This report was submitted to the United Nations Human Rights Council in the context of the third Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of Egypt, scheduled to take place on November 13, 2019. More information about the review can be found here.

1. Scope of international obligations and cooperation with international human rights mechanisms and bodies

1.1 Scope of international obligations

Egypt has not acceded to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), the Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (ICPPED), the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (OPCAT), and the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR-OP2).[1]

Furthermore, Egypt has not accepted the individual complaint mechanisms under the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT), as well as the First Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR-OP1).[2]

Recommendations

• Ratify the Rome Statute of the ICC, ICPPED, OPCAT and ICCPR-OP2;
• Accept the individual complaint mechanisms under UNCAT and ICCPR-OP1.

1.2 Cooperation with international human rights mechanisms and bodies

Despite supporting the recommendations to submit its overdue reports to the relevant Treaty Bodies,[3] Egypt has not submitted its reports to the Committee against Torture (CAT) and the Human Rights Committee, both overdue since 2004.

Egypt has not extended a standing invitation to Special Procedures mandate holders, and it has not responded positively to pending visit requests made by several mandate holders.[4] Following the visit of the Special Rapporteur on the right to adequate housing in 2018, individuals who cooperated with the mandate holder were subjected to acts of intimidation and reprisals.[5] Additionally, Egypt has appeared in the last two reports of the UN Secretary General on intimidation and reprisals for cooperation with the UN in the field of human rights.[6]

Lastly, the state has failed to release the majority of individuals whose detentions have been characterised as arbitrary by the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (WGAD). Victims have only been released after completing their prison sentences, and many have later been subjected to further arbitrary deprivation of liberty by being obliged to spend every night at a police station (see infra section 3.2.2).

Recommendations

• Submit the outstanding reports to the CAT and Human Rights Committee;
• Extend a standing invitation to all Special Procedures mandate holders, respond positively to the pending visit requests and set dates for the visits;
• Stop reprisals against individuals who cooperate with UN mechanisms and investigate the acts of reprisals;
• Fully cooperate with the UN human rights mechanisms by responding to all the communications submitted by the mandate holders and by implementing WGAD Opinions characterising deprivations of liberty as arbitrary.

2. National human rights framework

Although Egypt pledged to establish and strengthen its national human rights institution during the last UPR cycle ,[7] its National Council for Human Rights (NCHR)[8] does not abide by the Paris Principles.[9] In fact, the NCHR lacks financial and functional independence from the executive,[10] and its members are elected in a process that lacks transparency and affects their effective independence.[11]

As a result, the NCHR has failed to denounce the numerous human rights violations committed by the authorities in the reporting period and has denied the existence of torture, enforced disappearances and unfair trials in the country.[12]

Recommendation

• Amend Law No. 197 of 2017 establishing the NCHR in order to ensure the institution’s compliance with the Paris Principles.

3. Implementation of international human rights obligations

3.1 Human rights and counter-terrorism

In the past UPR, Egypt accepted recommendations to respect human rights in its fight against terrorism.[13] However, Egyptian laws provide a broad and vague definition of “terrorism”, which enables the authorities to list, prosecute and punish journalists, human rights defenders, peaceful protesters, political activists and members of the opposition for peacefully criticising the government.

Anti-Terrorism Law No. 95 of 2015[14] criminalises a wide range of acts as “terrorist”,[15] including any form of peaceful political opposition to the regime.[16] This broad and vague definition allows the authorities to crack down on nonviolent activities under the pretext of countering terrorism. Moreover, Law No. 8 of 2015[17] established a listing mechanism that lacks transparency and due process, without requiring the individuals and entities listed as terrorists to be notified nor allowing them to meaningfully challenge the listing before an independent judicial authority.

Furthermore, measures taken in the context of the counter-terrorism operations conducted across the country and especially in the Sinai region[18] have led to thousands of extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances and arbitrary detentions.[19]

Recommendations

• Repeal Anti-Terrorism Law No. 95 of 2015 and Law No. 8 of 2015, and ensure that counter-terrorism laws have a clear definition of terrorism in line with international human rights standards;
• End the use of security measures to crack down on any form of peaceful dissent;
• Cease all violations committed in counter-terrorism operations in the Sinai and abide by international human rights law standards regarding the use of force.

3.2 Right to life, liberty and security of person

3.2.1 Death penalty and summary executions

Egypt rejected all recommendations to establish a moratorium on executions and abolish the death penalty in the last UPR cycle.[20]

During the reporting period, the Egyptian authorities have dramatically increased the number of death sentences handed out, often issued to large numbers of individuals at once following grossly unfair mass trials. The number of executions has also increased and, in February 2019 alone, the authorities executed fifteen death sentences issued following unfair trials and based on forced confessions extracted under torture.[21]

3.2.2 Enforced disappearances

Security forces systematically arrest any individual deemed to be criticising the authorities – particularly journalists, human rights defenders,[22] members of the opposition and other peaceful political activists – without providing any warrant nor reasons for the arrest.

Following the arrest, individuals are usually held incommunicado and often kept in secret and unacknowledged detention by the authorities for prolonged periods of time that can range from several weeks to several months, leading to their enforced disappearance. During these periods, victims are systematically subjected to torture and ill-treatment (see infra section 3.2.4) and their families are at risk of reprisals if they try to enquire about their fate and whereabouts.

3.2.3 Arbitrary deprivation of liberty and conditions of detention

Despite the recommendations received in the last cycle,[23] the Egyptian authorities continue to severely and systematically violate their obligations to not carry out arbitrary deprivations of liberty and to respect fair trial guarantees during court proceedings.[24]

After being arbitrarily arrested without a warrant and held for prolonged periods of time in incommunicado detention that often takes the form of an enforced disappearance (see supra section 3.2.2), individuals reappear only when brought before a judicial authority that charges them – often with terrorism-related crimes. Pre-trial detention periods are renewed by the prosecution without the presence of a lawyer, even exceeding the two-year maximum period established by the Criminal Procedure Code.[25]

Fair trial violations remain of particular concern and take the following forms: mass trials of civilians before civilian, military[26] and emergency state security courts[27] in proceedings that violate basic fair trial guarantees;[28] the sole reliance on confessions extracted under torture (see infra section 3.2.4); systematic violations of defence rights and the right to be presumed innocent; violations of the right to a public hearing.[29]

Once released after completing their prison sentence, individuals are often required to spend every night – from 6 p.m. to 6 a.m. – at a police station for several years, in violation of the ne bis in idem principle. Such judicial control constitutes an additional form of arbitrary deprivation of liberty used as a tool to silence peaceful dissenting voices.

Furthermore, conditions of detention in Egyptian prisons are extremely poor: detainees are regularly held in overcrowded cells lacking basic hygiene standards, and medical treatment is often denied, leading to several deaths in custody in the reporting period.[30] Families’ and lawyers’ visits are arbitrarily and regularly banned or restricted as a means of punishment. 

3.2.4 Torture and ill-treatment

Despite supporting all the recommendations made on the issue during the last cycle,[31] Egypt has failed to bring the definition of torture under its domestic laws into line with international standards and to put an end to this practice in the country.[32]

In 2017, at the end of its inquiry procedure under article 20 UNCAT, the CAT declared that “torture is a systematic practice in Egypt” and that it “appears to occur particularly frequently following arbitrary arrests and is often carried out to obtain a confession or to punish and threaten political dissenters”.[33] The authorities rejected specific recommendations made by the CAT by refusing “to immediately end the use of incommunicado detention; create an independent authority to investigate allegations of torture, enforced disappearance and ill-treatment; restrict the jurisdiction of the military courts to offences of an exclusively military nature; and enforce the prohibition against “virginity tests” and end the practice of forensic anal examinations for those accused of crimes”.[34] Still, claims of torture are systematically ignored by courts, with judges not ordering any investigations into the allegations and admitting confessions extracted under torture as the sole evidence against the accused.

Recommendations

• Establish a moratorium on executions with the aim of abolishing the death penalty;
• Amend domestic laws and policies on arrest and detention to ensure they abide by the prohibition of arbitrary deprivation of liberty under international law;
• Immediately cease the practices of enforced disappearance, prolonged pre-trial detention, mass trials, and post-release judicial control;
• Repeal decrees expanding military and state security emergency courts’ jurisdiction over civilians;
• Ensure humane conditions of detention, and respect the right to medical care of detainees;
• Ensure due process and fair trial rights, and the rejection by courts of forced confessions;
• Amend domestic legislation to bring the definition of torture into line with article 1 UNCAT;
• Immediately end the practice of torture and ill-treatment in detention, ensure that claims of torture are investigated and those responsible are prosecuted and punished.

3.3 Administration of justice, including impunity and the rule of law

3.3.1 Independence of the judiciary

In spite of the several recommendations Egypt accepted in the last UPR[35] and in violation of its 2014 Constitution,[36] the Egyptian judicial system lacks independence from the executive.

The conduct of prosecutors and judges in the country indicates a lack of impartiality and independence, which results in a severe and consistent pattern of violations of fair trial guarantees prior to and during courts proceedings (see supra section 3.2.3).[37] Judges defending their independence and exercising their right to freedom of expression have been deemed to “oppose” the government and prosecuted on this basis.[38]

3.3.2 Impunity

Notwithstanding the recommendations made in the last review to investigate and ensure accountability for violations committed by military and security forces,[39] in 2018 Egypt enacted a law[40] that gives the president the power to grant military officers of his choice a lifelong immunity for any violations they have committed in the exercise of their functions.

As stated by the High Commissioner for Human Rights, this law “effectively bestow[s] immunity from prosecution on security force personnel […] promotes impunity, and undermines the faith of the Egyptian people in the Government’s capacity to deliver justice for all.”[41]

In this climate of pervasive impunity, no investigation nor prosecution has been carried out to date for the serious human rights violations committed in recent years, such as the killing of more than a thousand of protesters in 2013 in Raba’a Square.[42]

Recommendations

• Ensure that judges and lawyers exercise their functions with complete independence and in line with international standards of due process, and are protected from any form of reprisals;
• Repeal the 2018 Law Governing the Treatment of Certain Senior Commanders of the Armed Forces;
• Conduct effective, thorough, independent, impartial and transparent investigations into all violations committed by military and security forces, and ensure that those responsible are prosecuted and punished and the victims and their families are provided with an effective remedy.

3.4 Fundamental freedoms

3.4.1 Freedom of expression

Despite the recommendations received in 2014,[43] during the reporting period, peaceful critics – including numerous journalists, human rights defenders, and political activists – were forcibly disappeared, arbitrarily detained, charged with terrorism-related crimes and harshly sentenced.

A set of repressive laws enables the authorities’ crackdown on freedom of expression and the media. In particular, Law No. 180 of 2018[44] gives the executive broad powers to censor and prevent the publication of content deemed to be prohibited on the basis of vague criteria. It further establishes a strict licensing process that affects the work of independent media. Law No. 92 of 2016[45] established three bodies – whose members are largely nominated by the president – mandated to strictly regulate and monitor Egypt’s media and press. The law was amended in 2018 with provisions that “provide the authorities with overbroad powers to censor information” and allow “for restrictions on the basis of overbroad language”, according to the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression.[46]

Furthermore, while hundreds of websites have been blocked in the country since May 2017, including those of media outlets and human rights organisations,[47] the 2018 Cybercrime Law further expanded the authorities’ power to censor or block websites that publish content not in line with their views.[48]

3.4.2 Freedom of peaceful assembly and association

During the last UPR, numerous states recommended that Egypt bring its legislative framework regulating NGOs into line with international standards.[49]

However, Law No. 70 of 2017[50] imposed severe restrictions on civil society space. For example, the law prescribes strict registration and funding approval processes; limits the type of work allowed for NGOs to “the fields of development and social welfare”; establishes a National Agency for the Regulation of Foreign Non-Governmental Organisations composed of members of the executive mandated to grant permission to foreign NGOs to work inside Egypt;  and provides a set of punishments for violations of its provisions.[51]

As stated by the former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, the law “effectively hands administration of NGOs to the Government”.[52] As a result, several independent NGOs have been banned, and many local and international NGOs have been forced to cease their activities or relocate to other countries.

With regards to freedom of peaceful assembly, despite the recommendations made by several states,[53] Egypt has failed to amend its legislative framework to comply with international standards, and has continued to prevent and restrict peaceful protests in the country.

Peaceful protesters have been charged with broad and vague offences, such as “belonging to a banned group” and “disturbing public order”, and punished with harsh prison sentences under Law No. 107 of 2013. This law further establishes a strict notification system, and allows the security forces to use force in the dispersal of protests not in line with international standards, which enabled a brutal crackdown on protests in the reporting period.[54] Lastly, Presidential Decree No. 136 of 2014 gave military courts jurisdiction to try civilians who engaged in protests.

Recommendations

• Immediately cease reprisals against peaceful dissidents and release all those arbitrarily detained for their peaceful opposition to the authorities;
• Put an end to undue restrictions, monitoring and censorship of the media and internet content as well as the blocking of websites, including those of NGOs, and repeal Law No. 180, Law No. 92, the 2018 Cybercrime Law, Law No. 70, and Law No. 107;
• Respect the right to peaceful assembly by putting in place a non-burdensome notification system, and enable peaceful assemblies in law and practice;
• Ensure that domestic laws and policies regarding the use of force in dispersing demonstrations comply with the United Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials.