Egypt

Published in 2025

Executive Summary

Despite ratifying both the United Nations Convention Against Corruption and the African Union Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption, Egypt has yet to establish a comprehensive legal framework dedicated to protecting whistleblowers. Existing anti-corruption laws have been in place for over two decades and have not effectively deterred corruption. Instead, they have been selectively enforced as a political instrument to suppress those who seek to uncover corruption.

As for the state of press freedom, media rights, and freedom of expression, Egypt ranks among the lowest globally. Multiple international human rights organisations have classified it as a rogue state that systematically violates fundamental rights, citing arbitrary detention, enforced disappearances, and torture as methods used to silence dissent. These practices significantly obstruct access to independent information and restrict public scrutiny of government actions.

Introduction

In 2011, Egypt experienced its largest popular movement in history, with over eight million people demanding the removal of President Hosni Mubarak, who had ruled for more than 30 years. His regime was notorious for suppressing freedoms, maintaining a state of emergency for decades, and fostering widespread corruption. After a tumultuous transitional period, which included Mubarak’s ouster and Egypt’s first democratic elections, his successor, Mohamed Morsi, had a short-lived presidency. He was ultimately overthrown in 2013 following a national uprising and a military coup, leading to the rise of army general Abdel-Fattah El-Sisi. Since then, Sisi has ruled with an iron fist, silencing dissidents and critics.

Egypt remains among the world’s lowest-scoring countries in the Corruption Index, coming 130^th out of 180 countries in Transparency International’s 2024 ranking and 134^th out of 142 countries in the 2024 Rule of Law Index. Sisi’s regime, backed by the military, has been characterised by extensive infrastructure spending, which often lacks transparency and a robust economic strategy, resulting in a significant increase in national debt. With the military controlling roughly half of the economy, there is a lack of transparency regarding finances, fuelling allegations of embezzlement and misuse of vast sums of money by regime members, which has hindered Egypt’s economy and development.

Corruption, the misuse of public funds, and the repression of freedoms remain persistent issues in Egypt, making the role of whistleblowers crucial in exposing wrongdoing. However, Egypt’s legal system lacks the necessary protections to support such efforts.

Laws and measures related to whistleblowers

Egypt’s legal system is a mixed system influenced by both Islamic Sharia law and the Napoleonic Code. The Napoleonic Code forms the foundation of Egypt’s civil and commercial laws, while Sharia law primarily influences personal status laws (e.g., marriage, divorce, inheritance).

• Absence of specific national legislation on whistleblower protection

Although a stand-alone draft law on Witness Protection was proposed in 2013, which has since not been passed,  no comprehensive legal framework has been established to regulate whistleblowing.

From articles 564 to 568, the draft law proposed clauses of safety for witnesses:

• The witness may designate the police station or their workplace as their place of residence
•  If disclosing the witness’s information would put their life at risk, the law allows the court or the public prosecutor to hear their testimony without revealing their identity. Instead, a separate case file will be created to record the witness’s details and identity.
• The draft law grants the defendant the right to confront the witness whose identity has been concealed and to cross-examine them using remote technical means that do not disclose their identity.
• The draft law imposes severe penalties on anyone who discloses information about a witness whose identity has been ordered to be concealed.

However, it appears that the draft law lacks a clear definition of what constitutes a witness and does not specify the types of crimes that warrant witness protection. Furthermore, it fails to protect the relatives of witnesses from potential threats. Therefore, this law has too many loopholes to effectively protect witnesses and whistleblowers.

The law was heavily criticised by the international community for failing to meet international standards. Egyptian civil society at the time demanded necessary amendments to the draft law to include a clear definition of the whistleblower, witness, and expert, specifies certain crimes and their penalties and establish an independent body responsible for receiving complaints and reports and investigating them, and finally, to allow civil society a role in receiving reports in cases of significant danger. The overarching concern is that such a law could be misused by the government to suppress opposition, potentially discouraging whistleblowers.

