Bulletin Summary:

1. Investigation of citizen Dina Ezzat after she documented the raid on her residence.
2. Extension of the pre-trial detention of labor leader Shadi Mohamed and citizen Omar Al-Ansari, despite exceeding the maximum legal limit for pre-trial detention.
3. The General Assembly of the Cairo Court of Appeal approves the distribution of work for the new judicial year.
4. Defendants chant inside the court cages at Badr Prison.
5. Lawyers call for increasing the terrorism circuit courts to expedite rulings in cases.

Bulletin Items:

First. Public Prosecution Investigations:

• Investigation of citizen Dina Ezzat after documenting the raid on her residence: On September 22, and just a few hours after a video clip went viral in which citizen Dina Ezzat documented a detective officer from the Madinet Nasr Third Police Station along with two police officers from the same station raiding her residence—accompanied by her handcuffed husband—and seizing sums of money and gold jewelry from the home, as well as fabricating a drug trafficking charge against her husband, the Ministry of Interior issued a statement denying the claims in the video.

Following this, Dina Ezzat turned herself in, accompanied by her lawyer, to the Madinet Nasr Police Station. She was interrogated by the Madinet Nasr Prosecution on charges of publishing false news and statements. During the interrogation, she stated that she was assaulted inside the police station. Consequently, the investigation was transferred to the New Cairo Plenary Prosecution, where her testimony was heard as a victim.

On September 23, the Prosecution ordered the release of Dina Ezzat on a bail of 10,000 EGP, alongside referring her to the Forensic Medicine Authority regarding the injuries she stated she sustained inside the police station. The incident highlights the importance of separating the investigation into the charge brought against Dina Ezzat from the assault she reported experiencing inside the police station, ensuring each claim is subject to an independent and impartial investigation without one influencing the other. Furthermore, referring her to forensic medicine represents an important step in documenting the reported injuries, alongside the necessity of enabling her to exercise her legal rights and guaranteeing her right to a defense throughout the investigation procedures.

Second. Pre-trial Detention and Its Violations:

• Despite exceeding the maximum limit for pre-trial detention… Extension of detention for Shadi Mohamed and Omar Sami Al-Ansari:
  On September 27, in violation of the Criminal Procedure Code and exceeding the maximum limit for pre-trial detention stipulated in Article 143—alongside Omar Sami Al-Ansari failing to appear on the detention renewal video screen—the Second Terrorism Circuit of the Cairo Criminal Court, convened at Badr Prison under the chairmanship of Counselor Wagdi Abdel Moneim and membership of Counselors Abdel Galil Moftah and Deyaa Amer, extended the detention of labor leader Shadi Mohamed and citizen Omar Sami Al-Ansari for 45 days. This comes pending investigations in Case No. 1644 of 2026 (Supreme State Security), known as the “Palestine Solidarity Banner Detainees” case, in which they face charges of joining a terrorist group and publishing false news and statements.

The defendants were arrested in mid-April 2024 while hanging a banner expressing solidarity with the Palestinian cause in a tunnel in Alexandria Governorate. They were presented to the Supreme State Security Prosecution, which conducted investigations and ordered their pre-trial detention.

The continued extension of the defendants’ detention—despite exceeding the maximum duration prescribed by law—raises critical issues regarding adherence to the time limits set by legislators for pre-trial detention, emphasizing that it is an exceptional measure that must not transform into a punishment in itself. Additionally, the non-appearance of one of the defendants on the detention renewal screen calls into question the availability of the procedural guarantees necessary to enable the defendant to appear before the court and effectively exercise their right to defense.

• Extension of detention for TikToker Mohamed Allam, known as “Rivaldo,” despite his absence and without hearing his defense:
  On September 28, the Second Terrorism Circuit of the Cairo Criminal Court, convened at Badr Prison under the chairmanship of Counselor Wagdi Abdel Moneim and membership of Counselors Abdel Galil Moftah and Deyaa Amer, extended the detention of TikToker Mohamed Allam, known as “Rivaldo,” for 45 days pending investigations in Case No. 9 of 2025 (Supreme State Security). He faces charges of joining a terrorist group, committing a terrorism financing offense, and publishing false news and statements—despite the inability to establish a connection with the prison where he is held, and without holding the session or hearing his defense counsel’s requests.

Mohamed Allam was arrested at the beginning of January 2025 after publishing a video clip on TikTok in which he criticized the economic decisions of the Egyptian regime.

This incident raises questions regarding the extent to which detention renewal procedures satisfy the guarantees of the right to defense and confrontation, and whether issuing such a decision in the absence of an convened session and without hearing the defense aligns with the judicial nature of the detention renewal process and the requirement for it to be subject to effective judicial oversight.

Third. Trials:

During the second half of September 2026, trials were held involving over 3,000 citizens across 77 cases—mostly Supreme State Security felonies—before the Terrorism Circuits and Appeal Terrorism Circuits at the Badr Courts Complex inside Badr Prison. Some of these proceedings exhibited legal flaws and a lack of fair and equitable trial standards, including:

• After attaching evidence not belonging to the case… Adjournment of the trial of 9 defendants in the “Matariya Cell” case:
  On September 27, the Second Terrorism Circuit of the Cairo Criminal Court, convened at Badr Prison under the chairmanship of Counselor Wagdi Abdel Moneim and membership of Counselors Abdel Galil Moftah and Deyaa Amer, adjourned the trial of 9 defendants in Case No. 713 of 2025 (Matariya Felonies) to the session of October 11, 2026. The defendants face charges of establishing and leading a terrorist group, joining a terrorist group, and possessing unlicensed firearms and ammunition.

