Parliament Diaries| The Baccalaureate bill: Recycled reforms in shiny wrapping

Three sessions across three days, mounting up to 22 hours—that’s how long the Education and Scientific Research Committee in the House of Representatives spent debating and revising the Education Ministry’s proposed amendments to the Education Law.

As usual, the committee met behind closed doors, excluding journalists, as its head Sami Hashem believes education is too sensitive a topic to be aired publicly, fearing controversy on social media.

Despite instructions from House Speaker Hanafy Gebaly to hold a public consultation, the committee invited no experts and engaged solely in internal debate—shutting out the media altogether.

Constitutional red flags

Speaking of awkward timing, the bill arrived days before the end of Parliament’s fifth session.

On June 29, Gebaly referred it to a joint committee comprising the Education Committee, the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee, and the Budget and Planning Committee. He instructed them to study the proposal “quickly but carefully,” and to conduct a public consultation.

The first session was held Tuesday, July 1, drawing a large number of MPs to debate the government’s draft.

The bill quickly drew criticism for potential constitutional violations. A key provision, for instance, would empower the cabinet to establish integrated educational programs mirroring existing general or technical systems, granting equivalent high school certificates based solely on the education minister’s recommendation and Supreme Council of Universities’ approval.

Such a move essentially sought to bypass Parliament’s exclusive legislative authority over education.

The bill aimed to grant the executive sweeping powers to unilaterally create educational systems, directly contravening existing law. Conspicuously absent was any reference to the baccalaureate system the education minister hopes to roll out in the coming academic year.

During the July 2 plenary session, Gebaly swiftly raised constitutional concerns regarding the bill.

He specifically pressed Mahmoud Fawzy, the parliamentary affairs minister, on whether the proposal infringed upon any provisions, particularly the guarantee of free education. Gebaly also criticized the government’s timing, noting the submission of such a major proposal just days before the legislative session was slated to conclude.

Fawzy defended the timing, citing the government’s urgent need for educational reform. Unconvinced, Gebaly pressed for a direct answer, asking, “Have you identified any constitutional concerns, particularly with regards to the right to free education?”

The minister responded evasively, “We are open to revisiting or redrafting any provision,” and adding that the government would not support any text that ran afoul of the Constitution.

Behind closed doors

Although journalists were excluded, MPs shared impressions of the closed-door sessions, sometimes privately and sometimes more openly.

MP Mohammed Aziz publicly rejected the bill, saying it lacked both vision and proper research. He argued that it discriminated between citizens and undermined the principle of free education, restricting benefits to those with the financial means.

He also criticized the bill for giving the government unchecked power to revise educational systems without parliamentary oversight.

Several MPs who attended both sessions reported heavy criticism of the bill from across the political spectrum. Members of the Youth Coordination Committee objected to provisions that would: impose a 70% minimum passing score in the subject of religion, empower the government to alter or introduce educational tracks without parliamentary input, and charge fees for exam retakes or failures.

Conspicuously, the draft also failed to mention the baccalaureate system the education minister aims to implement in the coming school year.

In response to sharp criticism, sources said the government refused to withdraw the bill. Minister Fawzy insisted on retaining the proposal and amending it based on MPs’ feedback. By the end of the July 2 session, a subcommittee was formed, including Fawzy, Hashem, Legislative Committee Deputy Chair Ihab El-Tamawy, and several government legal advisers.

When the education committee reconvened on Sunday, July 6, Hashem had shifted from opposing the bill to defending it after several revisions.

The amended draft now explicitly included the baccalaureate system, removed the provision granting the government authority to unilaterally alter educational tracks, and reduced fees for exam retakes, whether for grade improvement or failure.

Repackaging the product

The revised bill formally outlines the baccalaureate system, which the education minister has championed as a viable alternative to the daunting Thanaweya Amma—Egypt’s traditional general secondary education track, which culminates in high-stakes national exams that determine university placement. The original draft, by contrast, had made no mention of it.

Minister Abdel Latif’s proposal for a baccalaureate system isn’t entirely novel, nor does it merely revive the early 20th-century model.

Instead, it’s a repackaged version of a controversial plan from decades past. This original model, introduced by former education minister Hussein Kamel Bahaeddin, split high school into two years and allowed exam retakes for score improvement. However, it was scrapped after just three years due to its failure.

Another former minister, Tarek Shawky, attempted to reintroduce this same model, but the Senate ultimately rejected it in 2021 over constitutional concerns.

For years, Shawky’s version remained dormant, gathering dust. However, that changed with Minister Abdel Latif, a businessman known for his ties to private education.

He resurrected the shelved proposal, meticulously rebranding it with updated packaging designed to appeal to both public and Parliament. His strategy includes borrowing established branding from prestigious international certificates—British, American, and Canadian—to market the proposal as a truly fresh alternative.

Despite this extensive rebranding, the system’s core remains largely unchanged, featuring only minor tweaks.

These include the introduction of a new business track focused on accounting and management. This expands upon the Thanaweya Amma, which comprises only three tracks: humanities, science, and mathematics.

Under the new system, the humanities track will be called “arts and humanities,” the science stream has become “medical sciences,” and the math track has been rebranded as “computing and engineering,” with programming added to its curriculum.

Free education?

The government insists the bill protects free education, but three parliamentary blocs disagree. MPs from the Social Democratic, Justice, and Wafd Parties all opposed the bill.

While the bill declares both the baccalaureate and technical education tracks free, it controversially introduces fees for retaking exams, whether for score improvement or after failing.

This provision directly undermines the constitutional guarantee of free education. During committee debates, the government only agreed to reduce these charges.

The original draft had imposed exam retake fees for students who had failed ranging from 200 to 2,000 Egyptian pounds (roughly $4 to $40). The revised version eliminated the minimum, cutting the maximum fee to 1,000 pounds (about $20). Further proposals to reduce these fees were rejected.

The final draft also included retake fees for students seeking to improve scores in any subject under either track. A standard fee of 200 pounds (around $4) per subject was introduced, with the Cabinet empowered to increase it up to 400 pounds (about $8).

Despite its striking resemblance to a 2021 proposal rejected over similar concerns, the Nation’s Future Party majority ultimately approved this version.

Religion above all!

Article 60 of the bill raises the passing threshold for core subjects like religion and national history from 50% to 70% across all stages.

While students must achieve this higher score to pass these subjects, their grades will not count towards their overall academic average.

During committee debates, the government remained unyielding, flatly refusing to lower the 70% passing threshold for religion and national history or to treat these subjects like other core subjects.

MPs Ihab Mansour, Amira El Adly, and Mohammed Aziz forcefully advocated for dropping this minimum. Aziz, in particular, emphasized that such high scores were unrealistic for many students, cautioning that the provision would impose immense, unnecessary pressure on both students and their families.

Education Minister Abdel Latif, however, presented a firm rebuttal, contending that “religious education is treated as a secondary subject that no one cares about. Students see it as less important than other subjects.”

“Do we want to teach our kids that religion is less important? What kind of message is that? Religion is the most important thing in life. We want to show that it matters—by setting the bar high,” he added.

The majority bloc backed the minister, rejecting all proposed amendments. The government’s firm stance seemed to imply that families are incapable of raising their children without state-imposed educational measures—as though high exam scores in religion alone could bridge moral divides or address deep-seated social issues.

In 2021, the Senate defeated then-education minister Shawky, his proposal rejected. This year, Minister Abdel Latif walked out of Parliament triumphant—having pushed through the same proposal, wrapped in new packaging and sold with the promise of lightening students’ burdens.