• Law No. 1 of 2024, amendments to the existing Criminal Procedure Code

On January 6th, 2024, President Al-Sisi ratified Law No. 1 of 2024, a standalone legislation that introduced significant amendments to the existing Criminal Procedure Code, in the government’s ongoing overhaul of the Criminal Procedure Code. While law No. 1 of 2024 provides key clauses to witness protection such as allowing witnesses to use a police station as their official address, permitting courts to hear witness testimonies anonymously and establishing separate case files to document witness identities confidentially, it is part of a legal corpus that has faced criticism from human rights organisations. Concerns have been raised that these newly introduced provisions could undermine fair trial rights and empower law enforcement officials without adequate oversight.

In December 2024, the Egyptian House of Representatives approved in principle a new draft law aimed at replacing the current Criminal Procedure Code, to accelerate the judicial process while ensuring “fair trial guarantees and the right to defence”. As of April 2025, the draft law has been approved by the House of Representatives, with multiple rights groups citing an apparent failure to protect detainees in a move that strengthens state’s authoritarianism.

• The existing laws seem to have a deterring effect on whistleblowers

The most telling example of deterrence can be found in Law No. 32/2014, also referred to as the “Corrupt Contracts Law”, which was enacted by interim President Adly Mansour in April 2014. In essence, the law prevents any third party from challenging the corruption of contracts, allocations, or sales conducted by the State, thus denying citizens the right to challenge the legality of a public contract with investors and its conformity to the public interest. Despite an appeal to the Constitutional Court in 2014, supported by the Egyptian Centre for Economic and Social Rights (ECESR) and its various legal collaborators, and a subsequent petition in 2023 to repeal the Presidential Decree Promulgating the law, the Constitutional Court has since upheld the law, citing its necessity at a time when Egypt’s national economy required “extraordinary measures to attract foreign investors”.  

While employees and citizens have the right to report misconduct within government institutions, according to Article 22 of  Law 62/1975 on Illicit Gains, they can face penalties, including fines or up to six months in jail, if their claims are deemed “false”. A decision up to the discretion of the judge, who often acts on behalf of the state, thus creating a strong disincentive. As for the Law No. 106 of 2013 on Preventing Conflicts of Interest for State Officials, it imposes strict penalties on individuals who reveal financial conflicts or corruption cases without going through official channels, which are often controlled by the state, evidently discouraging whistleblowers. Similarly, the Personal Data Protection Law No. 151 of 2020 imposes significant penalties, including fines ranging from EGP 100,000 to EGP 5 million (ranging from €1782 to €91,092), and imprisonment for unauthorised disclosure of sensitive data. Additionally, the aforementioned laws ignore the quintessential anonymity clause of whistleblowing, claiming that reports must include the whistleblower’s full personal details, which not only discourages reporting but also exposes individuals to potential reprisals, putting their safety at risk.

Some other disincentives exist in the legislation, such as Article 107 bis of the Criminal  Code No. 58 of 1937, which offers a full and absolute exemption from sanctions for any bribe-giver who self-reports and gives evidence against the culpable bribe-taker. And while the Egyptian Corporate Governance Code sets guidelines for firms to formulate their whistleblowing policy, it does not identify enforcement mechanisms, rendering the policy obsolete. Instead, the code vaguely lists the components of a whistleblower policy that each firm should include, such as, “the policy objective, the committee formed to review cases of violation of ethical conduct, and evaluate the associated risks, the general directives of whistleblowing policy statement (reporting procedures, confidentiality of information and identity, protection of the whistleblower), [and] the investigation procedures of the violations reported…)”. Since the Egyptian Corporate Governance Code is non-binding and serves merely as “a guide for best practices in the fields of governance, transparency and prudent management” for Egyptian stakeholders, companies rarely implement the aforementioned recommendations.

