Egypt lawyers appeal 2016 Red Sea boundary deal, handover of Tiran and Sanafir with Saudi Arabia

Dozens of Egyptian lawyers lodged an appeal at the Higher Administrative Court against a maritime boundary delimitation agreement between Egypt and Saudi Arabia that dates back to August 2016. 

The agreement opened the way for the handover by Egypt of the two Red Sea islands of Tiran and Sanafir which had been under Egyptian administrative and military control for decades.

In their appeal, the lawyers asked the court, which rules in disputes between ordinary Egyptians and their government, to revoke the agreement.

The agreement, they argued, violates Egypt's constitution and impinges on the supreme interests of the Egyptian state.

"The agreement violates the situation created by the 2014 constitution," Ali Ayub, one of the lawyers lodging the appeal, told The New Arab.

"Such an agreement cannot go into effect without public approval of it," he added.

The maritime boundary delimitation agreement with Saudi Arabia has been controversial since its signing by the Egyptian prime minister in August 2016.

It roused a series of street protests and anger among ordinary Egyptians, particularly due to the handover of the islands of Tiran and Sanafir.

The two islands are located in the Red Sea, a few nautical miles to the east of the Sinai Peninsula in Egypt and at the entrance to the Gulf of Aqaba, which links both Israel and Jordan to the Red Sea. The two islands also stand on the way to Eilat, Israel's only port on the Gulf of Aqaba and the Red Sea.

Violating the constitution?

In their appeal, Ayub and 56 other lawyers claimed in their appeal that the 2016 maritime boundary delimitation deal with Saudi Arabia violates Article 151 of the Egyptian constitution of 2014.

This article makes it necessary for the government to hold a referendum for the members of the public to seek their approval on agreements for alliances or reconciliation with other countries, as well as on giving away national territories to other countries.

In any case, the lawyers argued in the appeal, the government does not have any legal right to confer any of the nation's territories to anybody or any other country.

"The Higher Administrative Court had previously ruled against giving territories out to other countries," Ayub said. "Nobody has the right to even discuss this idea, neither the government nor the president."

The maritime boundary demarcation deal with Saudi Arabia was approved by the House of Representatives (parliament) in June 2017 and ratified by Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi in the same month.

Whether the Higher Administrative Court will approve Ayub's appeal and downturn the agreement remains to be seen. The court has not set a date for a verdict on the case.

This appeal is the last in a series of legal proceedings challenging the 2016 agreement with Saudi Arabia.

In January 2017, the Higher Administrative Court revoked the agreement, especially because it entailed the handover of the two Red Sea islands to Saudi Arabia.

However, in March 2018, the Supreme Constitutional Court overturned this ruling, noting that signing such an agreement by the representative of the state was, beyond doubt, falling within the political jurisdiction of this representative.

The court also described the 2017 verdict of the Higher Administrative Court as an "infringement" of the legislative authority.

Expecting a bonanza

Egypt set its sights on a number of positive economic consequences of signing the maritime boundary delimitation deal with Saudi Arabia.

These advantages included Egypt's ability to explore mineral reserves along its Red Sea coast, a move the populous Arab country could not take without defining its maritime boundaries with Saudi Arabia, which lies opposite the Egyptian Red Sea coast.

Soon after signing the deal, Egypt invited international petroleum companies to explore hydrocarbons in the area, amid expectations about the presence of mouth-watering reserves. The same expectations were boosted by Saudi Arabia's discovery of natural gas reserves along its Red Sea coast a few years earlier.

Egypt was also hopeful that the move would encourage Saudi Arabia to pump billions of dollars in investments into the veins of the Egyptian economy which was crying for foreign cash as Cairo tried to create jobs for the long line of its unemployed citizens and implement a long list of infrastructure projects.

Saudi Arabia invests now around $34 billion in Egypt, including through about 800 Saudi firms that operate in the Egyptian market.

Ayub and the other lawyers lodging the appeal against the 2016 maritime boundary delimitation agreement with Saudi Arabia say these economic perks are not worth the surrender of part of their nation's territory to the Saudis.

Their appeal coincides with a major social media campaign against the handover of the two islands, one steeped in history and historical files.

People involved in this campaign share historical maps and videos in their bid to prove that the islands belong to Egypt, including a video of late revolutionary leader Gamal Abdel Nasser, in which he says that the two islands belong to Egypt.

Propelling this campaign and the appeal are local media reports alleging that Saudi Arabia had invited the United States to establish a military base on one of the two islands to safeguard the freedom of navigation in the Red Sea.

These reports come as US President Donald Trump prepares to make his first foreign trip to Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar and as the US military continues to pound the positions of the Iran-backed Houthi militia in Yemen.

An unnamed Saudi official has denied his country's plan to invite the US to establish a military base on any of the two islands.

Nevertheless, angry reaction in Egypt to the same reports underscores the importance of the two islands for Egypt's national security and control over the Gulf of Aqaba, local observers said.

The two islands were instrumental in Egypt tightening the maritime noose around Israel ahead of the 1967 war when Nasser ordered the closure of the Strait of Tiran, a move that deprived Israel of access to the Red Sea.

Even now, Egypt has problems with foreign presence in the Red Sea due to fears that this presence may have negative effects on the Suez Canal, the shortest cut between the Red Sea and the Mediterranean and one of Egypt's most important sources of foreign currency.

"Egyptians generally have problems with any country perceived to be violating the sovereignty of their country," international relations expert Ahmed Abdel Meguid told TNA.

"These two islands are very important for both Egypt and Saudi Arabia," he added.