Freedom of Opinion and Expression in Egypt: A Decade of Decline and Challenges
Ahmed MERTEH
Executive Director of the Committee for Justice
Since 2013, Egypt has witnessed radical shifts in freedom of opinion and expression. Following the 25 January 2011 revolution, there was a sense of optimism for establishing a democratic society and guaranteeing the rights of individuals to express their opinions without fear. This period saw a wave of peaceful protests,demonstrations, and labor movements demanding political and social reform and new spaces for public debate and expression, both in the media and on the street.
The 2013 military coup changed this climate dramatically. One of the main goals of the coup was to eliminate freedom of opinion and expression. The military regime considered the spaces given to citizens at the end of the Mubarak era, such as demonstrations, sit-ins, and labor actions, the main driver of the 25 January revolution, and thus the main reason for the political changes that followed. As a result, there has been a relentless drive to suppress all forms of independent expression and restore full control over the public sphere.
The new regime did not hesitate to use all possible means to suppress and eradicate these movements, even the use of excessive violence. The repression was not limited to killing and arresting protesters, but included widespread campaigns against independent media. Satellite channels and newspapers faced closure, journalists faced arrests, and websites offering independent viewpoints were blocked.
In addition to street-level repression, the regime sought to legalize repression by issuing a range of repressive legislation to make it difficult for citizens to exercise their right to express their opinions. The most notable of these laws were the Protest Law[1] and the Anti-Terrorism Law[2], imposing severe restrictions on the organization of public gatherings and the expression of opinion, creating a climate of fear that prevented any future attempts at expression or dissent.
This repressive climate has led to a significant decline in the level of freedom in the country, with dissenting voices facing serious risks. Social media, serving as a platform for numerous activists to express their views in relative freedom, faced the regime’s grip and was restricted. Digital activists faced prosecution, and many accounts and websites were blocked.
This article provides a comprehensive review of the deterioration of freedom of opinion and expression in Egypt over the last decade, especially after the 2013 military coup. The analysis looks at how Egyptian authorities have pursued a series of policies aimed at regaining full control over the public sphere, and how this has led to the suppression of dissenting voices and the closure of any spaces for free expression.
First, we will look at the repressive legislation utilized by the regime as the main tool to undermine freedom of expression
In addition to these legislations, Egypt witnessed widespread repression of the media and social media. Since 2013, numerous independent media outlets faced closure and websites critical of the regime have been blocked. Social media, once a vital platform for expressing opinion, further became a target for blocking and censorship.
Civil society[3] further faced this repression. NGOs, including those working in the field of human rights, were restricted and targeted. [4] The NGO Law of 2019 imposed severe restrictions on the activities of these organizations and limited their ability to receive foreign funding and operate freely.
The regime’s repressive measures can be divided into what we called “the ten steps in ten years.” The first step was the suppression of peaceful demonstrations, followed by the issuance of the Protest Law in November 2013, restricting the right to peaceful assembly and leading to the arrest of thousands of activists.
In 2014 and 2015, the regime continued its campaign of arrests against activists, targeting voices that played a major role in the 25 January revolution. In 2014, numerous independent media outlets were shut down, leading to a significant decline in the level of press freedom. [5] In 2015, the Anti-Terrorism law was issued, granting authorities additional powers to crack down on political opponents and journalists under the pretext of combating terrorism.
In 2017, the regime intensified its control over the digital sphere by blocking hundreds of independent websites. In 2018, the Cybercrime Law was issued, granting the government additional tools to monitor online activity and block content it deemed threatening. During this period, numerous journalists and online activists were arrested for criticizing the regime on social media.
In 2019, the regime further targeted civil society through the NGO law, imposing severe restrictions on the work of human rights organizations. The period from 2016 to 2020 further witnessed an increased targeting of feminist activists and women’s rights defenders, who were arrested and prosecuted.