However, a leniency program is provided by the Egyptian Competition Law, Amended Law No.175 of 2022 (ECL), in cases where violators denounce cartels. The perpetrator is fully exempt from sanctions under the ECL if they report the violation and provide supporting evidence that helps prove or detect it. Afterwards, the court, at its discretion, may grant a partial leniency to the second or any following reporter of the violation.

• The National Anti-Corruption Strategy of 2023-2030

Across the years, Egypt has adopted several national Anti-Corruption strategies, the latest one primarily focused on addressing the shortcomings of the previous ones, with a key emphasis on enacting laws to protect whistleblowers and witnesses. The National Anti-Corruption Strategy (2023-2030) states that “…it is incumbent to give priority to…mechanisms [of community oversight and accountability] because citizens fear reporting corruption crimes. This fear emanates from the absence of a law that protects whistleblowers”. Again, without concrete legislative action and effective implementation, the strategies remain futile, and whistleblowers remain vulnerable to retaliation, limiting the strategy’s impact on fostering transparency and accountability.

• Whistleblower protection within the private sector’s codes of conduct

While the Egyptian Corporate Governance Code encourages private companies in Egypt to adopt a whistleblower policy, doing so is not legally or socio-economically mandated. However, certain, that enjoy integration within regional or global markets voluntarily include protection clauses in their codes of conduct, such as at Commercial International Bank (CIB) or the Arab Bank, with the latter allowing employees to report unethical or corrupt behaviour to an ethics committee email. As for CIB, their code of conduct includes clear definitions of acts that warrant whistleblowing, which is “encouraged at all levels”; acts “against the Bank causing loss…or damage to the Bank’s assets” or “completed transaction(s) suggestive of structuring and/or money laundering” are to be reported to CIB’s dedicated anti-bribery email. There is also a whistleblowing email that allows staff members to report acts of harassment or discrimination. However, in a national and judicial environment hostile to whistleblowing, the effectiveness of internal policies within the private sector should be subject to inquiry.

• Absence of whistleblower protections within the 2025 Revised Labour Law

In April 2025, the Egyptian Parliament’s House of Representatives passed a new labour law to overhaul the country’s labour legislation and align Egyptian labour laws with international standards. Adjusting annual raises, defining working hours and tightly regulating workers’ capacity to strike, the new labour law, which does not apply to public-sector employees, will additionally mandate the creation of “labour courts” to settle labour disputes and render more difficult the termination of employees without just cause. However, no whistleblower protection policy is mentioned in this new legislation, raising questions regarding the extent to which workers are protected. Many experts are urging the immediate establishment of these so-called ‘labour courts’ to ensure the law’s benefits are realised in practice rather than remaining mere words on paper.

Laws and measures related to combating financial crime

Despite signing and ratifying the United Nations Convention against Corruption in 2005 and the African Union Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption in 2017, enforcement remains weak, with little tangible progress in implementing these frameworks.

Article 218 of the 2014 Constitution (amended 2019) ensures that “competent oversight bodies and organisations commit to coordinating with one another in combating corruption, enhancing the values of integrity and transparency to ensure sound performance of public functions, preserve public funds, and develop and following up on the national strategy to fight corruption in collaboration with other competent control bodies and organisations, in the manner organised by law.” Yet, challenges persist in translating these commitments into effective action.

• Anti-Bribery Clauses in the Egyptian Criminal Code

While Egypt lacks specific Anti-corruption laws, its Criminal Code addresses bribery in articles 103 to 111. The Criminal Code criminalises several forms of corruption, such as active and passive bribery and abuse of office, but existing legislation is unevenly enforced, leading government officials to act with impunity. Furthermore, Egypt adopted the Anti-Money Laundering Law No. 80 of 2002, which aims to prevent, detect, and prosecute money laundering activities.

