The Center for Egyptian Women Legal Assistance (CEWLA) organized a roundtable on Sunday to discuss the draft Family Law for Egyptian Christians recently referred to parliament by the Ministry of Justice.
The event aimed to open a broader societal debate on the long-awaited legislation, inviting lawmakers and family law specialists to analyse the text’s impact on divorce, remarriage, and judicial guarantees and offer their perspectives.
Opening the session, CEWLA researcher Abdel Fattah Yehia questioned whether the long-awaited legislation would finally resolve protracted legal issues or if “we are still standing in the same place.”
During the debate, journalist Karima Kamal criticized government assurances that there would be societal dialogue around the new legislation. “We haven’t seen any societal dialogue. We are the society—so where is this dialogue and when did it happen?!” Kamal asked. Azza Soliman, chair of CEWI’s board of trustees, responded sarcastically, “It is their society.”
Kamal denounced the “confidential” status of the draft, recounting how an MP refused to share a copy. “How can there be a draft law concerning us that we have no right to see or discuss?!” she said. She attributed this secrecy to government and church fears of a backlash from those expecting the law to solve their specific grievances.
Kamal also expressed shock at leaked portions of the bill, arguing they would “increase problems rather than solve them.” She specifically cited new complexities regarding the traditional engagement ceremony. While previously simple to dissolve, the draft makes its termination as complex as legal divorce. “Instead of easing marriage [dissolution], they complicated engagements as well,” she noted.
Roundtable concerning the Personal Status draft law organized by the Center for Egyptian Women’s, Sunday, May 3, 2026.Fatima El-Zahraa Ghonaim, Women’s Committee rapporteur at the Lawyers Syndicate, echoed Kamal’s concerns over the bill’s transparency, stating the draft had been restricted to a select few instructed not to distribute it.
Meanwhile, writer Kamal Zakher expressed cautious optimism but raised concerns regarding Article 3, which applies the law only to disputes arising after its enactment. Despite the principle of non-retroactivity, Zakher argued legislators could and should extend the bill’s scope to include the thousands of pending cases—particularly regarding divorce—to avoid “disastrous” social consequences.
Despite the constitutional principle of non-retroactivity, Zakher argued that legislators have the right to extend the law’s scope to pending cases that have not reached a final verdict. He warned that leaving these cases unresolved, particularly regarding divorce, would have “disastrous” consequences.
Zakher also criticized a provision allowing marriage at age 18 with a guardian’s consent. He questioned the wisdom of marrying off individuals who “lack emotional maturity and whose will is not fully formed,” only to hold them accountable later for the consequences.
Psychotherapist Mai El-Kharrat argued that the draft “instills a sense of learned helplessness” by stripping citizens of the agency to choose life partners, leading to depression. Instead, she called instead for a truly progressive law that grants full freedom.
El-Kharrat also criticized the absence of psychological or social workers in divorce or custody decisions. While welcoming the relegation of fathers to second place in custody priority, she questioned why children’s psychological well-being was not treated more seriously in the draft.
On the other hand, human rights lawyer Hoda Nasrallah praised the activation of the constitutional right for Christians to apply their own religious laws to personal status matters. She called this a major gain that would stop courts from rejecting Christian claims based on Islamic Sharia or “public order” grounds. She also highlighted the draft’s mandate for gender equality in inheritance as a key improvement.
However, Nasrallah criticized the three-year separation requirement for divorce, to prove the impossibility of continued life together. “Why isn’t it one year? The draft provides no regulation for custody or educational guardianship during this period,” she said, questioning how separation would be proven.
She further criticized regulations regarding the "Certificate of No Impediment" issued by the church for marriage. She noted that requirements for the certificate delve into personal religious details, such as whether the individual attends confession or is a “dutiful son of the church.”
Nasrallah warned that such provisions allow the church to withhold certificates to maintain authority over individuals, forcing those not closely tied to the institution to seek mediation to obtain them.
The discussion concluded with a call to expand societal dialogue, review articles that hinder access to justice, and seek legal solutions more consistent with the lived reality of Egyptian Christian families.
