In its announcement, Egypt’s Technical Secretariat of the Supreme Standing Committee for Human Rights (SSCHR) referred to the “notable progress achieved by Egypt since the launch of the [2021-2026] Strategy.” It calls particular attention to the purported “advance[ment] and safeguarding [of] human rights in their comprehensive and integrated dimensions”.
However, as noted by the United Nations Committee against Torture (CAT), torture in Egypt remains a pervasive problem for which a “lack of accountability” contributes to a “climate of impunity”. In its most recent concluding observations, the United Nations Human Rights Committee (HRC) expressed concern that counter-terrorism laws are used to “silence actual or perceived critics of the Government”. Finally, as part of the Universal Periodic Review Process, Egypt rejected a recommendation to end its “excessive use of pre-trial detention,” a problem further noted by CAT and the HRC.
Facilitating a climate of impunity for torture, abusing overbroad legislation to target critics of the government, and outright denying recognized human rights issues hardly constitutes “advancement” and “safeguarding” of human rights.
Accordingly, the undersigned organizations stress that renewing and publishing a new human rights strategy is not an achievement in itself. Credibility is not measured by issuing documents, announcing “visions,” or performatively holding meetings with civil society, but by delivering tangible progress that can be measured, verified, and attributed to responsible authorities.
To this end, Egypt’s 2021-2026 Human Rights Strategy was more style than substance. Its many commitments were broad and indeterminate, without measurable indicators that allowed progress to be tracked or outcomes to be evaluated. Follow-up and review mechanisms were limited or insufficiently transparent. The result was a persistent gap between stated commitments and realities on the ground.
A renewed strategy must therefore move beyond repackaging aspirations or rearranging priorities on paper. It must adopt the logic of an action plan: specific objectives, clearly assigned responsibilities, publicly announced timelines and benchmarks, and meaningful public and civil society participation and scrutiny, including through public written inputs.
In this regard, the undersigned organizations note with concern that the process of developing the renewed Strategy appears to be anchored within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. While international engagement is important, a national human rights strategy is, by its nature, primarily concerned with domestic law, policy, and practice. Its development and implementation therefore require clear leadership and accountability from the institutions responsible for internal governance and justice.
Of particular importance are dedicated efforts to reform Egypt’s criminal justice system, including conditions of detention, fair trial guarantees, the prohibition of torture and ill-treatment, pretrial detention, and policies or practices that directly affect due process, defense rights, and personal liberty. The undersigned organizations call for structured, measurable, and trackable models of work with respect to the new Strategy’s approach to criminal justice reform, where challenges are among the most urgent and consequential for the Egyptian people’s lives and the rule of law. Specifically, the undersigned call attention to the need for independent monitoring of places of detention, having an open national campaign to stop torture, guaranteeing fair trial, and reducing pre-trial detention including the practice of “rotation” or “recycling”.
Because addressing criminal justice is decisive in determining the credibility of the renewed Strategy, the undersigned organizations will develop a civil society–led independent “Shadow Strategy” establishing clear, measurable standards for reform. The Shadow Strategy will serve as an independent and authoritative reference, setting out civil society priorities and standards, and providing a benchmark against which the quality, coherence, and meaningfulness of the renewed National Human Rights Strategy can be assessed.
The undersigned organizations underscore that the true test of the renewed Strategy will lie in its implementation and in the realization of genuine, measurable change on the ground.
Signatures
DIGNITY • ECRF • CFJ • REDRESS