• Administrative Control Authority (ACA), Egypt’s anti-corruption agency

The Administrative Control Authority (ACA), Egypt’s anti-corruption agency, has in its mission statement to implement the national anti-corruption strategy, promote transparency and integrity to enhance the public sector’s efficiency, improve the quality of services and finally, build citizens’ confidence in State institutions. It operates a hotline (16100) to facilitate the reporting of corruption and fraud; complaints are then followed online on the ACA’s website. Other agencies such as the National Anti-Corruption Committee, the Illicit Gains Authority, the Anti-Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Unit, the Administrative Prosecution Authority (APA), the General Administration for Combating Public Money Crimes (Ministry of Interior) and the Consumer Protection Agency are all part of the ecosystem set out to eliminate corruption in Egyptian society, bringing their total to more than 26 bodies. However, the multitude of anti-corruption agencies, as well as their political interference and lack of independence, renders their presence decorative, in an unintelligible and unproductive fight against corruption.

• Law 62 of 1975 on Illicit Gains (Amended to Law 97 of 2015)

The Illicit Gains Law additionally obliges all public officials to declare their assets upon taking their position and at the end of their term or contract, and every 2-5 years during their mandate, to the Illicit Profits Authority, formally established in 1975. All public officials, with the notable exception of judges, are required to declare personal and professional assets, investments, liabilities and gifts. Judges are exempt from such a declaration under the Illicit Profits Law, creating a much-criticised loophole for members of the judiciary. However, these declarations are not publicly accessible, nor are there mechanisms that ensure compliance, thus raising concerns about the enforcement and effectiveness of both the law and its governing body, the Illicit Profits Authority.

• Egypt’s Ombudsman’s Office

While not specifically possessing an ombudsman’s office, the Egyptian government delegates the task to the National Council for Women (NCW) and the National Council for Human Rights (NCHR), who could both theoretically receive complaints from citizens regarding corruption within public institutions and relay them in reports destined for the President and Prime Minister. However, in January 2014, NCHR’s director and human rights lawyer Negad el-Borai resigned in the face of NCHR’s inability to counter the state’s numerous human rights violations. He was then subject to a travel ban in 2016 following complaints from the High Judicial Council against the drafting of an anti-torture bill by el-Borai’s law firm, United Group.

Corruption remains pervasive at all levels of government, with its commitment to fighting corruption questionable due to its opacity regarding governmental and military spending. If anything, corruption charges are often weaponised against whistleblowers who attempt to speak out. For instance, former Agriculture Minister Salah Helal was arrested on corruption charges in September 2015, leading to the resignation of the entire Council of Ministers and his subsequent sentencing to ten years’ imprisonment in April 2016 and a fine of EGP 1 million (approximately €83,000 at the time). His case has, however, resuscitated outrage from experts who view him as a scapegoat for the government’s corruption. Despite intending to blow the whistle, he was swiftly charged with the very offences he sought to expose.

Media rights and freedom of expression

The Egyptian Constitution guarantees freedom of expression in its article 65 “All individuals have the right to express their opinion through speech, writing, imagery, or any other means of expression and publication.” In its Article 72, the Egyptian Constitution guarantees independence of press institutions: “The state shall ensure the independence of all press institutions and owned media outlets, in a way that ensures their neutrality and expressing all opinions, political and intellectual trends and social interests; and guarantees equality and equal opportunity in addressing public opinion.”

Yet, pluralism is non-existent in Egyptian media. Al-Akhbar, Al-Ahram and Al-Gomhuriya are the three most popular state-owned national newspapers. In 2024, Egypt was ranked 170^th out of 180 countries in the Freedom of Press Index compiled by Reporters Without Borders. Independent journalists and media outlets face excessively burdensome administrative and licensing requirements under Act No. 180 of 2018, which provides the Supreme Council for Media Regulation broad powers to control the press and media at its discretion.

