300 Egypt
This is all the more remarkable in that the capitulatory
regime in Egypt has, in course of time, come to be more
onerous than anywhere else. Take, for example, the
present organisation of the Mixed Tribunals. They were
proposed by Nubar (1876) as a reform that should lead to
the renunciation of the Consular Courts. They have not
as yet had this result, though half a century has passed
since their foundation. Even those German and other
Consular Courts closed during the war have since been
reopened. Besides that, these Mixed Tribunals have led
to permanent institutions for giving the Treaty Powers
a veto over modifications of the judicatures and jurispru-
dence. Thus, Art. 12 of the Civil Code provided that a
Commission de la Magistrature was to be consulted as to
any alteration of the Mixed Courts Codes. With the
British occupation the Mixed Courts rapidly assumed a
political role by constant refusals to carry out Anglo-
Egyptian legislation—notably the Police Regulations of
1887. This led to the establishment of a General
Assembly of the Mixed Court (January 31, 1889) w^h
the right of recording whether proposed measures were
(a) generally applicable and (b) agreeable to treaty
rights. Confirmation of this curious institution was got
in an amendment to Art. 12 of the Civil Code in 1911.
It is open to the Egyptian Government to consult the
Assembly or no, and the latter has itself no suspensory
veto. But the Assembly is, in fact, a sort of Supreme
Court with foreign representation ratifying or rejecting
domestic legislation affecting foreigners. Rejection by
the Assembly gives ground for diplomatic representation
as to a breach of treaty right. And though this is no
doubt a very .practical procedure for dealing with these
peculiar privileges of foreigners, yet it is one scarcely re-
concilable with the strict principle of national sovereignty.