The period after the 25 January 2011 revolution
After the 25 January 2011 revolution, Egypt witnessed a state of great optimism about freedom of opinion and expression. Civil society of all forms gained unprecedented space for expression, creating a climate of political and social openness. Tahrir Square became a symbol of change, serving as a vital platform for demonstrations and demands for reforms. Many believed that these gains would not be easily taken away as long as “the square is there,” referring to the strength of the popular movement then.
During this period, Egyptian media, labor demonstrations, and civil societies were unprecedentedly active. New platforms for free media emerged, free from government control, and Egyptians found in social media, including Facebook and Twitter, powerful tools to express their opinions freely. This period witnessed signs of political pluralism, as several political parties and groups began to compete for influence in the public sphere.
Numerous non-governmental organizations began to monitor and defend human rights, increasing the involvement of civil society in the political scene. However, this period faced challenges, as some media platforms were used to smear political opponents or spread misinformation, leading to some violations of freedom of expression.
The most important manifestations of freedom of opinion and expression emerging in Egypt as a result of the expansion of open spaces after the 25 January 2011 revolution can be summarized in the following points:
Independent media
After the revolution, many independent media platforms emerged that were not controlled by the government.
Public gatherings and demonstrations
The right to peaceful assembly and demonstration has become a key element of expressing opinions and demanding change.
Social media freedom
Social media platforms became effective tools for communicating and organizing among protesters, and disseminating information and news instantly, away from the control of traditional media.
Civil society activism:
Civil society witnessed unprecedented activity, with an increase in the number of NGOs focusing on human rights and freedoms. These organizations monitored government performance and reported on human rights violations.
However, these gains were soon threatened by the return of repressive policies, as the military regime sought to control these factors and limit the space for freedom.
The post-military coup period (2013)
Over the past decade, Egypt has witnessed radical shifts in the political and social sphere. The post-military coup Egyptian regime headed by then Defense Minister Abdel Fattah al-Sisi implemented systematic steps to suppress freedom of opinion and expression. This process began in earnest following the 2013 military coup, marking a major turning point in the country’s history.
The steps of the Egyptian regime ranged from practical measures on the ground to carefully tailored legislative measures to ensure full control of the public sphere. These steps were not isolated, but rather overlapped and integrated to form a comprehensive framework for suppressing freedom of opinion and expression.
On a practical level, the Egyptian authorities took a series of measures on the ground, aiming to minimize the spaces in which the opposition could express its views. The authorities utilized one of the most prominent practical tools of mass arrests of activists, journalists, and bloggers. These arrests were accompanied by waves of street repression and excessive violence to disperse any attempts to demonstrate or protest.
These massacres and other acts of violence against protesters were effective tools for imposing fear and intimidation among opponents. Egyptian authorities used violence in public squares and further pursued activists even in their homes and workplaces, making the idea of organizing and protesting almost impossible. Over time, Egyptians realized that the cost of participating in any protests or opposition movements would be grave, prompting many to retreat and avoid any political or opposition activity.
On a practical level, the suppression of protests and massacres was a key tool for reshaping Egypt’s political landscape. The suppression was not limited to dispersing gatherings or silencing voices, but rather a comprehensive repression aimed at establishing the notion that the state would not tolerate any attempt at change through the street, preventing any chance of the emergence of a real opposition capable of expressing itself either in the street or through the media.
On the legislative level, the regime played a pivotal role in drafting and passing new laws aimed at legitimizing repression and systematically restricting freedom of expression. The most prominent of these laws is the Anti-Terrorism Law, which granted authorities broad powers to monitor individuals and detain them for long periods of time without trial. These laws were drafted in a way that allows authorities to use them against any person or entity they deem a threat, even if the threat is merely an expression of opinion or criticism of government policies.
Another law that had a significant impact was the NGO Law of 2019. The NGO Law acted as a regulatory legislation, and further as a tool to control the work of NGOs, including those that were working in the field of human rights. Under the NGO Law, severe restrictions were imposed on foreign funding and the activities of these organizations, effectively paralyzing numerous human rights organizations that played an essential role in monitoring and documenting violations.
