On May 22, the Helwan Medical District hospitals and centers received a decision from the Ministry of Health, instructing them to conduct drug tests for the staff and medical personnel in the area between May 24 and June 1 at the Health Insurance Hospital in Helwan.
According to several medical sector workers interviewed by Zawia3, they were surprised by the decision. Although the drug test is typically free due to deductions from their monthly salaries for insurance and pensions, they were shocked to be asked to pay a fee of about 305 EGP (approximately $6.4 USD) without any receipt or proof of payment.
The workers went to the designated hospital for the test but found that the drug test kits were out of stock by 11 AM on the first day. The officials explained that the Ministry had sent an insufficient quantity compared to the number of employees needing the test, forcing them to purchase the kits at their own expense, with the price doubling from 45 to 100 EGP in just three days (approximately $0.9 – $2.1 USD). According to those we spoke to, the cost of the test and associated expenses amounted to about 450 EGP at a minimum ($9.5 USD).
The instructions to the hospitals threatened that anyone who failed to take the test would be denied promotion and raises or even dismissed from their job. This is reminiscent of the crisis involving employees dismissed under Law No. 73 of 2021, related to the conditions for holding or continuing public positions, commonly known as the Drug Testing Law.
The Law
Law No. 73 of 2021, in its third article, stipulates that: “To occupy positions in the entities subject to the law by appointment, contract, assistance, promotion, secondment, transfer, or delegation, or to continue in them, proof of not using drugs must be established through a sudden indicative test conducted by the work entities under the supervision of the Ministry of Health and Population or the Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research.” Article 12 of the law specifies the penalties for a positive test result, including suspension of the job application process, a decision to suspend the employee for up to three months or until the confirmatory test or forensic report result is received. Article 15 states that: “If the positive result of the sample is confirmed, the employee’s service will be terminated by law.”
In October, the Supreme Administrative Court issued the first ruling of its kind following the implementation of the law in 2021. It ruled in favor of reinstating an employee to his job and paying him his full salary and benefits. The court based its decision on the fact that the forensic lab did not send the confirmation of the sample within the 10-day period specified by the executive regulations of Law No. 73 of 2021. Instead, the forensic lab sent the result two months after the test, prompting the court to reinstate the employee. However, this case is considered rare, as stated by Fathi Nefady, a dismissed insurance inspector. He mentioned in an interview with Zawia3 that during a court session for his case at the State Council, the session secretary explicitly told him that the case would be dismissed due to directives from higher authorities to reject any lawsuit and not to reinstate any employee to their government job.
Arbitrarily Dismissed Employees
Nefady recalls his experience: “In March 2023, we were informed about the necessity of taking the drug test within a week. During those days, I had the flu, which forced me to take medication and injections for several days. Despite this, I went for the required test, fully believing it would be negative since I do not use any drugs. However, the result was shocking; it came back positive. I was forced to sign a report by the committee, with a promise that I could retake the test at the forensic lab. The next day, I went to retake the test, only to find that they would re-test the same sample and that I would have to pay the fee, as the law allows retesting the same sample within 24 hours.” He questioned, “What’s the point? If the first sample was positive, how could it change in the second test? What if the sample had deteriorated?”
He added that 55 days after the test, a decision to dismiss him from work was issued in May 2023. When he went to the legal affairs department at work, they told him, according to their interpretation of the law, that the dismissal was temporary and that he could return to work if he took a new drug test within three months and the result was negative. He mentioned that he has been dismissed for over a year now and that the litigation process is slow. He tried to find work in several private companies, but all nine attempts failed because one of the required documents is the termination letter from his previous job, which states the reason as “proven drug use.”
Nefady described his feelings: “This law destroyed my future and my family’s future. After 14 years of working in the government with diligence, honor, and efficiency—as confirmed by all the annual performance reports—I was dismissed from my job for a crime I did not commit. This led to a decrease in the family income, and I had to work as a private driver after being an inspector preparing for a promotion in the insurance authority. What are we supposed to do now?”
Mohamed Kamal, an employee in the customer service sector of the Drinking Water and Sanitation Company in Shubra El Kheima, who was also dismissed, suffers from the same issue. He had worked for the company since 2009, with excellent annual reports, according to him. In March 2023, he was surprised by a committee at his workplace conducting drug tests. He said, “I waited for my turn like everyone else. I had informed my manager that I intended to leave early because my mother was in the hospital. After waiting for a while, I was informed of her death and had to wait to complete the burial permits. I rushed to the committee head to retrieve my ID card, but he refused and ordered me to stay for the test. I left the card and work to go to my mother,” asserting that the committee head threatened to record a positive test result for him, which indeed happened. He filed a grievance with the Drug Control Fund, believing it was accepted after signing a document, only to be told to take the test again. He continued working for 16 days, but was later shocked by a decision to suspend him for three months until the confirmatory sample result from the Ministry of Health came in, despite not having taken any tests at all.
Kamal stated: “I conducted a test at the central labs of the Ministry of Health with a letter from my workplace, and the result was negative. I submitted multiple grievances, but two weeks later, the company responded that it was not their jurisdiction and filed the grievances. I submitted a new grievance to the Drug Control Fund, but it was rejected verbally. On the last day of the three-month period, I received a letter indicating termination of service and dismissal in May 2023.”
Kamal pointed out that he resorted to the judiciary, reassured by his lawyer due to the clear evidence of his absence during the drug test (his mother’s death certificate indicated the time and date, coinciding with the committee’s visit). He continued, “The first court session postponed the case. In the second session, the case was dismissed on the grounds that an employee cannot be imposed on the employer, which is not applicable since I am a public employee without an employer. I filed an appeal, but it was rejected for the same reason without hearing the witnesses of the incident.” He affirmed that there are high-level directives to labor courts not to reinstate any employee dismissed due to a drug test.
Debts Are Haunting Us
Mohamed Kamal, a dismissed employee from the Drinking Water and Sanitation Company, shares his financial struggles following his sudden job termination. He says, “I had no choice but to look for work. I worked for four months in the artisan area as a laborer for 14 hours a day, then moved to a restaurant in the First Settlement for three months. But the salaries were so meager that they barely covered the needs of my family, consisting of my wife and three children. We had to spend only 200 EGP per week (about $4.2 USD), which isn’t enough for a single meal for two people, let alone a week’s expenses for a family.” He adds that he had to transfer his children from private to public schools and stop their sports training at the club, which severely impacted their psychological state.
Kamal and Nefady, along with other state employees dismissed under the Drug Testing Law, had taken loans guaranteed by their public employment. Their job loss and halted salaries have affected their ability to repay the loan installments and accrued interest.
Kamal says, “I have a loan guaranteed by my job, and I haven’t been able to pay it for months. I used to pay around 2400 EGP monthly (about $50.7 USD), but with the accumulated interest, I’m now required to pay 3600 EGP monthly (about $76 USD). The bank has threatened to refer my case to legal affairs and take legal action to imprison me if I don’t pay the full debt at once.” Nefady, who also took a loan guaranteed by his job, asks, “Is this intentional? More than 90% of the dismissed employees had loans guaranteed by their jobs, which means if they can’t repay, they’ll be imprisoned.”
According to several testimonies we received, job dismissals have led to some employees being imprisoned for failing to repay debts. Additionally, two employees have died; one suffered a heart attack unable to bear the perceived unjust decision, and the other committed suicide immediately due to administrative harassment. Many others have lost familial ties and suffered social stigma in their communities. For example, in Beni Suef, Upper Egypt, 16 teachers tested positive for drug use, leading to social stigmatization and divorce, even though they asserted they were only taking medications that showed similar results.
Shorouk Mohamed Hassan, the daughter of a dismissed employee of the Egyptian Tax Authority who lives in El-Ayyat, explains the severe injustice her family faced. They were evicted from their family home and had to take a loan from the bank to secure a simple home on land owned by her maternal grandfather. The bank soon issued a foreclosure notice on the house, which they don’t even own, due to missed payments.
She adds, “At first, we didn’t know about my father’s job termination. We were expecting his upcoming promotion as a tax officer in the Omraneya Tax Authority in Giza. But after a while, we found out he was talking to a lawyer about filing a lawsuit, and that’s when we learned everything. My father took the drug test, which came back negative, unlike the committee’s result.” Since Mohamed Hassan stopped working in November 2021, their family has faced severe economic difficulties, causing the eldest daughter to decide against attending university after finishing high school to help repay the family’s debts, which include her father’s loan with a monthly installment of 3800 EGP (about $80.3 USD).
Shorouk describes her father’s deteriorating health, attributing it to the sense of oppression and helplessness after facing severe injustice, especially as he cannot find suitable work due to his age. He now works as a day laborer whenever he can.
Efforts to Amend the Law and Reinstate the Dismissed
In response to Law No. 73 of 2021, dozens of affected employees and their spouses held a protest in front of the Parliament on May 1, demanding amendments to the law and the reinstatement of the dismissed employees. Workers and employees from 44 government agencies were dismissed due to the incorrect application of the law, which did not consider social and humanitarian aspects, according to Fatima Fouad, Secretary of Workers at the Conservative Party and President of the Tax Workers Union.
