The Egyptian Front for Human Rights (EFHR) calls for an end to the expansion of the use of the death penalty in Egypt and for a temporary suspension of executions, alongside the opening of a broad legal, human rights, and societal debate on the scope of application of the death penalty and the crimes for which it should be imposed. This call comes following the issuance, on 6 September 2026, by the Cairo Criminal Court of a death sentence by hanging against TV presenter Sarah Khalifa and 11 other defendants, after convicting them in the case known in the media as the “Major Drug Case” of manufacturing synthetic drugs, promoting and trafficking them, as well as possessing and possessing without a licence firearms and ammunition. The court also sentenced nine defendants to life imprisonment and acquitted seven others.
The verdicts were based on provisions of Egypt’s Narcotics Control Law No. 182 of 1960, as subsequently amended, which contains four provisions—Articles 33, 34, 41, and 34 bis—that prescribe the death penalty by hanging. These provisions were introduced through successive amendments that expanded the scope of crimes punishable by death, whereas the original text of Law No. 182 of 1960 provided for the death penalty in cases of recidivism for certain offences related to drug trafficking.
In this context, EFHR reiterates its call for a renewed debate on the death penalty in Egypt. A total of 85 provisions of Egyptian legislation currently provide for the death penalty, distributed across the Penal Code and several other laws enacted during different political periods in the country. This call is motivated by two fundamental considerations.
First, the death penalty is an irreversible punishment whose consequences cannot be remedied or corrected if a procedural error is subsequently discovered, or if legal and policy approaches to the procedures or conduct warranting the death penalty change. The debate surrounding amendments to the schedules of controlled narcotic substances by the head of the Egyptian Drug Authority provides a relevant example of the legal and technical changes that may affect a case and require a reassessment of the legal characterisation of the conduct at issue. This was further illustrated by the subsequent ruling declaring the decision of the head of the Egyptian Drug Authority unconstitutional. Calling for a reconsideration of the death penalty is, at its core, a call for caution and deliberation before deciding to end an individual’s life.
Second, concerns regarding fair-trial guarantees under Egyptian legislation provide another basis for reconsidering the status of the death penalty in Egypt. These guarantees are not sufficient to ensure the proper application of one of the most severe forms of punishment. EFHR’s findings indicate that this concern extends across a broad range of offences punishable by death under both civilian and military legislation. It also applies to cases involving offences such as drug-related crimes and violent extremism under the Counter-Terrorism Law, which is used in cases involving political charges. Such offences do not fall, under international human rights law, within the category of the “most serious crimes” for which the death penalty may be imposed. Moreover, the use of the death penalty does not reflect evidence of its effectiveness in combating the crimes it is intended to address.
The absence of adequate fair-trial guarantees in cases resulting in death sentences has been documented by EFHR in its report on the death penalty. These deficiencies include the failure to address violations committed against defendants and infringements of their right to a defence. In addition, the judicial independence to form individual convictions has resulted in differing approaches among judicial circuits, while it can be difficult to establish whether the members of a court have reached a genuine consensus or to ensure sufficient deliberation regarding the non-binding opinion of the Dar al-Ifta, which does not legally bind the court. This stands in contrast to claims regarding the effectiveness and actual functioning of these safeguards in the Egyptian context, as reflected in recommendations addressed to Egypt concerning the death penalty and its implications in the 2025 Universal Periodic Review.
EFHR reiterates its opposition to the death penalty and calls for a temporary suspension of death sentences and executions pending broad legal, political, human rights, and societal discussions on the punishment, with the aim of reaching a clear definition of the scope of the “most serious crimes” for which it may be considered. In parallel, EFHR calls on the Egyptian authorities to open a societal dialogue on the death penalty and to incorporate this issue into the framework of the authorities’ work on preparing the second National Human Rights Strategy, allowing for a clear definition and identification of the crimes considered most deserving of such punishment, as well as a review of the relevant laws that provide for the death penalty.