Judge denies defense delay request in Lina Attalah licensing trial

An Egyptian court on Tuesday rejected a motion by the defense team of Lina Attalah, editor-in-chief of independent news outlet Mada Masr, to adjourn her trial for operating an unlicensed website. The judge also barred journalists and international observers from the courtroom.

The 9th Circuit of the New Cairo Misdemeanors Court denied defense lawyers’ request to delay proceedings in Case No. 11743 of 2026 to review case documents and prepare their legal arguments, defense attorneys Nabeh Elganadi and Nada Mosaad told Al Manassa.

The judge recessed the session to reconvene later the same day, arguing that the case was simple enough not to require an adjournment for file review, stating that the only matter before the bench was the administration of an unlicensed website.

Prior to the start of the hearing, court security prevented several journalists and supporters of Attalah from entering the hall. Among those barred was Egyptian Journalists Syndicate board member Eman Ouf, who stated in a Facebook post that security blocked her from attending the session. 

Journalists present reported that court guards demanded their syndicate membership press cards to seek permission from the presiding judge before allowing them inside.

The presiding judge also barred representatives of the European Union, as well as diplomatic delegates from Germany, France, Austria, Denmark, Spain, Belgium, and Sweden, in addition to envoys from Norway, Switzerland, Britain, and Canada, insisting that only Attalah and her legal defense team could attend.

During the hearing, the judge confronted the Mada Masr editor-in-chief with the charges referred by the Supreme State Security Prosecution, asking her whether the website operated without a license. Attalah replied by affirming that she had submitted an application for licensing, but authorities never answered it.

Defense attorney Nada Mosaad said the legal team’s motions included requesting access to Mada Masr’s licensing application file held by the Supreme Council for Media Regulation, as well as the original decree rejecting the license. 

The requests also sought the original copy of a document dated Oct. 12, 2022, rejecting the license, which the media council claims Attalah signed upon receipt.

According to the defense, counsel further demanded that the court hear testimony from relevant specialists at the Supreme Council for Media Regulation and attach all correspondence subsequent to the licensing request to the case file.

Last Thursday, the Supreme State Security Prosecution referred Attalah to the New Cairo Misdemeanors Court on charges of establishing and managing a website without a license. The referral came hours after prosecutors interrogated her and released her on a 100,000-Egyptian-pound bail (around $1,800) in Case No. 9072 of 2026 (Supreme State Security).

For its part, the Journalists Syndicate announced on Monday evening that it had submitted a memorandum to the Supreme Council for Media Regulation concerning the crisis over Mada Masr’s licensing application and the associated judicial prosecutions. Syndicate lawyers planned to present a second memo to the court on Tuesday to support the outlet.

According to the syndicate’s statement, the legal memorandum cited several defenses, including administrative procedural violations in handling the licensing request, failure to notify the applicant of the decision, and the legal requirement to resolve disputes through administrative courts rather than criminal prosecution.

The syndicate noted in its submission to the media council that it stepped in as part of its mandate to defend its members and ensure they practice their profession within a stable legal framework. 

It pointed out that it had previously filed multiple demands to examine license applications and lift blocks on several websites, including Al Manassa, Fekr Tani, and Egypt360.

The head of the Journalists Syndicate based his argument on Article 12 of the executive regulations of Press and Media Regulation Law No. 180 of 2018, as well as Article 16 of the licensing regulations. Both articles compel the council to notify applicants to complete missing documentation, issue its decision on approval or rejection within 90 days, and formally notify the applicant via registered mail with acknowledgment of receipt, while preserving their right to appeal before administrative courts. 

The syndicate head emphasized that failing to reply to licensing applications or neglecting to notify applicants constitutes a procedural breach infringing upon applicant rights, adding that the proper legal path for licensing disputes is judicial appeal, not criminal prosecution.

The syndicate demanded that the Supreme Council for Media Regulation formally notify both the syndicate and the parent publishing company of the status of the licensing request and provide them with copies of any decrees issued regarding the matter. 

The union also demanded that the regulator officially settle the application with a reasoned decision, specify any remaining requirements to enable the company to fulfill them, adhere to statutory deadlines for deciding on requests, establish a clear legal effect for failure to respond, halt judicial prosecutions linked to the lack of licensing, adopt fair and transparent licensing rules applied equally to all news websites, and complete the outlet’s licensing procedures while ending all legal proceedings against it.