Egypt: Asylum Law No. 164 Implementation Shifts Refugee Authority

• Egypt's Asylum Law No. 164 transfers primary authority for refugee status determination from UNHCR to the Egyptian government.
• This change significantly alters the asylum process for Sudanese individuals, who previously registered with UNHCR.
• Concerns exist that the state may arbitrarily deny or withdraw asylum, given its history of human rights issues and recent actions.
• Under the former UNHCR system, asylum seekers often felt pressured to embellish their stories and provide specific, detailed accounts of violence.
• The new system requires legal professionals to urgently understand the updated procedures and criteria to effectively advise Sudanese asylum seekers.

This necessitates an urgent and thorough familiarization by lawyers with the new procedures and specific criteria that will be applied, as the legal landscape has significantly shifted from the previous UNHCR-led system.

The Egypt Asylum Law No. 164 implementation marks a pivotal change in the nation's approach to refugee protection, transferring primary authority for asylum decisions from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) directly to the Egyptian government. This legislative development fundamentally alters the process by which individuals, particularly Sudanese asylum seekers in Egypt, will seek and obtain protection from violence and deportation. For years, Sudanese individuals arriving in Egypt before 2023 navigated a system where registration with UNHCR was the initial step, often followed by prolonged periods of uncertainty awaiting an interview to determine their refugee status.

This new framework signifies a substantial Egypt refugee system change, moving away from UNHCR's long-standing role. Previously, the UNHCR Egypt authority shift was anticipated, and its full realization under Law No. 164 means that the Egyptian government asylum process is in the process of assuming direct management of determinations of refugee status, with the full operational transfer from UNHCR expected by March 2027. This transition is particularly critical for the large population of Sudanese individuals who have historically relied on UNHCR for various forms of assistance and protection, including modest financial aid, endorsements for residency, and referrals for medical services, effectively positioning UNHCR as a "surrogate state" in many respects.

The implementation of Asylum Law No. 164 follows a period during which Egypt has progressively reduced its adherence to the principles and obligations outlined in the 1951 Refugee Convention Egypt commitments. Legal commentators have voiced significant apprehension that this shift could lead to the state arbitrarily denying or revoking asylum, a concern amplified by a documented history of human rights abuses against Sudanese populations. The escalating number of deportations, increased police surveillance, and a recent violent raid targeting gold miners in the Aswan and Red Sea Governorates have further eroded trust among asylum seekers regarding the state's capacity or willingness to offer impartial protection.

This new legal landscape raises profound questions about how Sudanese individuals will navigate an asylum system now directly administered by the very governmental entity that some perceive as a source of persecution. The previous system, while often protracted and challenging, offered a degree of separation from direct governmental control. The current changes necessitate a re-evaluation of legal strategies and advocacy efforts, as the criteria and procedures for refugee status determination will now be under the direct purview of the Egyptian state, potentially introducing new complexities and risks for vulnerable populations.

Under the previous arrangement, the process of seeking protection through UNHCR often demanded a specific narrative from asylum seekers. Many Sudanese individuals felt compelled to meticulously craft and, at times, embellish their personal accounts during interactions with UNHCR officers. The Refugee Status Determination (RSD) interview was the most crucial stage, determining legal residency based on a well-founded fear of persecution. Individuals like Abdelrahman would diligently record every violent incident they experienced in Sudan and Egypt, a practice frequently recommended by refugee-led organizations and community groups in areas like Cairo and Giza.

This preparation often included mock interviews with peers or sharing experiences via WhatsApp channels to prepare others for challenging interview scenarios, such as navigating difficult interviewers. The expectation was to recount violent events chronologically, providing specific details like the color of an aggressor's clothing or the number of people in a detention cell. The emphasis was heavily placed on demonstrating victimhood and the severity of violence to convince UNHCR officers of the genuine need for protection. Hassan, from North Darfur, recounted focusing his RSD interview solely on conflict, casualties, family deaths, and personal safety, deliberately omitting reasons related to personal well-being, academic pursuits, or employment, believing these would not support his claim. He felt he had no alternative but to "play that role well" to secure assistance. The emotional toll of this process was evident, as illustrated by Banda, who, still reeling from trauma in Sudan, was unable to complete his interview.

The full Egypt Asylum Law No. 164 implementation fundamentally reshapes the environment for Sudanese asylum seekers in Egypt and, consequently, for legal professionals advising them. With the Egyptian government asylum process in the process of assuming primary authority for refugee status determination, the criteria, evidentiary requirements, and appeal mechanisms are becoming subject to direct state control. This necessitates an urgent and thorough familiarization by lawyers with the new procedures and specific criteria that will be applied, as the legal landscape has significantly shifted from the previous UNHCR-led system.

The change from a UNHCR-centric system to one managed by the state presents a new set of challenges, particularly concerning the potential for arbitrary decisions and the need for robust legal advocacy. The previous system, despite its flaws and delays, offered a distinct channel for protection. Now, legal advisors must prepare their clients for a process where the state's discretion will be paramount, requiring a deep understanding of domestic administrative law and human rights frameworks to effectively represent asylum seekers. This transition underscores the critical importance of informed legal counsel in safeguarding the rights and potential outcomes for those seeking refuge in Egypt.

Lawyers advising Sudanese asylum seekers in Egypt must urgently familiarize themselves with the new procedures and criteria under Asylum Law No. 164, as the government now holds primary authority for refugee status determination, significantly altering the legal landscape and potential outcomes for clients.

Source: Insights derived from source reporting