Rising Court Fees in Egypt: A New Barrier to Women’s Access to Justice

Rising Court Fees in Egypt: A New Barrier to Women’s Access to Justice

Since 2016, the Egyptian government has embarked on a project to automate the justice system. This initiative is part of a broader digital transformation. Despite being promoted as a means to facilitate access to justice and expedite litigation, as part of the “Successful Justice Strategy” announced by the Ministry of Justice, the following years have witnessed continuous increases in court fees, which have taken an unprecedented upward trend, in some cases reaching more than ten times the original fees.

These decisions regarding increases were issued without a transparent legislative review and in the absence of social impact assessment studies, thereby disregarding society’s right to access information and to engage in public debate. Consequently, these increases have not been accompanied by any tangible development in guarantees of access to justice; rather, they have effectively become a tool for excluding marginalized groups, especially women. This raises questions regarding their constitutionality and consistency with Egypt’s international obligations to ensure effective and equal access to justice. In addition to the increases issued through the legislative amendment to the Judicial Fees and Notarization Law, a number of administrative decisions were issued by the courts. A summary of these increases reveals that the cost of photocopying a single page, for example, rose from one Egyptian pound to more than EGP five, and the fee for issuing a certificate of non-appeal jumped from EGP 25 to 60.5. Other fees also saw increases of up to 300% and 900%, respectively, while other fees saw increases of up to 500%,*1 including lawsuit filing fees, case file fees, attorney fees, and others. These fees and others are paid into the treasury and are subject to daily increases.

Looking at examples of court fees concerning the cost of women resorting to the litigation facility, we observed that since 2019 and up until this year, there were procedures exempt from fees previously, but now the opposite is true. The executive formula used to be free, but now, in alimony and family cases, it costs approximately EGP 57. Also, obtaining a form to investigate the husband’s income in alimony cases now requires a court permit for a fee of approximately EGP 57, in addition to inquiring about cases, which now costs EGP 57. In addition, the procedure for obtaining a session report to issue an income investigation statement, set by the court session clerk, now costs approximately EGP 57, after the income investigation statement was previously free. This is in contrast to examples of procedures whose fees have increased, such as in alimony cases, for example. From 2016 to 2018, these cases were exempt from basic court fees, except scanner fees, bar association fees, and legal stamps, which used to be around EGP 40-50 and now stand at around EGP 136. In other cases, such as divorce or khul’, fees can reach around EGP 300. This is in addition to the arbitrators’ deposit, which rose to EGP 350 after ranging from EGP 150-200. In subsequent years, newly introduced secure forms and automated services, so previously free fee inquiries now cost EGP 57 per transaction. Document photocopying fees also range from EGP 75-150.

Similarly, obtaining an income investigation, which used to be free, now requires a declaration fee of around EGP 57. This is in addition to obtaining other judgments to cite or obtaining a certificate from the table. In addition to advertising, this does not mean that lawsuits are free of charge, as Article 3 of Law No. 1 of 2000 stipulates, exempting lawsuits for alimony, wages, maintenance, and similar expenses from fees. Furthermore, the fee for obtaining copies of judgments used to be low, rising from EGP 5 or 10 to approximately EGP 55. Sometimes, the cost is calculated based on the number of pages, which is usually secured paper, with each page ranging from EGP 3 to 5, as in personal status cases, for example. Furthermore, paid services have been introduced, adding additional economic burdens. Indirect fees vary, including fees for documents or secured forms, inquiry fees, and extraction fees. A so-called secured or computerized form has been introduced, replacing the previously standard paper form, which has resulted in the cost per page now ranging from EGP 3 to 5 in alimony cases. As for violence cases, there are no fixed fees for computerized paper or secure forms; the price per sheet ranges from EGP 20 to 25, depending on the decisions of the heads of the various courts. New procedures have been introduced, such as the court facility development fee, which is sometimes estimated at approximately EGP 75, and other fees on the petition. Meanwhile, Family appeal fees rose from around EGP 200 to 400, then to 800. Appeal fees are now calculated based on the number of pages in the petition, rather than the total or type of case. Fees vary from proportional to fixed fees, fees related to mechanization development, legal services, and taxes, including VAT, attorney fees, and computer fees.

For cases of violence, such as assault, the direct misdemeanor fee increased from approximately EGP 136 to 250 and then to 300. This increase is evident in cases of violence heard by the Economic Court, such as defamation, electronic blackmail, and others. Fees for photocopying records, reviewing records, reviewing portfolios, and securing documents have increased significantly. The price of a single secured document ranges from EGP 20 to 30, varying from one court to another. These successive fee increases contradict the right guaranteed by Article 97 of the Egyptian Constitution, which states that “litigation is a right protected and guaranteed for all.” These decisions to impose prohibitive fees, without corresponding protection or exemption policies, constitute an infringement on women’s right to access justice and further entrench structural discrimination based on gender and class. These increases also violate the essence of international agreements such as the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), which emphasizes the need to remove economic barriers to women’s access to justice. In addition, according to data from the Egyptian Ministry of Justice, the number of cases filed since 2019 has declined, coinciding with repeated increases in court fees, to approximately 11 million cases during 2021 and 2022.*2

Moreover, the Administrative Courts have issued decisions to halt the implementation of these decisions, including the appeal against the decision of the President of the Ismailia Court of Appeal in 2022.*3 The court also ruled to dismiss 26 other lawsuits filed by lawyers in recent years, and also in December 2023, against fees set by the Mansoura Court for mechanization services.*4 In addition to lawyers’ appeals against administrative decisions to increase fees, these decisions are facing widespread objections. Representative Sanaa El-Saeed submitted an official inquiry regarding the illegal increases in judicial service fees, noting that some fees were imposed without a legal basis, in violation of Article 38 of the Egyptian Constitution, which regulates the principles of imposing taxes and fees, which are only enacted by law. The Constitution also emphasizes the importance of ensuring fairness in distributing tax burdens, taking into account individuals’ financial capacity.*5 Furthermore, the Egyptian Bar Association and several sub-bargains have recently taken firm positions, expressing their categorical rejection of the recent fee increases. The union announced its intention to take escalatory action, considering that imposing fees at this rate constitutes a violation of the principles of justice.*6

In conclusion, these increases cannot be viewed in isolation from the unequal economic and social structure that characterizes women’s relationship with the justice system in Egypt. The majority of women who approach the courts are from socially and economically vulnerable groups, whether as breadwinners, victims of violence, or claimants of their own or their children’s rights. These increases come at a time when women face social and legal obstacles in reporting violence. This means that access to justice has become conditional on economic capacity, with high court fees representing an additional barrier preventing women from accessing justice.

Finally, we commend all legal initiatives and express our full solidarity with collective and union actions with all collective and protest positions taken by trade union organizations, which affirm their expected role, which represents a positive development in a landscape often characterized by silence and deserves praise and support from feminists, human rights, and civil society organizations. Pursuing justice requires broad solidarity for a just and equitable legal environment that does not exclude the poorest and most marginalized groups.