
Verdict appealed against Article 3 of Law No. 38 of 1972 concerning the House of Representatives: “The Republic of Egypt shall be divided into one hundred and seventy-five constituencies. The districts shall be determined by law. Each electoral district shall elect two members of the People’s Assembly, at least one of whom shall be among the workers and the peasants.
The remaining members of the Parliament elected from among the workers and peasants shall continue to retain the status on which they were elected. If one of them loses that status, membership shall be revoked by a decision of the Parliament by a two-thirds majority of its members. ”
Article 6: The application for candidacy for membership of the Parliament shall be submitted in the constituencies allocated for election to the individual system from the candidates in writing to the Elections Committee in the governorate in which the candidate wishes to stand in one of its electoral constituencies within the period specified by the Supreme Elections Committee. Five days from the date of opening the nomination.
The nomination application shall be accompanied by a deposit of LE 1,000 for the court of the competent court and the documents determined by the Supreme Elections Committee in order to prove the availability of the conditions required by the law to nominate and confirm the status of the worker or farmer with a declaration submitted by the candidate accompanied by the supporting documents.
Papers and documents submitted by the candidate shall be considered as official papers in the application of the provisions of the Penal Code.
The provisions stipulated in the preceding three paragraphs shall apply to the candidates of the closed party lists. The competent body of the Party or the relevant parties shall take the procedure of their candidacy with a request submitted on the form prepared by the Higher Committee for Elections. The amount of one thousand pounds provided for in the second paragraph shall be deposited for each Candidate of candidates list ”
Article 9 bis: “The Electoral Commission of the province shall, after the conclusion of the committee for the dismissal of the objections referred to in the preceding article, prepare two final statements, one of which shall include the names of the candidates in the individual system and the names of the candidates of the lists. A candidate and the party to which s/he belongs, if any, and the electoral code assigned to each candidate or list.
The High Electoral Commission publishes the names of candidates in its constituency and in two widely circulated daily newspapers.
Adverse and representation Anwar Sobhi Darwish – appellant
Date verdict 14th June 2012
Judges Farouq Ahmed Sultan – President
Appealed against parties President of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces

Prime Minister

Minister of Justice

Chairman of the Supreme Elections Committee

Interior Minister

Governor of Qalioubia

Verdict The court ruled :

First: unconstitutionality of the text of the first paragraph of Article III of Law No. 38 of 1972 regarding the Pairliament replaced by Legislative Decree No. 120 of 2011.

Second: unconstitutionality of the contents of the text of the first paragraph of Article VI of this law replaced by Legislative Decree No. 108 of 2011 to release the right to apply for nomination to the Parliament in the constituencies allocated to the election system individual members of the political parties as well as independents not belonging to those parties.

Thirdly: Article 9bis (a) of the above-mentioned law is unconstitutional by Decree-Law No. 108 of 2011 as stipulated in the final disclosure of the names of the candidates in the individual system of the party’s statement to which the candidate belongs.

Fourth: The unconstitutionality of the text of Article 1 of Decree-Law No. 123 of 2011 amending some provisions of Decree Law No. 120 of 2011, and the collapse of the text of Article II thereof.