• The Cybercrime Law Act No. 175 of 2018, a media censorship legislation

Censorship is rampant in Egypt, with the government regularly monitoring social networks. The Cybercrime Law Act No. 175 of 2018 explicitly authorises surveillance of social media accounts with more than 5,000 followers, leading to arrests when influencers express discontent regarding Egypt’s deteriorating socio-economic crises. The Association for Freedom of Thought and Expression (AFTE) listed an astonishing 496 websites blocked by the Egyptian government in 2018, with no apparent reason provided.

Journalists and media outlets are frequently prosecuted and detained for their work, often under counter-terrorism legislation, as is the case for journalists working at Egypt’s remaining independent media outlet, Mada Masr. The government regularly charges political prisoners and journalists with offences such as “spreading false news,” “misuse of social media,” and terrorism-related charges for criticising government actions. This is exacerbated by the fact that Egypt has been in an almost permanent state of emergency since 1981, which encourages broad and limitless human rights restrictions in the name of securing the state.

In November 2021, French NGO Disclose released an investigation revealing how the Egyptian regime monitors its population using file-keeping and mass surveillance software under the guise of fighting terrorism and smuggling, with France’s complicity. Two of Egypt’s most famous jailed journalists include British-Egyptian activist Alaa Abdel Fattah and Egyptian activist Mohamed Ibrahim Radwan “Oxygen”, who have now been imprisoned for over a decade, enduring torture, bans on family and consular visits, despite national and international pleas to end their imprisonment.

• A Total Lack of Legal Safeguards

Multiple reports from international organisations have indicated frequent arbitrary detentions in Egypt, which violate fundamental procedural safeguards. Reports highlight issues such as detainees not being promptly informed of charges, their inability to challenge the legality of detention before a judge, and the absence of timely trials. Sometimes, journalists are abducted from their homes, forcibly disappeared, until they appear one day in pre-trial detention, as was the case for journalists Ashraf Omar and Khaled Mamdouh.

Moreover, statutory limits on pretrial detention are reportedly circumvented through “rotation,” where individuals face repeated charges under similar offences in new cases. This practice often targets dissenting voices, journalists, human rights defenders and political opponents, sometimes involving interference by security agencies in release decisions, even following court acquittals. The politicisation of judicial and prosecutorial authorities has also been noted, resulting in politically motivated cases against actual or perceived critics and political opponents, characterised by prolonged pretrial detention and violations of fair trial guarantees.

• NGO Law No. 149 of 2019

Furthermore, NGOs seeking to denounce these human rights violations see their work restricted by the authorities. Law No. 149 of  2019, which is also known as the “NGO Law”, gives the authorities broad powers to oversee the registration, activities, funding sources and dissolution of NGOs. It restricts the activities of NGOs by limiting their work to “societal development”, a vaguely defined concept which could be used to effectively ban human rights work. This law not only grants authorities wide discretion in overseeing and dissolving NGOs, it also limits the ability of NGOs to engage with foreign actors, ultimately standing in violation of Egypt’s domestic, international and regional legal commitments.

In addition to the weaknesses of legal protections of whistleblowers in Egypt, cases of intimidation are widespread. Most Egyptians fear denouncing illegal acts as it can quickly lead to arrests, periodic bans on family visits, torture, arbitrary detention and ultimately, unfair trials. Torture is widespread and systematic in Egyptian prisons, police stations, and security forces facilities, amounting to a crime against humanity according to several international human rights organisations.

• The Egyptian Journalists’ Syndicate

Despite a historical climate of tightening on labour syndicates in contemporary Egyptian politics, the Egyptian Journalists’ Syndicate remains laudable in its efforts to denounce violations against journalists, advocate for a broader freedom of expression and ultimately secure the release of detained journalists through negotiations. It should be noted that it is only on the steps of the syndicate, located in Cairo, that Egyptians are allowed to protest against the Egyptian response to the Gaza war, in an environment otherwise hostile to mass demonstrations. Recently, the Syndicate filed a formal complaint to the Public Prosecutor on behalf of journalist and activist Rasha Azab, who had been a vocal critic of the Egyptian government’s response to the Gaza war and had thus been subjected to threats, surveillance and warnings of arrest. However, the lack of political will ultimately renders the Syndicate’s attempts commendable, yet futile.

