Read the full commentary here!

More than a year after the deadline set by the law, the Council of Ministers published the Executive Regulations (hereafter referred to as bylaws) of the Asylum Law (No. 164 of 2024) in the Official Gazette on May 21. Following the path set by the Law itself, the bylaws contain many provisions that undermine the established rights of refugees and asylum seekers, as stipulated in international treaties and laws to which Egypt is a signatory.

The Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights (EIPR) has drafted a detailed legal analysis of the bylaws that will enter into force within three months of their date of publication according to Prime Ministerial Decree (No. 1568 of 2026)., effectively terminating the operations of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). Yet,  the Standing Committee for Refugee Affairs—which is expected to assume all refugee-related matters previously managed by the UNHCR —has not been established, and does not even have a physical address yet.

In its analysis published today, 30 June 2026, EIPR notes the absence of any reference to a transitional role for the UNHCR regarding protection or refugee status determination until the national system becomes fully operational. This raises grave concerns regarding the fate of newly arrived asylum seekers and their protection against detention or deportation. These concerns are exacerbated when these legal and legislative questions are viewed against the backdrop of the material reality of refugees and migrants in Egypt.  Since mid-2024, the Egyptian state has embarked on a large-scale campaign targeting refugees and asylum seekers with detention and deportation, regardless of their legal status or their right to legal protection in Egypt. This campaign reached its peak in 2026; the most conservative estimates to date indicate that at least 5000 refugees have been detained since January, in addition to the death of at least 15 refugees in detention facilities. This is an unprecedented figure compared to the past decades, during which Egypt was consistently one of the largest host countries for refugees and those seeking safe haven from neighboring states. Meanwhile, statistics from the International Organization for Migration indicate the return of over 620,000 Sudanese who had sought refuge in Egypt following the outbreak of war within two years.

This paper briefly reviews some of the most significant concerns related to the bylaws and provides specific recommendations for addressing them. However, it is important to reiterate that even if amendments and improvements are made to the bylaws, the Asylum Law will continue to contain fundamental provisions that contravene human rights and the essence of the international treaties Egypt has signed. These are provisions that the bylaws cannot legally contradict or override, which confirms the continued need for the Parliament to amend the law to repeal those provisions that conflict with the fundamental protections upon which asylum laws are based.

The main concerns in the bylaws can be divided into three broad issues:

First: transitional issues concerning the absence of a clear roadmap to ensure the transfer of files and data pertaining to refugees and asylum seekers, and the seamless transition of the registration and refugee status determination process from the UNHCR to the Standing Committee, especially given the low probability that the procedures for establishing the Standing Committee and providing the necessary resources will be completed so it can carry out its duties by the specified date.

Second: Procedural issues regarding the texts governing the procedures and rules established by the bylaws concerning registration, refugee status determination, appeal mechanisms within the committee, judicial appeals, and the safeguards provided by the bylaws for refugees and asylum seekers. This includes the absence of fundamental safeguards, particularly guarantees of protection against refoulement or forced return of asylum seekers at various stages of the refugee status determination process, including appeals and judicial review.

Finally: The analysis tackles the most dangerous legal provisions in the Asylum Law that the bylaws failed to address, and in some instances, even exacerbated, regarding definitions of refugees and procedures for the denial, revocation and cessation of refugee status. If anything, the punitive approach that characterises the asylum law has been cemented. 

EIPR's commentary points to some positive aspects in the bylaws despite their numerous legal and human rights flaws. For example, the bylaws introduced some clarifications and detailed SOPs regarding the operational procedures of the Standing Committee and its technical secretariat with respect to the refugee status determination process, including the rights of asylum seekers to an individual hearing, legal representation, and access to interpretation into a language they understand. Furthermore, there are some safeguards for the protection of the most vulnerable groups, as well as the protection of unaccompanied children. However, even those provisions in the bylaws  that guarantee the rights of refugees to basic healthcare and primary education urgently  require further details specifying the responsibilities of executive authorities in facilitating and operationalising these rights. 

Read the full commentary here