The adjournment decision came after discovering that the Public Prosecution had attached evidence belonging to another case to the active case file. The court opened the evidence during the session before realizing that the presented items were unrelated to the trial at hand.

This incident highlights the crucial importance of verifying the identity of evidence and matching it to the relevant case prior to opening it, especially since unsealing evidence and discussing its contents are directly linked to enabling the defense to examine and confront the prosecution’s evidence. Rectifying the procedure after discovering the error allows for correcting the procedural track, ensuring that defendants and their counsel can inspect the specific evidence belonging to the case under trial.

• Due to the absence of defendants… Adjournment of prosecution arguments in the case of Hamdy Al-Zaeem and 167 others:
  On September 27, the Second Terrorism Circuit of the Cairo Criminal Court, chaired by Counselor Wagdi Abdel Moneim, concluded its session without hearing Case No. 955 of 2020 (State Security), registered under No. 29 of 2025 (Fifth Settlement Felonies), involving 168 defendants, including photojournalist Hamdy Al-Zaeem. The session was scheduled to hear the oral arguments of the Public Prosecution.

After the defense team brought to the court’s attention that the case had not been called, the court president explained that several defendants had not been brought from their place of detention, and that the court would wait for their arrival. He stated that if they arrived, the court would hear the prosecution’s arguments, whereas the trial would be adjourned if their attendance remained impossible. A few minutes later, the court president informed the defense team that the hearing had been adjourned to the previously designated date for hearing prosecution arguments.

This incident underscores the intrinsic link between conducting trial sessions and the physical presence of defendants to allow them to follow proceedings, particularly in cases involving a large number of detained individuals. The failure to transport certain defendants from detention stands out as a disruptive factor to the regularity of trial proceedings, necessitating proper measures to guarantee their attendance and enable them to exercise their defense rights throughout all stages of the trial.

Fourth. Government & Official Actions (Positive or Negative):

A) Judges

• The General Assembly of the Cairo Court of Appeal approves work distribution for the new judicial year:

On September 28, the General Assembly of the Cairo Court of Appeal convened at the High Court of Justice (Dar Al-Qadaa Al-Aali), chaired by Counselor Magdy Ali Qassim, President of the Cairo Court of Appeal and member of the Supreme Judicial Council, to address several organizational matters ahead of the new judicial year. The General Assembly unanimously approved the work distribution scheme for the Cairo Court of Appeal’s circuits and judges for the 2026/2027 judicial year. This includes determining circuit jurisdictions and organizing case distribution as part of preparations for managing judicial workflow in the coming year.

B) Lawyers

Lawyers call for increasing terrorism circuits to expedite case rulings:

• On September 27, during substantive trial sessions for cases referred by the Supreme State Security Prosecution, a group of defense attorneys—including lawyers Ahmed Helmy Abbas and Alaa Alam El-Din—requested Counselor Wagdi Abdel Moneim, presiding judge at the Cairo Court of Appeal (Badr Prison division), to intervene with the Supreme Judicial Council to demand an increase in the number of terrorism circuits specialized in hearing cases referred by the Supreme State Security Prosecution.

The attorneys explained that restricting these cases to only two circuits has led to a heavy backlog of cases and defendants. This setup risks prolonging trial durations, causing repeated adjournments, and extending the pre-trial detention periods of the accused. In response, Counselor Wagdi Abdel Moneim clarified that the request falls outside his official authority, suggesting instead that the attorneys submit a written petition signed by multiple lawyers directly to the President of the Cairo Court of Appeal, in his capacity as a member of the Supreme Judicial Council, to consider and decide on the matter.

Fifth. Prisons and Detainees:

• “Freedom… Freedom” and “A charade… A charade”: Defendants chant inside court cages at Badr Prison:
  Over the course of September 26, 27, and 28, following the adjournment of trial sessions before the Second Terrorism Circuit of the Cairo Criminal Court—convened at the Badr Prison Complex under the chairmanship of Counselor Wagdi Abdel Moneim and membership of Counselors Abdel Galil Moftah and Deyaa Amer—courtrooms witnessed repeated protests by several defendants inside the court cages. The defendants banged on the metal bars from within, chanting slogans such as “Freedom… Freedom” and “A charade… A charade,” while attempting to break surveillance cameras inside the cages during their ongoing trial proceedings.

These protests come in the context of repeated calls for freedom by defendants during circuit hearings, alongside recurring objections inside the detention cages while cases are being heard.

These events reflect a state of tension during trial proceedings and highlight the need to address the underlying causes of the defendants’ protests and their detention conditions. It underscores the necessity of ensuring they are enabled to present specific grievances or requests through proper legal channels, while maintaining order in the courtroom and guaranteeing the defendants’ right to present their defense and motions through lawfully established means.