The subsequent Cybercrime Law further added a new dimension to repression, granting authorities additional powers to monitor online activity and block websites that they deem to be oppositional or a threat to the regime. The internet, which served as an alternative platform for youth and activists to express their views after traditional media outlets were clamped down on, further came under the regime’s control, limiting the ability to circulate information freely.
These dual steps, between practical actions on the ground and legislative measures, were part of an integrated strategy aimed at ensuring total control over the public space. Legislation provided a legal cover for repression, while practical measures provided the means to enforce that legislation on the ground.
Over the past decade, the Egyptian regime implemented a gradual plan to suppress freedom of opinion and expression through a series of practical and legislative steps that deliberately aimed to eliminate all available spaces of expression. These steps, over the years, came in succession but differed in their timing and effects. These steps can be divided into ten main stages that were the cornerstone of the gradual elimination of freedom of opinion and expression in Egypt.
1. Suppression and massacres of the Rabaa and Nahda demonstrations and sit-ins (August 2013)
These phases began with the suppression of demonstrations and the Rabaa Square and Nahda Square massacres in August 2013, when Egyptian authorities used excessive force to break up peaceful protester sit-ins opposing the military coup. These massacres resulted in the death of hundreds of civilians and marked the beginning of a wave of severe repression of protests. The primary objective was to send a clear message that the state would not tolerate any form of opposition protests or gatherings and that violence was the primary means of dealing with dissent.
2. Issuance of the Protest Law (November 2013)
The regime followed up this repression by issuing the Protest Law in November 2013, severely restricting the right to peaceful assembly. The law required permits for demonstrations and granted authorities the right to forcibly disperse protests. As a result, thousands of peaceful activists and protesters were arrested. This law was part of the regime’s attempt to dismantle any capacity for collective organizing or peaceful gatherings that posed a threat to its authority. The Protest Law gave security officials broad powers and near-absolute discretion to prevent the right to protest without clear legal justification. The law further allowed security forces to forcibly disperse any demonstration even on the basis of the behavior of a single protester, opening the door to the use of infiltrators as a pretext to prevent and disperse demonstrations.
The wording of the law criminalizes behaviors without clarifying them, leaving room for broad and imprecise criminalization, including “attempting to influence the course of justice.” The same applies to gatherings, as the text grants the Minister of Interior the right to ban any gatherings of a public nature of more than ten people, even in an electoral context, without recognizing the right to smaller, urgent, or spontaneous gatherings.
Although the law recognizes means of litigation to discuss the authority’s decisions in relation to the right to protest, these means do not respond to the nature of the violated rights, meaning that judicial intervention to address violations is after litigation is no longer necessary or effective to protect rights or even address their violations.
The Protest Law was declared unconstitutional on two occasions. [6] The Supreme Court upheld the articles of the law with the exception of Article 10, declaring it unconstitutional, which grants the Ministry of Interior the authority to authorize demonstrations, while the rest of the violations of Article 73 of the Egyptian Constitution remained without any sanction from the competent judicial body.
Egyptian and international civil society condemned this law, with the Human Rights Watch issuing a report calling it a repressive law [7], and the High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay issuing a statement on 23 November 2013, [8] saying that the law threatened the lives and safety of protesters and established escalating measures in the use of force.
3. Arrests of activists (2014-2015)
In 2014 and 2015, the arrest of activists was another key step in this process. Activists who led or participated in the 25 January Revolution or voiced criticism of the new regime were arrested and prosecuted. The most prominent of these activists was Alaa Abdel Fattah, who was arrested and sentenced to prison for organizing a peaceful demonstration. These arrests were a systematic campaign to silence the most prominent opposition voices that had a significant impact during the revolution.
