Al-Jazeera trial: prosecution witnesses contradict claims in written testimony
|
Version 0 of 1. The case against three al-Jazeera English journalists on trial in Egypt was compromised on Sunday after a group of key prosecution witnesses contradicted several of their own major allegations previously provided to the court in written testimony. Journalists Mohamed Fahmy, Baher Mohamed and the Australian Peter Greste have been imprisoned in Cairo since last December on charges of endangering national security, aiding terrorists, doctoring footage, and operating without licence. The prosecution's case was largely based on allegations made in a report written by a committee of technical experts from Egypt's state television network. But under cross-examination in the trial's 10th hearing on Sunday, the committee's three representatives said they did not know whether the journalists' work had endangered national security, or if their equipment was unlicensed – contradicting arguments they had made in writing. Defence lawyers argued this showed clear discrepancies between the committee's oral and written evidence. Khaled Abou Bakr, who represents Fahmy, told the judge: "They have broken their oath, and their evidence is null and void." Each of the three committee members still maintained that footage found with the journalists had been edited in a biased manner. But under cross-examination, they repeatedly failed to name a single example, saying that they had forgotten the specific instances. Shouting from the defendants' cage during a recess, Fahmy claimed the trio's contradictory testimony showed that they did not know what had been written in their report. Fahmy, an ex-CNN journalist who has reported from several war zones, said: "It's very clear that they have been fed what to say by the prosecutors. We have been in prison for six months because the tech committee were forced to sign a statement that our coverage was against national security … The prosecution should be in the cage." The case was adjourned until 5 June, when the lead prosecutor will be allowed to sum up his case. The trial has sparked global outcry. But inside Egypt – where al-Jazeera, and in particular its Arabic channel, is seen as biased towards the ousted president Mohamed Morsi – many see the case as fair. There are some signs, however, of a limited shift in public opinion: several public figures, including the former government minister Amr Moussa, have signed letters of support for Mohamed Fahmy. In a separate case, a fourth al-Jazeera journalist, Abdullah el-Shamy, has been in prison without charge since August and has been on a hunger strike for over 100 days. |