There is no shortage of cases proving this premise, with tens of thousands of individuals arbitrarily detained in Egypt, including activists, public figures, journalists, students, lawyers and political opponents. Most are charged with bogus charges such as “publishing false news”, “misusing social media”, “inciting to protest” or the most common charge, “joining a terrorist or unlawful group”, instrumentalising the fight against terrorism to silence journalists and human rights activists.

Access to Information laws

As previously mentioned, Egypt’s severe restrictions on freedom of expression create a highly repressive environment for journalists, activists, and whistleblowers. Despite being a signatory to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which upholds freedom of expression and the right to information, serious hurdles are institutionalised to bar citizen access to information.

Independent media outlets face intimidation and shutdowns, while restrictive laws further criminalise investigative journalism and criticism of the state. As a result, a lack of press freedom and transparency makes it exceedingly difficult for citizens and civil society to hold authorities accountable or access factual, unbiased reporting.

• Absence of specific legislation on the right to information

Article 68 of the 2014 Constitution (as amended in 2019) enshrines the right of the people to access information, stating that “information, data, statistics, and official documents are owned by the people. Disclosure thereof from various sources is a right guaranteed by the state to all citizens.” While the constitutional provision obliges the issuance of a law that more specifically governs access to information while balancing national security matters, none have yet been passed as of 2025; if anything, existing legislative provisions render access to information a hurdle. For example, Law No. 121 of 1975 restricts access to and the publishing of state documents, citing national security concerns. Its article 2bis states that, “anyone who, by their work or responsibility, becomes aware of information of a confidential nature related to the state’s high-level policies or national security, is not permitted to publish or broadcast such information if doing so could harm the security of the country, its military status, or its political, economic, or social position”. However, this vague definition of “[the] broadcasting of information harmful to national security”, which is determined at the discretion of official bodies, has since been instrumentalised to suppress dissent and target activists, including photographer Mahmoud Abu Zeid (Shawkan) and blogger and activist Alaa Abdel Fattah.

• Defamation in legal texts and its instrumentalisation

The Egyptian Penal Code (Law No. 58 of 1937) classifies defamation in article 302 as “the act of falsely attributing something to a person in a way that damages their honour or reputation” and criminalises “public insults and slander, even if the defamatory statement was not published in writing’ in article 306 with ‘harsher penalties when the defamatory statement accuses a person of criminal activity”, as cited in article 308. Articles 179 and 184 particularly protect public institutions from defamation, with the former criminalising insults directed at the President of Egypt, imposing penalties of up to three years of imprisonment, and the latter protecting the Egyptian military. Both were used in the case of Galal El-Behairy, a poet and lyricist who, in 2018, was arrested for writing a satirical song that mocked President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi and was prosecuted under the defamation articles of the Egyptian Penal Code.

Concerning “defamation” in print and media outlets, the Press and Media Regulation Law (Law No.180 of 2018) severely limits what can be published by journalists about businesses and public officials, holding them accountable for any ‘false statement’ that could damage reputations. The Cybercrime Law (Law No.175 of 2018) extends defamation to digital platforms, criminalising defamatory content and “false information” on social media, online blogs and news websites. Both the cybercrime and media regulation laws have been heavily criticised as they have allowed security officials to consolidate further repressive powers, often arresting individuals for simply critiquing Abdel-Fattah El-Sisi on social media.

Under Egyptian law, defamation clauses do not differentiate between personal (against private individuals) and public (against politicians, public figures or businesses). However, unlike some legal systems where defamation cases require proof of tangible harm, Egyptian courts do not always require proof of financial loss; the mere fact that a statement damages a person’s social standing can be enough for a defamation charge.