Of course, the arrest campaigns continued beyond that period of time, representing the beginning of a systematic policy to suppress freedom of opinion and freedom of demonstration. In July 2024, 100 people were arrested for calling for peaceful protests, and Amnesty International issued a statement condemning the arrests. [9]
4. Closure of independent media outlets (2014)
In a parallel attempt in 2014, authorities shut down independent media outlets. This campaign targeted TV channels and websites that were providing critical coverage of current events. Al Jazeera Mubasher Misr and numerous independent newspapers and websites highlighting human rights violations faced shut down. These closures were part of a larger plan to control the media sphere and direct the media narrative to serve the regime’s interests.
Despite these practices violating Article 65 of Egyptian law, which enshrines freedom of opinion and thought, it was only one step of a series of measures and legislations aimed at reducing the scope of freedoms and the space for public expression.
5. Issuance of the Anti-Terrorism Law (2015)
In 2015, the regime passed the Anti-Terrorism Law, granting authorities broad powers of arrest and surveillance under the pretext of fighting terrorism. This law was increasingly utilized to crack down on political opponents, journalists, and activists who criticized the government or the military, leading to increased official repression and censorship of all forms of dissenting expression.
Similar to other terrorism laws enacted as part of the international and domestic fight against terrorism, Egypt’s 2015 terrorism law limited the procedural safeguards afforded not only to defendants but also to suspects. The law included several exceptions to the requirements of a fair trial, as the legislative policy tended to minimize the margin of the rights of those involved in the proceedings in terms of time limits and guarantees, under the pretext of combating terrorism. Since the application of the penal code, concerned with crimes of public right, does not respect defense guarantees and fair trial principles, it was logical that the application of the anti-terrorism law would be less respectful of human rights, making it tempting for the authorities to further use it to suppress freedom of expression, opinion, and protest, especially with the law’s severe penalties.
6. Blocking websites (2017)
In 2017, the authorities attempted another escalation with the blocking of websites. More than 500 websites were blocked, including Mada Masr, one of the most important independent media platforms that published critical reports. This blocking severely restricted freedom of access to information and stifled the independent media space in Egypt in violation of Article 70 of the Egyptian Constitution, which guarantees freedom of the press, including digital media.
The aforementioned case was one of many examples and practices of how authorities consider the real gains made by Egyptian civil society in the field of freedom of expression, opinion, and the press, whether at the end of the era of President Hosni Mubarak or after the revolution, as an existential threat to the authorities that monopolize sovereignty and usurp power from its owners, the general public, who are supposed to have sovereignty and decision-making power. This makes the authorities in place since the military coup the embodiment of the counter-revolution that systematically and progressively suppresses freedom of expression and opinion.
7. Issuance of the Cybercrime Law (2018)
In 2018, the Anti-Cybercrime Law No. 175 of 2018 was issued in the same context of progressive, [10] and systematic, suppression of freedom of expression. This law gave the government more tools to monitor the internet and block content it deems “threatening” to national security. Bloggers and digital activists who used social media to express their opinions were targeted. Numerous journalists and digital activists, including Amal Fathy in 2018, have been arrested for criticizing government and police policies.
The Cybercrime Law violates Articles 65, 70, 71, and 72 of the Egyptian Constitution and contains unclear wording and imprecise terminology. The law grants police the power to block websites or pages at the beginning of an investigation, not at the end, when the elements of guilt have been established. The decision to block or ban must be issued by a judicial authority, and the permit system it imposes for the use of certain mechanisms and technologies is a pretext for prevention and criminalization, which constitutes a ground for employing the text to suppress freedom of expression and to the inadequacy of the penalties to the criminalized act.
8. Arrests of digital journalists and activists (2018-2019)
During this period, numerous journalists and bloggers faced arrests for criticizing government policies. [11] Among these cases, activist Amal Fathy was arrested in 2018 after posting a video criticizing the police. Social media users were further targeted under anti-terrorism and cybercrime laws.
