Representatives of the Administrative Prosecution Club met on Tuesday with Constituent Assembly Chairman Amr Moussa to demand a wider jurisdiction in the new constitution.
Members of the Constituent Assembly, tasked with amending the 2012 constitution, had proposed an article which would take the judicial disciplinary board away from the State Council’s jurisdiction and award it to the Administrative Prosecution instead.
Noha Al-Sherbini, a member of the Administrative Prosecution Club who attended Tuesday’s meeting, said the meeting was originally called for when news surfaced that the aforementioned amendment would be discarded.
“Moussa denied that the amendment was discussed by the Constituent Assembly to begin with,” Al-Sherbini said. She added that Administrative Prosecution representatives later met with members of the assembly’s drafting committee to agree on the proposed amendment. The meeting had not ended till time of print.
Abdallah Qandil, head of the Administrative Prosecution Club, earlier said the proposed amendment is in the citizens’ best interest. Qandil said that the Administrative Prosecution, which handles the investigation of employees referred to disciplinary judiciary, is more informed about disciplinary cases than the State Council and thus more entitled to look into them.
The State Council’s general assembly condemned the proposed amendment trimming its jurisdiction on 12 October, describing it as “conspiracies to dismantle the State Council”. Hamdy Yassin, head of the State Council Judges Club and Deputy Chairman of the State Council, said that the State Council has been handling the judicial disciplinary board for over 60 years.
The judicial disciplinary board is tasked with looking into court cases filed against state employees.
Article 174 of the now stalled 2012 constitution gives the State Council the jurisdictions of ruling on all administrative conflicts as well as handling disciplinary reports and appeals.