The undersigned human rights organisations express their categorical rejection of the draft law regulating foreigners’ asylum in Egypt, which was recently approved by the Defence and National Security Committee of the Egyptian Parliament. This bill is expected to be discussed and voted on in the next plenary session of the House of Representatives, in the context of passing a set of sensitive legislation that reshapes an important part of the legal legislative structure complementary to the constitution in an accelerated manner and without real community participation or wide consultation with stakeholders and experts.
This project on regulating the rights of refugees is an extension of exclusionary policies that ignore refugee stakeholders, their representatives, and human rights and UN organisations, as it was submitted without the involvement of international partners or civil society organisations that work in the field of refugee protection and have been managing the refugee status determination system and providing assistance to refugee communities for decades, sometimes in cooperation with – or on behalf of – the state.
Lack of international standards
The draft law reflects the absence of clear criteria for the selection and training of staff in the committee that will be formed to oversee the asylum process, as well as the criteria on which the committee will base its decisions. This raises concerns about the compatibility of these criteria with international refugee protection conventions on which the UNHCR bases its management of the asylum determination system and the provision of assistance to refugees: the 1951 Convention and 1967 Protocol, as well as the 1969 Organisation of African Unity (OAU) Convention. The absence of these standards in the draft law reflects concerns that the level of protection applied in Egypt will be reduced if it is adopted in isolation from the international conventions and standards that Egypt committed to when it signed these conventions.
A transitional vacuum
Similar experiences of countries that have made a successful transition from a UN mandate to a national asylum system tell us that they needed to work in parallel with the UNHCR for a transitional period until the national system was able to carry out these tasks in a manner consistent with legal and humanitarian obligations. The draft law neglected to provide for a transition period commensurate with the magnitude of the task. In fact, it completely ignored the existence of an existing legal system. The draft law does not include any reference to procedures to organise a smooth transition to the new system, seemingly assuming that it is an instantaneous process that takes place automatically once the law is enacted. However, the practical reality is that creating a legal structure for registering asylum seekers, determining asylum status, and managing and protecting data is an extremely complex legal and logistical process that requires a long preparation and qualification period and close co-operation with the authorities that have carried out this task for nearly five decades.
Independence of the Commission
The draft law raises concerns about the independence of the committee, which is made up of the Prime Minister and representatives of government ministries, as well as being funded from the state’s general budget. This makes its members non-independent public servants, in contrast to the current situation in which the somewhat independent UN system implements laws and regulations on refugee status determination, regardless of the political orientation of successive governments.
This lack of independence, coupled with the granting of full powers to the Commission with limited guarantees to manage the asylum process, threatens current refugees and asylum seekers when the Commission begins its work. The draft gives the committee the right to request to ‘take whatever measures it deems necessary’ towards refugees who have been granted protection by the same committee after determining their asylum status in emergency situations that are not precisely defined in the text, raising concerns for the refugee community that suffers from repeated practices by the Egyptian authorities, whether in forced deportations, campaigns against communities of a specific nationality, or other legal violations of the Egyptian police practices.
Concerns about fundamental rights
The draft includes an unjustified expansion of the Commission’s powers to revoke refugee status for reasons related to vague terms such as ‘national security’. Due to the overly broad and vague nature of the term ‘national security’, this expansion could be used to overly restrict the rights of refugees without any real oversight. These terms can be used exceptionally and unjustifiably to narrow the scope of protection offered to refugees, putting these individuals at risk of refoulement or other abuses, and effectively rendering meaningless the protections afforded to refugees by the texts defining refugee rights.
The draft law restricts basic rights, such as education, health care, and housing, to those with refugee status. This excludes asylum seekers from these rights who are granted temporary protection until their status is resolved, thereby removing them from social protection and making them vulnerable to exploitation or extortion from service providers, as well as insecurity.
The draft law also fails to protect refugees’ data, putting their personal information at risk of disclosure and misuse. Data confidentiality is a fundamental right that must be protected, especially for individuals who may be in a vulnerable position due to abuses or security threats in their countries of origin. Disclosing this sensitive information may expose refugees to multiple risks.
We are also concerned that the draft law, despite its ostensible commitment to international conventions, does not take into account the real issues faced by refugees in Egypt. Instead of including articles that encourage the integration of refugees into society and capitalise on their potential, the bill tends to limit opportunities for integration and impose harsh penalties for unclear acts, such as so-called breaches of public security and public order, or political or trade union activity, ignoring the political rights of refugees guaranteed by international law.
External context
The draft law cannot be separated from the ongoing agreements and partnerships between Egypt and the EU and its member states since 2014. It does not stem from a genuine internal Egyptian will to resolve refugee issues or to establish a comprehensive legal framework that allows for their integration into society. From the Khartoum Agreement through cooperation projects in ‘migration governance and border control’ to the €7.4 billion Strategic Partnership Agreement, of which more than €200 million is dedicated to migration control, it is clear that these legislations are responding to external pressures. These partnerships, which the Refugee Platform in Egypt has previously described as ‘complications of a failed and deadly partnership,’ lack transparency, as their details are not made public or set out clear clauses that commit to respecting human rights.
Conclusion
In light of the above, the undersigned human rights organisations declare their total rejection of the draft law regulating the asylum of foreigners in Egypt in its current form. The bill does not provide real solutions to the basic challenges faced by refugees, but rather increases the complexity of procedures and reduces their access to protection and services. It also completely ignores the need to plan for a transitional phase that allows for a coherent legal and logistical system, without disrupting the legal procedures currently overseen by the UNHCR, which could cause legal chaos and undermine the rights and protections of the refugee community before the law is passed.
The undersigned organisations call for the draft law to be returned to the relevant committee and for a real and careful debate on the provisions of the draft law with the participation of experts and specialists, and to amend its articles to ensure the protection of the rights of refugees in accordance with international standards. We also call for transparent guarantees for the working mechanisms of the committee proposed in the draft law, and a comprehensive transition plan that would guarantee the rights of refugees and uninterrupted services provided to them.
The human rights community deals responsibly with the proposed Egyptian legislation, believing in the importance of constructive engagement with issues of public concern, despite the Egyptian authorities’ constant disregard for this positive engagement. The Refugee Platform in Egypt and the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights issued a detailed analytical paper addressing the potential and expected effects of the proposed draft law on the situation of refugees in Egypt, in addition to a policy brief reviewing the most important issues contained in the draft law. The ECRF also issued a commentary on the draft law. We hope that these efforts by civil society organisations will find a constructive response and engagement from the legislative authority in Egypt.
____
Signatory organisations:
Refugee Platform in Egypt
Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights
El Nadeem Center
Sinai Foundation for Human Rights
Egyptian Forum for Human Rights
Egyptian Human Rights Forum (EHRF)
Law and Democracy Support Foundation – LDSF
The Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy (TIMEP)
Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies(cihrs)
ANKH association
egyptwide
HuMENA for Human Rights and Civic Engagement
Intersection Association for Rights and Freedoms
The Regional Coalition for Women Human Rights Defenders in South West Asia and North Africa (WHRDMENA)
MV LOUISE MICHEL PROJECT
Maldusa Project
