Table of Contents
A man currently residing in Saudi Arabia fabricated claims of financial exploitation and threats of imprisonment by his children to garner public sympathy and pressure regarding a land dispute, according to the Egyptian Ministry of Interior. The ministry’s statement addresses a video circulating on social media alleging the man’s children had seized his funds and were holding him against his will.
The Ministry of Interior initiated an investigation after the video gained traction online. Officials confirmed that no formal reports of the alleged crimes – financial seizure or unlawful imprisonment – had been filed with Egyptian authorities.
Investigation Reveals Family Land Dispute
The investigation identified the individual who published the video and uncovered a complex family history. He is married to two women; one wife passed away in 2011, with whom he shares three sons, and the other remains alive, with whom he has two sons.
The core of the issue, authorities persistent, stems from a family dispute over a plot of land located in the Sharkia Governorate.The dispute is specifically between the man and one of his sons from his deceased wife. notably, no legal action had been initiated to resolve the disagreement.
“The incident was due to family disputes regarding a plot of land…without any legal measures being taken regarding the dispute,” a senior official stated.
Attempt to Leverage public Opinion
The Ministry of Interior concluded that the man intentionally filmed and disseminated the video to manipulate public opinion and exert pressure on his son to relinquish the contested land. This tactic,officials believe,was a deliberate attempt to circumvent the legal process.
“The aforementioned person filmed and published the circulating clip with the intention of gaining public sympathy and pressuring his son to recover the plot of land in question,” the Ministry confirmed.
Legal measures have been taken in response to the man’s actions, though the specifics of those measures were not disclosed. The case highlights the potential for misinformation and the misuse of social media to influence personal disputes.