These measures constituted an exploitation by the existing authorities of the aforementioned above. These measures facilitated the way for legislative amendments to undermine the essence of human rights and create a climate of repression and prosecutions. These measures addressed the activity of dissidents and human rights defenders and further created behaviors of self-repression, where members of society avoid expressing any ideas or opinions that criticize or anger the ruling authorities to avoid their repression.
9. Targeting civil society (2019)
In 2019, authorities targeted civil society by issuing NGO Law No. 149 of 2019. The law placed severe restrictions on the work of NGOs, especially those working in the fields of human rights and democracy. The aforementioned law made it difficult for these organizations to operate freely, led to the closure of many of them, and limited their ability to receive foreign funding. These measures led to the closure of many organizations that were defending human rights and freedom of expression.
The law limited the scope of intervention for associations, and further used broad terms, including “threat to national unity and violating public order.” In-line with the legislative policy tendency to narrow the margin of freedoms in previous texts, the NGO law did not deviate from this trend. The NGO Law granted government agencies wide powers restricting the freedom of association and activity of associations, and establishing unjustified interference in their internal affairs or activities. However, the restrictions were more severe for any activities related to foreign affairs, whether about funding or even just relations with foreign NGOs.
The law is in a clear violation of Article 75 of Egyptian Constitution, which enshrines the right to form associations upon notification and to practice their activities freely.
10. Targeting women's rights and feminist activists (2016-2020)
Between 2016 and 2020, the regime focused on targeting women’s rights and feminist activists. The authorities targeted, prosecuted, and arrested women’s rights Activists, including Mozn Hassan and Amal Fathy, for their activities. This campaign against feminist voices is part of a broader strategy to silence all forms of dissent, including those related to women’s rights.
These systematic steps, between practical actions on the ground and legislative measures, formed a step-by-step plan to suppress freedom of opinion and expression in Egypt [12], restricting the public sphere [13], and eliminating any form of dissent.
Conclusion
Articles 92 [14] and 93 [15] of the Egyptian constitution have not prevented authorities from systematically violating human rights, especially freedom of expression in Egypt, both in legislation and in practice.
The reopening the public sphere in Egypt is an absolute necessity to ensure the stability and progress of society. An open public sphere is the platform where citizens interact freely, discuss their issues, express their opinions, and demand their rights. It is the space that allows society to breathe, forms the foundation on which true democracy is built, and ensures societal control over the government and prevents deterioration toward corruption or tyranny.
The promotion of freedom of opinion and expression and opening up the public sphere contributes to building a society capable of facing challenges, including extremism and terrorism. Closed and repressive societies that are ruled with ironclad are a fertile environment for the spread of extremism, for the absence of freedom creates frustration and congestion among citizens. When denied the right to express their opinions or participate in decisions that affect their lives, individuals are more likely to engage in extremist movements or adopt violent ideas. In contrast, open societies allowing people freedom of expression and assembly are a strong barrier against the spread of extremist ideas because free and open dialogue give citizens the opportunity to resolve their differences and express their grievances in peaceful ways.
The opening up the public sphere further contributes to improving the performance of the government itself. As a result of open space for expression and constructive criticism, the government becomes more accountable and less prone to corruption. Community oversight is the most effective tool to ensure transparency and accountability. In societies where citizens enjoy freedom of opinion and expression, an independent press and media can play a pivotal role in exposing corruption and human rights violations, adding pressure on the government to improve its performance and respond to the demands of the people.
The reopening of the public sphere in Egypt is not only an urgent necessity, it is the only way to achieve a cohesive and sustainable society based on dialogue, freedom, and participation. It is the foundation upon which any development or reform project is built because societies thrive only when individuals can actively participate in making decisions that affect their lives, and when open dialogue and constructive criticism are the primary means of communication between the state and citizens.
Maintaining an open public sphere requires dismantling existing tools of repression, including laws restricting freedoms, censorship apparatuses that stifle independent media. This further requires removing restrictions on peaceful gatherings and demonstrations. A society can only breathe and move freely when it enjoys its basic rights, including the rights to expression, assembly, and association. These are individual rights and the pillars of democracy, ensuring that society remains in a state of balance between authorities and the people.
