The step was described as essential to ensuring the efficiency, fairness, and credibility of Egypt’s justice system.
The special parliamentary committee formed to re-examine the articles objected to by the president concluded that the law’s enforcement should be delayed in light of the president’s detailed assessment of the major changes introduced in the law.
These include establishing telephone notification centres in all district courts, which require significant technical infrastructure, electronic integration, and staff training across judicial bodies.
According to the committee, the delay will allow time to ensure that judges, prosecutors, law enforcement officers, and lawyers are fully acquainted with the new provisions and that courts’ digital readiness is complete.
The committee stressed that postponing enforcement of the law for one year aims to provide sufficient time to complete the technical, human, and technological preparations necessary to achieve its objectives without affecting the quality or accuracy of its implementation.
According to the parliamentary report, the committee approved the Ministry of Justice’s proposal to amend the article to reflect the new timeline.
The minister of justice explained that delaying implementation until the start of the 2026 judicial year meets practical and organizational requirements. This allows courts to improve efficiency and digital infrastructure and to provide sufficient time to train judges, prosecutors, and law enforcement officers on the new rules.
A representative from the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology confirmed that the proposed extension is sufficient to complete the digital infrastructure for the telephone notification centres and link them electronically to all courts, citing ongoing coordination between the Ministries of Justice and Communications.
“This law shall be published in the Official Gazette and shall come into force as of the first of October following its publication. It shall be sealed with the state’s seal and enforced as one of its laws,” according to Article 6 of the law’s issuance provisions.
Heated debate
In September, President Abdel-Fattah El-Sisi referred the draft Criminal Procedure Law back to the House of Representatives for re-examination.
The draft Criminal Procedure Law has been under discussion for years and is meant to replace legislation dating back to 1950.
In April 2025, the House of Representatives gave preliminary approval to the 544-article bill after months of debate.
Supporters argue that the bill modernizes the country's criminal procedures by introducing travel bans, watch lists, remote hearings, witness protection programmes, compensation for wrongful detention, and new mechanisms for international judicial cooperation.
However, some critics raised concerns about the articles on pre-trial detention, arguing they do not sufficiently prevent prolonged detentions.
The debate over the new Code of Criminal Procedure intensified during the session.
The proposed amendment to Article 105, which allows prosecutors to interrogate a defendant without a lawyer in rare cases where delay could harm the investigation, sharply divided lawmakers, the government, and the legal community.
“The government has no intention of tampering with the Constitution. Even if it did, which it does not, the House of Representatives and the president would never allow it. All institutions serve the Constitution, and the Constitution serves the people,” Minister of Parliamentary Affairs Mahmoud Fawzy said, defending the government’s position.
His comments came in response to MP Diaa El-Din Dawoud, who strongly opposed the amendment and urged Speaker Gebaly to step down from the chair and speak from the chamber floor to provide his constitutional opinion.
Dawoud praised Gebaly’s leadership and constitutional rigour, but warned that Article 105 directly violates Article 54 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to counsel during investigations.
“It is impossible that the president’s letter intended this. This is the government’s interpretation, not the president’s,” Dawoud said, noting that the proposal passed the committee by only one vote.
“An investigation begins with questioning, interrogation, and confrontation, three stages that cannot legally begin without a lawyer present. For the sake of this country, let us not tamper with the Constitution. Allow Egypt to build its procedural legitimacy on sound constitutional foundations,” he added.
Abdel-Halim Allam, head of the Egyptian Lawyers Syndicate, who attended the session, firmly rejected the amendment to Article 105 and opposed any wording that could permit interrogations without a lawyer present.
Allam also rejected the compromise text introduced by MP Atef Nasser of the Nation's Future Party, which sought to narrow the scope of exceptions.
The proposed amendment said, “A member of the Public Prosecution may proceed to interrogate a suspect whose life is in danger after requesting from the local bar association the urgent appointment of a lawyer to attend the investigation, as coordinated between the prosecution and the General Bar Association.”
“The prosecutor may begin the interrogation if the lawyer fails to arrive on time. The assigned or chosen lawyer may attend the session if he arrives before it concludes and review the procedures carried out in his absence,” it added.
Allam insisted that any exception to the constitutional right of defence was unacceptable. “This article has been debated extensively; we must be clear about our direction. It is intrinsically linked to Article 54 of the Constitution. Any exception would violate it, and we are in the presence of the speaker, a constitutional scholar,” he said.
Allam also noted that the proposal contradicts the president’s memorandum, which called for increasing safeguards and refining the text, not weakening them.
The exchanges exposed deep divisions between the government, opposition, and professional bodies over the scope of prosecutorial powers.
All sides agreed on one principle: Egypt’s new Code of Criminal Procedure, the first complete overhaul in more than seven decades, must balance procedural efficiency with unwavering constitutional guarantees.
Short link: