More than three months after Egypt's House of Representatives approved the new Criminal Procedures Code, the fate of the controversial bill now rests with President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, who has yet to ratify it.
Critics—including local and international rights groups, activists and legal experts—warn that the law risks institutionalising repression under the guise of reform, granting unsupervised powers to prosecutors in a system already accused of being reportedly afflicted by abuses.
Originally enacted in 1950 and amended in 2013 and later in 2020, Egypt's Criminal Procedures Code is the backbone of the country's justice system. The draft bill, presented to parliament in early 2024, is expected to be signed into law at any moment.
Status quo legalised
In a country where prosecutors are reportedly known to work closely with security agencies to crush dissent, rights defenders expressed alarm at the vast authorities and immunity granted to prosecutors in the absence of judicial oversight.
The law gives prosecutors the power to impose travel bans and renew pre-trial detentions without judicial involvement, while shielding them from legal accountability.
On 30 April, a day after lawmakers unanimously passed the bill, eight prominent rights organisations condemned in a joint statement the legislation for providing "institutional cover for the extra-legal practices and policies that have been instituted over the past decade."
The government, however, frames the legislation as a major step forward.
Speaking before the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, Egypt's Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty hailed the draft as a "legislative revolution to criminal justice."
But veteran human rights lawyer Fahd El-Banna begs to differ.
"There is no legislative revolution here. The bill has legalised illegal procedures that have been practised by prosecutors for years and are known to everyone—broadening their jurisdiction and granting them powers that legally belong to judges," Banna told The New Arab.
"For example, over the last decade, prosecutors have been referring suspects to trial, which is illegal. Their role is to confront the accused with charges, not refer them to court. That authority used to lie solely with a judge," he argued.
Following the law's approval, UN Human Rights spokesperson Thameen Al-Kheetan expressed concerns about expanding prosecutorial discretion.
"The law would also provide for other measures adversely impacting the right to effective legal representation, and on accountability for the conduct of public officials, including law enforcement personnel," Kheetan said in an official statement on 13 May.
The bill also allows suspects to be interrogated with minimal or no legal representation.
"Even lawyers will have no place to make an argument in defence of their clients during interrogation," Banna warned. "An attorney can only make a brief statement that may or may not be considered."
Regime critics argue that over the past 11 years—marking President Sisi's reign—pre-trial detention and arbitrary travel bans have been weaponised to silence activists, journalists and government critics.
The new law also codifies practices previously deemed informal or unlawful, such as indefinite detention and "case recycling," a tactic where detainees are released from one case only to be charged in another with new allegations.
Authorities have routinely "recycled" political detainees into new cases before the 24-month maximum limit of pre-trial detention expires.
"Egypt is ruled by an authoritarian regime using laws to tighten its grip. Laws passed over the past decade continue this path," renowned political sociologist Dr Said Sadek remarked to TNA.
"While framed as a response to public demands, its provisions reveal a commitment to maintaining control over the judiciary and regime critics, signalling ongoing repressive practices rather than a shift towards democratic progress," Sadek noted.
Alaa Abdel-Fattah's ongoing ordeal
Egypt's justice system has faced criticism for years due to its use of arbitrary arrests, enforced disappearances, mass trials, and televised confessions.
Among the most exemplary cases is that of Alaa Abdel-Fattah, a British-Egyptian activist and one of the leading voices of the 2011 revolution that overthrew late, long-time autocrat Hosni Mubarak.
In May, the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (UNWGAD) concluded that Abdel-Fattah had been illegally detained following an 18-month investigation. The UN body called for his immediate release and demanded that the government provide him "an enforceable right to compensation and other reparations, in accordance with international law."
Abdel-Fattah, 43, was sentenced to five years in prison in 2019 for "broadcasting false news" after sharing a Facebook post. Amnesty International has declared him a prisoner of conscience, and rights groups have denounced the trial as politically motivated and grossly unfair.
Previously imprisoned from 2013 to 2019, Abdel-Fattah was arrested again shortly after his release and recycled into a new case. His sentence technically ended on 30 September 2023, but the prosecution has refused to count the two years he spent in pre-trial detention as part of his sentence.
As a result, he is now expected to remain behind bars until January 2027.
Egypt ranks 135 out of 142 countries in the World Justice Project's Rule of Law Index—an indication, rights defenders argue, of a deep erosion of due process, judicial independence, and basic civil liberties.
Even though the Criminal Procedures Code was unanimously approved by the parliament, known for its loyalty to Sisi, it remains unclear when it will be ratified by the president and then published in the official gazette.
Meanwhile, Sadek argues that Sisi's apparent reluctance to ratify the law, known for enjoying his endorsement, may reflect both internal and international pressures.
"The law's failure to address fair trial rights and its alignment with Egypt's repressive practices have drawn international scrutiny and may have prompted Sisi to delay ratification—probably to mitigate diplomatic and public backlash," Sadek opined. "Without clear public statements from the presidency, it remains uncertain whether Sisi will eventually ratify the law, return it to the parliament for amendments, or shelve it indefinitely."
"While framed as a response to public demands, its provisions reveal a commitment to maintaining control over the judiciary and dissent, signalling ongoing repressive practices rather than a shift towards democratic progress," Sadek added.