The Disciplinary Court of the State Council in Al-Buhaira issued the reasoning for its ruling in the case against the defendant, known in the media as the “Doctor of Kafr El-Dawar,” sentencing her to a six-month suspension from work on charges of disclosing patients’ secrets.
Reasoning of the Ruling Against the Doctor of Kafr El-Dawar
The court’s reasoning stated: In conclusion, the court points out that given the importance and seriousness of the incident constituting the violation to society, this has motivated the court to elaborate on explaining its causes, manifestations, means of combating it, and eradicating it, in fulfillment of the social role of judicial rulings. This role is not limited only to punishing those who have strayed from the right path but also to sounding the alarm to alert society to the facts presented before its judiciary, which compel society as a whole to confront them (ruling of the Supreme Administrative Court in Appeal No. 43350 for Judicial Year 64, session dated 13/6/2020).
The reasoning continued: From this perspective, and given its connection to the reality of contemporary society, the court points out that it has recently observed the spread of a phenomenon where a not insignificant segment of society uses what is called “live” broadcasting—direct streaming on the social media site Facebook and other social media platforms. When any event or situation occurs involving the owners of these accounts or people anywhere, the account holder opens their mobile phone camera, films what they or others are experiencing or have experienced, and broadcasts it live on their personal page via their account on these sites.
The ruling’s reasoning added: This is done whether for the purpose of fame, increasing followers on their accounts on these sites, for material gain from the video’s spread on these sites, for genuine advice, guidance, and education, to share with their followers what they are experiencing, or for any other purpose—these are intentions in the hearts of the owners of these pages and accounts known only to God. Consequently, this is a phenomenon that has become new to Egyptian society due to its violation of the sanctity and privacy of others by filming people without their consent and infringing on their right to privacy. This technological revolution of social media sites on the internet in general could have had a positive impact on citizens’ lives.
The reasoning further stated: However, their misuse has had a clear and tangible negative impact on others in many cases, involving violations of the sanctity of private life for some individuals and, in some instances, committing acts that could disturb public order and morals, or involve insult, slander, defamation, blackmail, and abuse. Caution must be exercised by users of these accounts when exercising their right to publish, because the potential for harm must be weighed against any benefit that might arise from it. In what is called a “live” broadcast, a person appears and begins discussing matters, secrets, and details—whether about themselves or others (if they are even true in the first place and not fabricated)—that they should not have mentioned in public view, out of respect for the sanctity and privacy of citizens’ lives and for the social traditions and customs observed in Egyptian society.
It continued: Therefore, the court urges all members of society, including employees, to use the internet in general and social media sites in particular within the limits and scope of the purpose for which they were launched: the easy and rapid transfer of information and data, and seamless and swift communication among all, especially in light of the openness, ease of information flow, and technological revolution in data transmission that the global community is experiencing. The aim should not be for users of these sites to have objectives involving obscenity or mere defamation of reputation by discussing facts and matters that should not be talked about or delved into, whether from an ethical, religious, or legal perspective, by violating the sanctity and secrets of others by broadcasting them publicly to attract and increase views for the users of these accounts on these platforms.
Regarding the third violation attributed to the defendant, the Doctor of Kafr El-Dawar, which involves her falsely claiming to be a specialist in obstetrics and gynecology despite being only a fellowship doctor in obstetrics and gynecology. This entails misleading and deceiving the patient audience with a professional description contrary to the truth, in addition to unfair competition with other specialized doctors, according to what was proven in the case verification report prepared by the Private Treatment Administration of the Kafr El-Dawar