Refugees in Egypt and the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights: The asylum bill inflates security measures and is inconsistent with Egypt’s international obligations 

The Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights (EIPR) and Refugees in Egypt (RIE) have released an in-depth study (translation pending) and a policy brief on the bill submitted by the Egyptian government “regulating the asylum of foreigners in Egypt”. The draft law was discussed and approved by the Defence and National Security Committee of the House of Representatives on 22 October, signalling its submission to the plenary session of Parliament as the likely next step. 

The in-depth study, titled “A regression on the status quo: bill undermines basic protections for refugees”,outlines the main issues inherent in the articles of the draft law. It provides a legal analysis of each provision of the proposed law, which, if passed, would replace the asylum system in Egypt, currently managed in collaboration between the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the Egyptian government. The study argues that many of the issues in the law could have been avoided if the law’s drafters had engaged in dialogue and consultation with international and local refugee organisations and stakeholders. The attached policy brief focuses specifically on the issues of the highest concern and the most glaring violations embedded in the law, and the likely ramifications if passed.

The Egyptian government kept the text of the draft Foreign Asylum Law secret for a year and a half after it was first announced in June 2023. The draft articles only came to light after the Parliament’s Defence and National Security Committee approved them at the end of last October. The government did not inform or communicate this to any of the concerned parties, primarily the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).

The study shows that although the proposed draft law takes initially appears to include the definitions contained in the main texts of international conventions that Egypt has ratified and become part of its legal system in the definitional provisions, it modifies and adds to those internationally agreed definitions, most worryingly to the articles outlining exclusion grounds or denial of the right to asylum. The proposed definitions and exclusion clauses are fundamentally inconsistent with international conventions, and essentially  render any protections granted to a refugee after the determination of his status void because of broad powers to revoke status. The draft includes many provisions that use broad terms to define the powers of the committee to be formed by the Council of Ministers, which has the sole authority to examine and decide on the applications of asylum seekers and regularise the status of refugees in Egypt.In addition to the broad exclusion clauses, the law bestows on the committee the exceptional power to ‘take whatever measures it deems necessary’ in supposedly exceptional circumstances (that are very loosely defined, allowing for a high abuse potential). 

The bill does not appear to be concerned with the  humanitarian crises that drive asylum seekers to flee their countries of primary residence and to seek refuge in Egypt, which explain the inclusion of many proposed provisions in tending towards penalisation and criminalisation of asylum seekers in cases where they arrive in Egyptian territory in an unregulated manner. It is noteworthy that Egypt has seen a surge in the last two years in those types of arrivals on its borders with multiple wars raging on its eastern and southern borders.

The draft law also contains other punitive provisions that penalise refugees, asylum seekers and even Egyptian citizens for alleged violations that include assisting refugees and performing humanitarian acts and even acts such as “sheltering” a refugee without notifying the authorities. There is no legal or constitutional basis in Egypt whatsoever for the penalisation of such an act.

The study and policy brief also note that the draft bill does not specify in any articles the mechanisms and procedures through which the examination and determination of asylum applications will be managed during the transitional phase. This transitional period may end up being prolonged, between the end of UNHCR’s mandate (whenever that might be) and the assumption of these tasks by the permanent Committee to be established in accordance with the new law.This concern is especially valid when one considers the looseness and very general and unspecific nature of many  articles of the draft law, which leaves many basic details about the work of the committee, the framework governing it and the limits of its authority and competencies to the Executive Regulations, the publication of which may well be delayed for years.

The Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights and the Refugee Platform in Egypt call for Delaying any attempt to put the law to a vote before the plenary session of the House of Representatives, and for a real and meaningful dialogue on the law with concerned organisations and parties and in actual experts. This is the bare minimum needed to ensure a fair and just national draft law that respects Egypt’s international and humanitarian obligations, puts the rights and interests of refugees and asylum seekers at the forefront of government policy, and ensures an adequate transitional phase in cooperation with UNHCR that would allow for a smooth transition from the existing system to the new system.