Marwa Fahmy, wife of Canadian Al-Jazeera English journalist Mohammed Fahmy, bursts into tears as she is watched by human rights lawyer Amal Clooney after the verdict is delivered in Tora prison in Cairo. An Egyptian court sentenced three Al-Jazeera English journalists to three years in prison.Amr Nabil/The Associated Press
In no particular order, the following is a list of news stories that captured the Egyptian public's attention over the weekend:
After three years without a parliament, the country has finally set a date for parliamentary elections, set to commence Oct. 18.
An Italian energy firm announced it has discovered what could be one of the largest natural gas fields in the world, just off the Egyptian coast.
An Egyptian imam has been suspended after modifying a traditional Muslim prayer call to include a reference to Facebook.
It is quite likely that, among many Egyptians, all these stories generated far more interest in Cairo this weekend than anything to do with the ongoing trial of three Al Jazeera journalists – a court case that has become a high-profile indictment of Egypt's post-revolution political and judicial systems.
On Saturday, Canadian Mohamed Fahmy, Egyptian Baher Mohamed and Australian Peter Greste were sentenced to three years in prison on charges of spreading false news and failing to register as journalists. Mr. Mohamed received an additional six-month sentence.
The verdict is the latest blow to Mr. Fahmy and Mr. Mohamed, who are in custody in Egypt (Mr. Greste has been deported and is now free, though now that he has been convicted, he may be subject to extradition while travelling to other countries).
In Canada and throughout the world, the trial has long been the subject of immense significance – condemned as a politically motivated farce by myriad human rights groups. After this weekend's verdict, political leaders from Canada, the United Kingdom and elsewhere once again lined up to call for the defendants' release.
But what has never really changed, for the duration of the Al Jazeera journalists' 18-month ordeal, is the case's domestic resonance.
Which, for all intents and purposes, is none.
To the great misfortune of the accused, the Al Jazeera trial is of fairly little interest in a country whose central drama concerns the increasingly bloody battle between an authoritarian government and a radicalized Islamist fringe.
In the context of that battle, the journalists' cause is particularly toxic among many Egyptian supporters of the current regime. That's because the case has its genesis in a terrorism-related allegation – in late 2013, the three men were arrested on charges that they conspired with the Muslim Brotherhood to spread false news.
Even though the government has shown no evidence to support that charge (and the original sentence in the case was eventually thrown out), the journalists' alleged affiliation with the Brotherhood has made them difficult to defend among the significant portion of the Egyptian population that loathes the Islamist group.
As such, even as foreign leaders call on Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sissi to use his broad authority to release the journalists, the amount of domestic pressure the President faces is effectively nil.
And so Mr. Fahmy and Mr. Mohamed's nightmare continues. The two can appeal their sentence to Egypt's highest court. But it is likely that Mr. Fahmy's legal team will focus its energy on convincing the President to deport him back to Canada.
Even if Mr. Fahmy is eventually deported – an option unavailable to his Egyptian colleague Mr. Mohamed, who was convicted on equally frivolous evidence – the Al Jazeera journalists' trial will resonate well beyond the date of its conclusion.
Regardless of outcome, the case has sent a clear message about the extent to which Cairo is willing to tolerate messengers broadcasting any narrative but the one approved by the government. In recent months, using the war with Islamist groups as justification, the el-Sissi government has seized the opportunity to pass severely draconian restrictions on press freedom. As a result of one such law, passed earlier in August, it is now a crime in Egypt for journalists to contradict any government version of a terrorist attack.
Ultimately, beyond the devastating impact it has had on their lives, the Al Jazeera trial has arguably never had much to do with the convicted journalists or the work they did. Any basic assessment of the case against them reveals a bevy of absurd, irrelevant "evidence," which nonetheless resulted in a guilty verdict.
Instead, the men found themselves caught in a political shoving match between Egypt and Qatar (where Al Jazeera is headquartered) over the latter nation's tacit support of the now-criminalized Muslim Brotherhood.
And the ultimate resolution of the case (at least for Mr. Fahmy, by virtue of his Canadian citizenship) may well be equally political – a Presidential order of deportation that rids the Egyptian government of a minor public-relations headache.
But how long such a resolution may take is anyone's guess. The Egyptian government has brushed off any foreign criticism of Saturday's verdict as an unacceptable interference in the country's judicial system.
And domestically, it seems, the trial and its implications for press freedom in Egypt are, at best, of minor importance.