style="font-size:15px;"> ʿĪsā ibn Hishām said: They then brought me forward as a witness. The Judge proceeded to question me about my knowledge of the whole affair. I responded to his questions.
ʿĪSĀ The whole thing is a most peculiar tale. It started like this—
JUDGE (interrupting) There’s no need to go into details. Just tell me what you know about it.
ʿĪSĀ What I know is that one night at daybreak I was visiting the graveyard in search of spiritual counsel and reflection.
JUDGE (getting irritated) There’s no need to speak at length, just answer the point I asked you.
ʿĪSĀ That’s what I was doing. I was telling you what happened. I saw a man coming out of—
JUDGE (fidgeting) I’ve just told you I won’t accept any elaborate accounts of what happened. Did the accused strike the police officer and the Donkeyman?
ʿĪSĀ The accused did not strike the Donkeyman; he merely pushed him away because the Donkeyman was being so persistent. He didn’t hit the policeman either. He was feeling faint and simply fell on him by accident. He’s quite unaware—
JUDGE All right, that’s enough! Call the Attorney.
4.12
ATTORNEY This Pāshā stands accused of assaulting a member of the police during the course of his duties at the police station, and also of injuring Mursī the Donkeyman. The charge is substantiated by the witnesses’ testimony in the dossier on the case. The court has enough information about all this. On that basis therefore, the Parquet demands that sentence be passed against the accused according to article 346 dealing with misdemeanors. It demands that the court must prove its integrity by showing no mercy in its sentence. The accused’s attitude demands no less. He seems to be under the impression that his status exempts him from the authority of the law and gives him the right to regard the rest of the population as being less important than himself. So he disciplines them himself without regard to their rights and the sanctity of the law. He must undoubtedly be punished severely so as to provide an example and warning to people like him and to ensure that justice will be unbiased. I commit the case to the court.
4.13
JUDGE (to the lawyer) Now the defense, and make it brief.
LAWYER (after clearing his throat and fumbling among his papers) We are indeed amazed that the Attorney of the Parquet has summoned us here today describing us as the accused. What we say, your worship, is that, since desert civilization and the barbarian ages, the origin of the occurrence of crimes according to the law in this world was meant—
JUDGE (in disgust) Would my learned friend be brief and get to the point?
LAWYER It is well known, your worship, that the system of organization in the classes of human society demands—
JUDGE (irritated) My dear Sir, be brief.
LAWYER But the point at issue requires that—
JUDGE (grumbling) There is no need for all this.
LAWYER (flustered) The Attorney has said … (here he quotes something from the Attorney’s speech), however, we claim that, were we to concede for argument’s sake—
JUDGE (annoyed) That’s enough, sir. Get to the point!
LAWYER (stuttering and confused) May it please the court, this accused man who now stands before the Judge is a man of importance and an amir of considerable standing in days of old. His story has been published in the papers; here are the numbers of Miṣbāḥ al-sharq for you to examine.37 While he was walking, a donkeyman kept blocking his path, so he pushed him aside. Now we’re all well aware of how persistent and uncouth donkeymen and uneducated people like them can be—
JUDGE (losing all patience) Listen, my good Sir, I’ve told you to be brief!
LAWYER (sweat pouring off him) When the accused reached the police station, he fainted and fell unintentionally on a policeman out of uniform who was sweeping the station floor. The integrity of the court therefore demands that no attention be paid to the police claims. There can be no charge against the accused whatsoever. He lived in an age different from our own; in his day the whole system was different. He has never heard of the demands of the law, so he is unaware of its regulations. Your worship knows the situation best of all, and if—
JUDGE (pounding the desk with his hand in annoyance) The court has been enlightened, so there’s absolutely no need for all this talk. Get on with your demands.
LAWYER (suppressing his own anger) We have two demands. We ask that the accused be acquitted as a matter of principle. If the court decides otherwise, then we hope that, in accordance with article 352 of the Penal Code, it will show due clemency.
4.14
ʿĪsā ibn Hishām said: The Judge proceeded to deliver his verdict. In accordance with the two articles of the Penal Code as cited, he condemned the Pāshā to a year and a half’s imprisonment and fined him five piasters with costs as stipulated by the article on misdemeanors also mentioned above. I found this too much to bear; the world darkened before my eyes. I would certainly have joined my companion in a swoon of astonishment, had not the Lawyer given us every possible assurance that the Pāshā was bound to be acquitted at the Court of Appeal because of the fairness of its members. However, he told us that, besides that, we would have to raise a grievance with the Committee of Surveillance so as to present the case in a favorable light when it was considered at the appeal. “I want you to realize,” he told me, “that the Judge kept interrupting and hurrying me on because he’s been invited to the banquet of a friend of his at 1 p.m. He’s got thirty cases on his agenda, and intends to pass sentence in all of them before his appointment.”
4.15
ʿĪsā ibn Hishām said: God Almighty alone is the possessor of power and might! What could I say other than quote the words of the wise poet, al-Maʿarrī:
I forbid you to pursue controversy or to be seen
as linked to preaching or mosque-imam.
Abandon princedom and using a whip in the city,
thinking it a champion’s sword.
These things have I despised in relatives
and friends alike. It were better to stint your own self.
Miṣbāḥ al-sharq 39, January 12, 1899
5.1
Our Lawyer forwarded a petition to the Committee of Surveillance and suggested that we should go to inquire about it. He told us that he would like to deal with it himself, but he was prevented from so doing by the realization that the Judge who was the subject of the complaint because of his continuous interruptions during the evidence phase might well make a determined effort to do him some harm in the future. He would be aware that the Lawyer
