In this report, we discuss the cabinet events that occurred in December 2011, with a focus on the trial of Ahmed Douma, which sheds light on a pressing question in any discussion of democratic transition in Egypt, namely the question of the independence of the judiciary and the legislative authority from the executive authority, in order to preserve the course of justice and adherence to the law and consolidate a true democratic society, in which no one is punished for what he did not commit, and in which those in authority do not escape legal punishment.

In writing this report, we relied on the case documents known as the “Council of Ministers Incidents Case”, and about nine thousand pages that include reports, medical reports, arrest warrants, referral orders, investigation records and interrogation of the defendants and the injured, in addition to the text of the first instance judgment issued by the court on February 4th, 2011.

Reliance on the case papers was key to highlighting the legal aspects related to the conduct of investigations with the defendants in them, which enabled us to understand violations of fair trial standards in the accusations against the defendants, who will be sentenced later. The case file helped us understand the defendants’ narratives during their interrogation by the prosecution.

In the report, we sought to use the defendants’ narratives, during interrogation, to find out details related to their diversity and the diversity of their social backgrounds, and to understand the way in which they dealt with the judicial system for the purpose of defending themselves, even if they did not always tell the truth, especially in view of the prosecution and the judiciary preconceived notion about them, as will be explained.