Whose Values? Online morality policing in the name of “Egyptian family values”
Introduction
At the onset of exceptional measures to confront the Covid-19 pandemic in April 2020, Egypt’s Public Prosecution launched a campaign of “moral” prosecutions targeting non-political online content for “violating Egyptian family values.” This is now a core approach of its operations.
Accompanied by media-driven stigmatization and defamation campaigns, these prosecutions are the visible extremity of the state’s new social control project, which first set its sights on a group of women content creators using TikTok. The project’s rhetoric has emerged in successive statements from the Public Prosecution and later the Ministry of Interior, coming to occupy a significant part of public discourse. It has also consumed a considerable share of the Public Prosecution’s and Egypt’s criminal justice resources over the past half-decade.
Yet the investigations and trials that repeatedly flood public debate with fabricated moral crises are just the tip of the iceberg: such prosecutions largely remain hidden beyond official statements.
By the time of writing, at the end of November 2025, this far-reaching, ever-growing pattern of prosecutions has revealed itself over five years as an indicator of a broader political and social project aimed at controlling online, even non-political content. The project uses legal prosecution and punishment as practical tools to control Egyptian society, particularly in upholding hierarchical gender structures and state-approved forms of gender expression, as well as social and economic structures and the fixed class positions of the vast majority of Egyptians.
In this report, the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights (EIPR) analyzes the use of the legal provision that is the hallmark of these prosecutions: Article 25 of the Anti-Cyber and Information Technology Crimes Law No. 175 of 2018, known in local media as the Cybercrime Law, which introduced the criminal offense of “violating any of the family principles or values in Egyptian society.” It is increasingly used to criminalize acts never considered crimes outside the online sphere or to create far more severe penalties, whether imprisonment or fines, for existing crimes.
This report examines the legal practices which apply Article 25 and the official discourse that accompanies its application. In considering the backgrounds of the victims of prosecution, the report offers a preliminary sociolegal analysis. It also analyzes the rhetorical role of the project, which we believe is essentially a campaign to incite social moral panic, as well as the impact of this discourse beyond the individuals subjected to legal prosecution - particularly its function as a tool of social control to ensure the immutability of specific class and gender structures.
Methodology
The report adopts a documentary and analytical methodology that combines quantitative and qualitative monitoring. It draws on case files and investigation documents containing charges of “violating Egyptian family values,” reviews legal texts and court rulings, and creates a discourse analysis based on a detailed and in-depth reading of executive authorities’ official and media statements. The analysis covers cases occurring between April 2020 and the end of November 2025.
Data collection and case documentation: We compiled data on 252 cases from the specified period based on EIPR monitoring-either through direct involvement when EIPR provided legal assistance or advice, or through tracking published news, Public Prosecution and Ministry of Interior statements, referral orders, and rulings obtained by EIPR’s legal aid team or defense lawyers. We also relied on legal materials and court decisions reported in the press. The cases we collected do not represent a comprehensive record of all related cases during the period; they are likely far fewer than the total number of cases and investigations based on similar facts and charges.
The data collection process also included tracking complaints filed by lawyers against content creators, as well as information related to investigations, pretrial detention, and referrals to trial.
Legal and legislative analysis: The report analyzes the laws and provisions investigative authorities use in these cases, foremost the Cybercrime Law and particularly its Articles 25 and 27.
The analysis examines how these provisions have been interpreted in official records, referral orders, and the reasoning in various court rulings. Special attention is given to judgments issued by the Economic Courts of First Instance or Appeals, which have set important legal precedents in interpreting these articles, whether positively or negatively.
Analysis of public and media discourse: The report generates an analysis of the statements issued by the Public Prosecution and the Ministry of Interior, as well as media coverage of the cases, to identify the dominant features of official discourse. This allows us to perceive the state’s policy regarding the cases and the main actors involved. The report also considers the official discourse of members of the executive branch and their statements in the media.
Human rights framework: The analysis is grounded in international human rights standards to which Egypt is committed, as well as the constitutional principles that govern the Egyptian legislative system in theory.
It also draws on previous EIPR publications, including reports, data, and news, especially reports issued by EIPR independently or in cooperation with other organizations over the past decade. Examples include the “Anti-Technology” report on the draft Cybercrime Law, “Virtual Freedom: Towards Ending the Cybercrime Law's Repression of Online Freedom of Expression in Egypt,” and the “Guide to the case of Mawadda and Haneen: A Report on the Harsh Sentences Against Women Online Content Creators on Charges of Human Trafficking,” as well as EIPR statements on specific cases.
