The Egyptian Front for Human Rights (EFHR) strongly condemns the referral of dozens of lawyers and other human rights defenders in Egypt to criminal courts on the grounds of activities related to their professional or human rights work. While many of these lawyers face charges solely for exercising their legal right to defend individuals, including in politically motivated cases involving the right to assembly, organization, and freedom of expression, others are being prosecuted for documenting violations, providing legal support, or cooperating with UN mechanisms. These referrals constitute clear evidence of the state’s ongoing policy of criminalizing human rights work and the right to legal defense, posing a direct threat to the independence of the legal profession in Egypt, and undermining the safety of the entire legal and human rights community, and ultimately, the citizens seeking justice through peaceful and lawful means.
EFHR has documented the referral of no less than 92 lawyers and other human rights defenders to terrorism criminal courts. Many of them had been engaged in defending individuals in politically motivated cases. Their names appeared in the referral orders of 25 State Security cases, a number likely to grow as further referrals are issued. These referrals also included five female lawyers involved in the same types of legal defense. According to the referral documents, the charges brought against the lawyers often mirrored those of their clients, individuals detained for exercising fundamental rights such as freedom of assembly, organization, and expression. These lawyers now face terrorism-related charges, most notably “joining a terrorist group established in violation of the law” and “funding a terrorist group.” In several cases, security investigations explicitly cited the lawyers’ legal defense work as evidence of their alleged affiliation with terrorist groups, referring to so-called “human rights units” or the assumption of “responsibility for defending” members of such groups before the courts.
Among the most prominent cases is that of lawyer and human rights defender Ibrahim Metwally, who faces charges of joining and funding a terrorist organization under case no. 900/2017. His human rights work was driven by his search for his son, who has been forcibly disappeared since 2013. The investigation alleges he was “responsible for the enforced disappearances file, prepared reports and statements aimed at defaming state institutions, and communicated with international human rights organizations to internationalize the issue and tarnish the state’s image.”
Another significant case is case no. 540/2023, which includes nine lawyers charged merely for defending the original defendants. The investigation accused them of “defending Brotherhood-affiliated individuals.”
Case no. 2976/2021 (widely known as the “Our Kitchen Group” case), which revolved around a group preparing food for political detainees, referred to the lawyers involved as part of a “human rights unit” defending those accused in politically motivated cases.
Also included is case no. 1233/2023, involving human rights lawyers Mohamed Eissa and Mahmoud Adel, who are on trial for providing legal aid and documenting violations in their capacity with EFHR. Several UN Special Rapporteurs have characterized this prosecution as direct reprisal for their human rights work and cooperation with UN mechanisms.
These referrals often came months or years after the lawyers were secretly added to State Security cases while performing their legal duties before exceptional judicial bodies, such as the Supreme State Security Prosecution or terrorism courts, or in similar cases in other governorates. These retaliatory actions have led to the arrest of some lawyers without prior notice, while others face arrest warrants and terrorism-related charges with the possibility of harsh sentences.
This mass prosecution campaign, led by the Supreme State Security Prosecution, represents a grave violation of fundamental principles and rights, especially the right of detainees to have legal representation, and the judiciary’s duty to guarantee this right—particularly in cases where defendants cannot appoint a lawyer themselves. It is also a blatant assault on the legal profession and human rights work in Egypt, through direct security threats, stigmatization, and prosecution of lawyers and defenders for simply fulfilling their duties and documenting violations. These actions aim to intimidate the entire legal and rights community, stripping them of independence and freedom, especially in politically charged cases involving civil and political rights.
Despite the near-closure of case no. 173/2011 (the “Foreign Funding Case”), in which several lawyers and human rights defenders were targeted, and despite official rhetoric around launching a “National Dialogue” and a “National Human Rights Strategy,” which promised progress, these new mass referrals clearly confirm that the state continues to target any activity it deems oppositional, even if it is within legal bounds, such as the right to defense.
EFHR calls for the immediate removal of the names of the lawyers and Human rights defenders listed in these recent referrals, and for their exclusion from these cases. These individuals are being charged under anti-terrorism legislation merely for defending clients in politically motivated cases or documenting rights violations. EFHR also calls for the immediate release of those already detained, the removal of others from travel ban lists, and guarantees for their right to continue their work without intimidation or threats.
EFHR stresses the urgent need to end the use of exceptional laws, especially the Anti-Terrorism Law, in the prosecution of lawyers and human rights defenders. It further emphasizes the importance of upholding the independence of the legal profession and the role of the Bar Association in protecting its members from professional and security harassment. EFHR also calls for an independent and impartial investigation into the practices of the Supreme State Security Prosecution, and for those responsible for relying on security investigations as sole evidence to face accountability.