Breaking News

A month after an incident that shook Egypt – the verdict on the prostrating to the dog doctor

30 days after an incident known to the media about the “doctor prostrating to the dog” incident, the Egyptian judiciary took a step that might change many things, as a ruling was issued in the case by the Economic Court, today, Saturday, against the background of accusing him and 2 others, of bullying a nurse and violating The sanctity of his private life and the infringement of the values ​​of society.

The Economic Court in Egypt punished a doctor for the “prostrating to the dog” incident, which shook the Egyptian public opinion, with two years imprisonment and a fine of 100,000 Egyptian pounds.

The court decided to punish the doctor, Amr Khairy, professor and head of the orthopedic department in a major hospital, and two other people, with imprisonment for two years and a fine of 100,000 pounds each, after they were convicted of bullying the nurse, Adel Salem, and asking him to prostrate to a dog and salute him.

Prior to the ruling, a legal expert stated that the ruling scenarios will not go beyond 4 possibilities.. The first is that the court will pass a prison sentence, imprisonment, a fine, or one of the two penalties for the crimes attributed to them, namely: bullying a nurse, violating the sanctity of his private life, violating the values ​​of society, According to legal experts.

According to what the Egyptian media reported on the legal expert and cassation lawyer, Ismail Baraka, the court ruling will not deviate from 4 scenarios:

first scenario, according to the text of Article 178 of the Penal Code, “whoever publishes video clips on social media if they are harmful to life shall be punished by imprisonment for a period not exceeding two years and a fine of not less than 5,000 pounds.” Also, according to Article 25 of the Internet Law, he shall be punished by imprisonment. For a period of no less than 6 months, and a fine of no less than 50,000 Egyptian pounds, whoever assaulted any of the family principles or values ​​in the Egyptian society, violated the sanctity of private life, or gave personal data to a system or website.” Also, Article 26 states: Whoever intentionally uses a computer program or information technology to process personal data of others to link it with immoral content shall be punished by imprisonment for a period of no less than two years and not exceeding 5 years, and a fine of no less than 100,000 pounds and not exceeding 300,000 pounds, or one of these two penalties. public,” according to Baraka.

As for second scenario It is for the court to issue a ruling acquitting the accused of the charges against them, or acquitting them in one of them and convicting them in the other.

Or Third Scenario It is the issuance of a decision to extend the time for pronouncing the judgment, which means postponing the issuance of the judgment to the date set by the court itself.

As for Fourth Scenario It is that the accusations leveled against the accused in the incident of “prostrating to the dog” may in some of them reconcile with the victim, and other accusations in which it is not permissible to reconcile. According to the legal expert.

The Public Prosecutor had referred 3 defendants who were imprisoned; two doctors and an employee of a private hospital, for criminal trial; to accuse them of bullying a nurse by verbally displaying power and controlling him; They ordered him to prostrate to an animal owned by a doctor of the accused, taking advantage of his weakness and their authority over him, with the intent of frightening him and making him a subject of ridicule and degrading.

The prosecution also charged the defendants with accusations of assaulting family principles and values ​​in Egyptian society, violating the sanctity of the victim’s private life, as well as accusing them of publishing through the information network a depiction of the bullying incident, which violated the victim’s privacy without his consent, and using a special account on a social networking site with the aim of committing those crimes.

The Public Prosecution indicated that it had established evidence in front of the defendants, which was proven by watching a video clip of the incident of bullying, the defendants’ acknowledgment of it and the correctness of their appearance in it, and what was proven from the testimony of the victim and two other witnesses, and what the defendants’ confessions included in the investigations.