WHISTLEBLOWER CASES

Considering the asphyxiating repressive environment, as well as the normalisation of corruption in everyday life, whistleblower cases are extremely rare in Egypt, whether in the public domain or the private sector. As such, below is a list of whistleblowers and activists who have exposed governmental and/or societal corruption, as well as corruption in their specific domains, and the consequences they’ve faced as a result of blowing the whistle and alerting the public.

• Khaled Saeed, arguably one of the most influential cases of whistleblowing in contemporary Egyptian history, posted, in 2010, a video online of Egyptian police officers distributing drugs among themselves that had been confiscated during a drug bust. He was then arrested, tortured and beaten to death by two policemen; photos of his disfigured corpse quickly spread online and sparked heated outrage against the mounting police brutality in Egypt, inadvertently becoming the final straw that pushed many Egyptians to the streets in 2011 in what would become the Egyptian Revolution of 2011, toppling 30-year dictator Hosni Mubarak and calling for democratic change.  

•  Hesham Genena, former head of the Accountability State Authority, Egypt’s central auditing agency, was fired and arrested in 2016 after releasing a report that revealed the state’s involvement in corruption transactions of around $68 billion over four years. Genena faced abuse after accusing members of the sovereign and security authorities of being involved in corruption cases. He was arrested for spreading false news and sentenced to one year in prison.

•  Mohamed Ali, particularly well-known in Egypt as a successful businessman and actor, made headlines in 2019 when, after self-exiling, he accused Al-Sisi and the army of wasting public funds and corruption. He had worked for fifteen years with President Al-Sisi and the army as a building contractor, tasked with constructing new presidential palaces and projects for the Egyptian military. In a rare show of dissent, thousands of people rallied in cities across Egypt, demanding the resignation of Al-Sisi following a call for protests by Ali. In response, authorities launched the “biggest crackdown” under Al-Sisi’s rule, according to Amnesty International, rounding up more than 2,300 people. Ali got a five-year sentence in absentia for tax evasion and life imprisonment for inciting the 2019 protests.  

• Greco-Roman wrestler Mahmoud Sebie and five-time African wrestling champion faced backlash for releasing a tell-all video in 2018, in which he outlined the corrupt manoeuvrings of the Egyptian Wrestling Federation and the Egyptian Olympic Committee. His revelations pointed to clear favouritism of certain athletes close to members of the political elite, who were personally chosen as competing finalists for the Olympics, having done no lead-up tournaments. Upon experiencing this shunning on multiple occasions, and with no answer from the federation, Sebie turned to social media to voice his concerns, amassing half a million views in 24 hours. Disillusioned by the corruption, Sebie moved to the US to pursue a career in MMA fighting. It is unclear whether this decision was driven by pressure or intimidation. However, exposing corruption in Egyptian sports is often considered less controversial than revealing political corruption.

RECOMMENDATIONS: WEAKNESSES AND NEEDED REFORMS

Building on the aforementioned legislation, Egypt is in dire need of a specific stand-alone law dedicated to whistleblowers’ protection. However, it seems that the road to accountability is still marred with difficulties as amendments to Articles 185, 189 and 193 of the Constitution adopted in 2019 have sought to undermine judicial independence. These amendments allow the President of the Republic to directly appoint the heads of judicial bodies and the prosecutorial authority. Additionally, the Supreme Council for Judicial Bodies or Entities, headed by the President himself, decides on matters related to the appointment, promotion and discipline of judicial members. Multiple reports indicate the politicisation of judicial and prosecutorial authorities, leading to politically motivated cases against actual or perceived critics and political opponents, characterised by prolonged pretrial detention and violations of fair trial guarantees.