In conclusion, opening up the public sphere and revitalizing society is the key to real progress. Society is the foundation on which any development is built, and when a society is active, open, and free, it is able to face challenges in a constructive and peaceful manner. The government must realize that suppressing freedoms and closing the public sphere will not lead to stability but rather to more tensions and radicalization. Only through freedom of expression and open interaction can society avoid slipping into violence and achieve sustainable development.
Law No. 107 of 2013 on the regulation of the right to public gatherings, processions and peaceful demonstrations, amended by Law No. 14 of 2017, the Egyptian Protest Law.
The Anti-Terrorism Law No. 94 of 2015, amended by Law No. 15 of 2020, dated 3 March 2020.
Ahmed Mefreh, “A Decade since January 25: The Egyptian human rights community between positives and negatives. Alaraby Aljedeed.” 25 January 2021. Available here.
One of the most famous restrictions is Case 173, known in the media as the “Funding of Organizations” case, in which 43 employees of NGOs and foreign NGOs were prosecuted for foreign funding following a decision by the Cabinet, with sentences ranging from one to five years in prison and the closure of numerous international NGOs.
In 2018, Egypt ranked 161 out of 180 in the World Press Freedom Index, published by Reporters without Borders (RSF), with 32 journalists imprisoned. In 2023, Egypt’s ranking dropped to 166.
The first case, Case No. 160 of 36 Constitutional Court, claims that Articles 8 and 10 of the law are unconstitutional. Article 8(4) stipulates that a notification of the demonstration must be submitted to the police station or district in which the venue is located, specifying the time limit for the notification and the information that must be included in it. Article 10(5) allows the Minister of Interior or the competent security director to cancel, reroute, postpone, or reschedule a demonstration by a reasoned decision based on evidence of a threat to peace and security. The second case, Case No. 234 of 36 Constitutional Court, challenged Article 7 of the law (6), which prohibits participants in a demonstration from disrupting security, public order, production or citizens’ interests, or blocking roads or transportation, and other criminal acts. In addition to challenging Article 19 of Law 7, which stipulates a prison sentence of up to five years for anyone who violates Article 7 and commits one of the prohibited acts. Protesters are often referred to trial for committing the acts listed in Article 7, which are punishable by imprisonment or a fine in Article 19, under which, along with articles of the Gathering and/or Criminal Codes, defendants were convicted in the cases mentioned above, despite the lawyers’ argument that the charges were fabricated and that there was no real evidence that they had committed these acts. Published in Legal Agenda, Menna Omar, “Egypt's Supreme Constitutional Court: The protest law is constitutional except for one article,” dated 03 January 2017. available here.
Human Rights Watch, “Egypt: Deeply Restrictive New Assembly Law,” 26 November 2013. available here.
United Nations, “New law on demonstrations in Egypt seriously flawed and must be amended - Pillay,” 26 November 2013. available here.
Amnesty International, “Egypt: More than 100 arbitrarily detained over calls for anti-government protests,” 18 July 2024. available here.
The government presented a draft law in 2015 and a draft law in 2016, but it was not until the authorities considered that the security and political context allowed for this after the start of the blocking campaigns on websites in 2017 that a cybercrime law was proposed, discussed, and approved.
United Nations, “UN experts urge Egypt to end crackdown on protesters and human rights defenders,” 28 October 2019. available here.
Human Rights Watch, “Egypt: Spate of Free Speech Prosecutions,” 29 August 2024. available here.
Human Right Watch, “Egypt: Violations, Repression Upstage Presidential Vote,” 18 December 2023. available here.
The rights and freedoms inherent in the citizen cannot be suspended or diminished. No law regulating the exercise of rights and freedoms may restrict them in a way that affects their origin and essence.
The state shall abide by the international human rights conventions, covenants, treaties and charters ratified by Egypt, and they shall have the force of law after their publication in accordance with the prescribed conditions.