Fouad asserts that they have filed complaints with various official bodies, from the Attorney General’s office to the Egyptian Trade Union Federation, the Prime Minister’s office, the Parliament, and the International Labour Organization. She adds, “We were surprised that about 22 MPs we contacted knew nothing about the law despite approving it in 2021. They were shocked by the number of dismissed employees, which we estimated to be around 15-16 thousand, according to our circles. Only MP Atef Maghawry, a member of the Legislative Committee in the Parliament and head of the parliamentary body of the Tagammu Party, responded, promising to submit a proposal to amend the law.”
MP Atef Maghawry submitted a request to amend the law, which was referred to a joint committee from the Manpower and the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committees. The proposed amendment aims to prevent the dismissal of an employee from the first instance of drug use detection, suggesting that warnings should be given first. He justified this by stating that the law was intended to address negative social phenomena, not to destroy families (economically after dismissing the breadwinner).
Fouad believes the real reason behind the mass dismissals is the government’s implementation of International Monetary Fund directives to reduce the number of civil servants, which the government claims to be around seven million. However, according to Saleh El-Sheikh, head of the Central Agency for Organization and Administration, there are only 3.231 million employees as of 2022. She argues this indicates a systematic plan to eliminate more employees without granting them their entitlements under the new Social Insurance Law No. 148 of 2019.
Law No. 148 of 2019 specifies in Article 21 the conditions for paying a pension and end-of-service gratuity in cases of early retirement before reaching the age of 60. The law limits this to cases of complete disability or death within one year of employment termination to receive a pension, or waiting until the retirement age to receive the pension and end-of-service gratuity. This applies to dismissed employees, who will receive their pensions only upon reaching 60 or their death, whichever comes first.
Fouad describes the drug testing procedures as unregulated, often conducted in inhumane conditions. She told Zawia3 that some committees lacked proper legal formation, such as the absence of a forensic representative, which should invalidate the procedures if the law were applied correctly. She criticized the drug test kits for being of poor quality and producing inaccurate results compared to blood tests. Many employees, who are patients taking various medications like cold and cough medicines or fertility drugs, showed positive results despite providing proof of their medical conditions. She questioned, “Why not use blood tests, which are more accurate and reliable? Is it reasonable for a family’s fate to depend on a test that might be wrong?”
She continued, “In the initial phase of implementing the law, there was a provision for a three-month suspension from work, with employees returning if the new test proved negative. But now, everyone is being dismissed, and the numbers are increasing.” Fouad stressed that there has been a trend in courts to reject these cases since before Ramadan last year, calling for the possibility of early retirement if the government aims to reduce the number of civil servants, but with immediate disbursement of all entitlements without waiting for the retirement age.
Legislative Conflicts and the Need for Amendment
The application of Law No. 37 of 2021, according to Fouad, leads to legislative conflicts as it contradicts Labor Law No. 12 of 2003. The latter states that an employee cannot be dismissed for drug use unless caught in the act at work. Article 69 of the Labor Law states, “An employee cannot be dismissed unless he commits a gross misconduct, which includes being found intoxicated or under the influence of drugs during work hours.”
Mustafa Zaki, a cassation lawyer and labor advisor who successfully reinstated six dismissed employees since 2021 through legal cases, explained that the law applies to employees of any company or entity in which the state has a stake. He added, “We now call it the job slaughter law. Before this law, two laws applied to civil servants concerning drug use; the first for public sector workers under the Civil Service Law allowed dismissal for addiction, not mere use, after a six-month treatment opportunity. The second for private sector workers under the Labor Law required the employee to be visibly affected by drug use at work to be dismissed.” Zaki highlighted that the current law restricts the employer’s discretion to reinstate a dismissed employee based on need or competence.
He criticized the implementation of the drug tests, describing them as conducted in crowded, inhumane conditions, with mirrors reflecting the employee’s face during the test, causing immense pressure and embarrassment. The crowded environment could lead to sample contamination or deterioration, and the sample’s validity is limited to a few hours. “How can they rely on the same sample for retesting?” he questioned.
Zaki criticized the law for several reasons, including the vague definition of drug use, the absence of a hearing for the employee’s defense, the violation of the constitutional right to privacy as long as it does not affect the workplace, and the lack of a fair guarantee for dismissal after labor court review, making dismissal automatic. He also noted the absence of a graded penalty system, leading to immediate dismissal.
Thousands of dismissed state employees await reinstatement or legislative amendments to a law that, they argue, subjected many to clear injustice and shattered numerous families due to economic hardships and social stigma.