Egypt has shown efforts to combat corruption within the framework of the National Anti-Corruption Strategy, but reports show that corruption remains pervasive in many sectors of public life, specifically among the judiciary. Additionally, trust in its legal institutions seems to be faltering and non-existent; one in five Egyptians believes that most or all judges and magistrates are corrupt, while over half of those who interacted with the courts in the past year report having paid a bribe. As such, Egypt must remedy the lack of specific information provided on the effectiveness of its anti-corruption strategy and on the measures in place to ensure the independence, transparency, effectiveness and accountability of the Administrative Control Authority, which is expected to play a central role in combating corruption in Egypt. 

To strengthen Egypt’s anti-corruption framework and establish dedicated whistleblower protections, PPLAAF presents the following key recommendations for reform:

• The adoption of a comprehensive whistleblower law. Egypt must enact a dedicated law ensuring protection against retaliation for individuals reporting corruption, misconduct, or illicit activities and establish a clear, secure, and anonymous reporting mechanism. It must also provide legal, financial, and employment safeguards for whistleblowers.
• The establishment of independent anti-corruption oversight. Egypt must strengthen the independence and mandate of its anti-corruption bodies by granting them investigative authority without political interference and establishing transparency measures for asset declarations of public officials.
• Strengthening access to public information. Strengthening access to public information is crucial for transparency, accountability, and democratic governance. Egypt should adopt comprehensive legal frameworks that guarantee the public’s right to information while ensuring the protection of journalists, whistleblowers, and civil society organisations. This includes implementing clear mechanisms for requesting and obtaining information, reducing bureaucratic barriers, and promoting open data initiatives. Independent media and digital platforms must be safeguarded to facilitate the free flow of information, enabling citizens to make informed decisions and actively participate in public affairs. Ultimately, improving access to information fosters trust in institutions, reduces corruption, and strengthens democratic oversight.

KNOWLEDGE, SUPPORT, AND ACTION CENTRES

Due to Egypt’s heightened security apparatus, whistleblower support centres are non-existent. By and large, corruption is deeply entrenched in Egyptian society and is omnipresent in the administrative, personal and professional lives of everyday Egyptians. As a result, it is usually journalists who choose the tumultuous path of unveiling corruption or grand cases of misconduct, as non-journalists fear prison charges and retaliation. That being said, despite the harsh repression silencing civil society-led anti-corruption efforts, there are, notwithstanding, a few organisations that continue to take the risk and denounce human rights violations, corruption and the overarching oppressive environment orchestrated by Egypt’s militarised ruling class.

• Mada Masr, Egypt’s remaining independent media outlet, continues to publish investigations revealing high-level corruption within Egypt’s governing elite, despite the serious repercussions it continually faces. It faced intimidation and judicial repression for its 2023 publication, entitled the Argany Peninsula,  which exposed the network of profiteering linking Egyptian militia businessman Ibrahim Al-Argany to the Rafah Port crossing, with government approval and financial gain. Following the publication, editor-in-chief Lina Atallah received multiple judicial summons, eventually being charged with publishing false information and undermining national security. . This move was widely seen as part of a broader crackdown on independent journalism in Egypt, where authorities continue to target media outlets that challenge official narratives or expose high-level corruption.

• The Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights (EIPR) is one of Egypt’s most internationally known civil society organisations, tasked with “strengthening and protecting basic rights and freedoms in Egypt through research, advocacy and supporting litigation in fields of civil liberties, economic and social rights, and criminal justice” since 2002. Its founder, human rights activist Hossam Bahgat, has been subjected to repeated judicial harassment, including renewed charges on January 19, 2025, for alleged “membership in a terrorist group”.

• The Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies (CIHRS) is an independent human rights organisation, with headquarters in Egypt and Tunisia, aimed at fostering a culture of human rights in Middle Eastern countries and promoting respect for fundamental freedoms, democratic values, and human rights principles in the region. CIHRS consults regularly for the United Nations Economic and Social Council, has an observer status at the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights and is a member of the Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Organisation. However, despite its international standing and importance, it remains the target of countless raids from security officials and continual judicial repression.