A proposal to amend the law governing Egypt’s Journalists Syndicate has become a flashpoint as members vote in the midterm elections today, Friday, May 2. The dispute follows a request submitted by a general-assembly member associated with the campaign of Abdel Mohsen Salama, the main challenger to incumbent Khaled El-Balshy.
Salama is widely seen by his critics as close to the state, a characterisation he has rejected in an interview with Zawia3. El-Balshy is associated with the syndicate’s independence current.
The proposal would expand the council from 12 to 16 members, with four appointed rather than elected—a departure from the existing framework. Members of the general assembly fear that a last-minute opening of the law could undermine established protections and the syndicate’s independence.
At the same time, the law was written more than five decades ago, when print dominated journalism and digital newsrooms did not exist. Its membership framework has left many journalists working for online outlets without syndicate recognition, creating a real demand for reform. The dispute concerns not only whether the law needs updating, but who would shape the changes, when and with what safeguards.
Reform—or a threat to independence?
Salama has advocated amending the syndicate law since his earlier term as chair between 2017 and 2019. During the current campaign, he proposed a conference bringing together private newspaper and digital-newsroom leaders with the Supreme Council for Media Regulation if he wins. Some general-assembly members reject the regulator’s involvement as interference in internal syndicate affairs.
His earlier reform initiative in 2018 also faced opposition. It coincided with the passage of press and media legislation that drew objections from members of the general assembly and four council members: Mahmoud Kamel, Mohamed Saad Abdel Hafiz, Gamal Abdel Rahim and Amr Badr.
Those critics argued that the legislation served efforts to control state-owned and private journalism rather than journalists themselves. They also warned of a threat to public press institutions and their employees.
El-Balshy rejected opening the syndicate law at the April 26 launch of his election programme. He voiced concern that existing gains could be lost in the legislative process, pointing to recent laws, including the medical-liability legislation, that had not met the expectations of the professions affected.
Mahmoud Kamel, a council member who heads the freedoms and cultural committees, sees the present proposal as a return to attempts made in 2018. He fears changes that weaken the syndicate and reduce protections secured by the existing law.
Speaking to Zawia3, Kamel says calls to involve the Supreme Council for Media Regulation recall the experience of Law 180 of 2018. In his assessment, that legislation restricted journalism and journalists’ ability to work. He considers interference by actors outside the general assembly a direct challenge to the syndicate’s independence.
Kamel also disputes arguments based on the existing law’s references to the former Arab Socialist Union. He maintains that obsolete provisions can be superseded by subsequent legal developments and should not, on their own, justify reopening the entire law. That is his interpretation of the provisions’ current effect, rather than a claim that legislation automatically expires simply through the passage of time.
For Kamel, the general assembly—not the chair or council alone—is the ultimate guardian of the syndicate, its law and its independence.
Former chair Yehia Qallash has also opposed the proposals. In a Facebook post, he likened the amendment to an “orphaned bill,” invoking an earlier controversy in which no one would publicly accept authorship of a contentious draft.
Qallash recalled an attempt more than 30 years ago that he said was backed by Safwat El-Sherif in coordination with some council members. The late journalist and council member Magdi Mehanna published the leaked proposal in Al-Wafd, prompting journalists to gather at the syndicate.
According to Qallash’s account, the proposal would have widened membership to other media workers, extended the chair’s and council’s terms to four years, abolished midterm elections and allowed applicants without higher-education qualifications to join.
He recalled former chair Kamel Zoheiry denouncing the draft before hundreds of journalists. Its supporters subsequently disowned it, and then-chair Ibrahim Nafie announced his rejection and said the council had not known about it.
Qallash asks whether the profession is now confronting a similar attempt, following another initiative in 2018 that he says was pursued without most council members’ knowledge. He considers the proposed introduction of appointed council members especially alarming and calls for those promoting it to be held accountable by their colleagues.
Digital journalists need protection—but who decides the changes?
The current debate intensified after a March 25 meeting at the syndicate involving at least 12 editors-in-chief of online news outlets. They discussed professional problems, particularly the demand that digital journalists be admitted to the working-members register.
The meeting took place amid an already tense election season. The midterm vote had initially been scheduled for March but was postponed because the general assembly had not reached its required quorum.
Kamel circulated a statement urging members to reject attempts to change the law under electoral pressure. More than 300 journalists signed it. The statement warned that reopening the law at this moment could put historical gains at risk and provide an attractive slogan for attempts to weaken them.
It also rejected intervention by the Supreme Council for Media Regulation or any other external body and insisted that any later discussion take place under the general assembly’s authority, away from electoral rivalries.
Shimaa Galal, editor-in-chief of Al-Raees News and a participant in the digital-outlets meeting, says the discussion began before the syndicate’s sixth general conference. Its purpose, she says, was to protect journalists excluded from membership—not to influence the election.
Galal tells Zawia3 that these reporters lack the professional and legal protection afforded by membership while working in the field. She says this can expose them to accusations of impersonating journalists. She denies that the meeting was connected to the election or intended to create controversy before the general assembly convened.
Mona Ezzat, a journalist, general-assembly member and researcher in social and economic affairs, agrees that the law requires a broad discussion. She argues for a structured process comparable to the debates preceding the sixth general conference, rather than treating amendment as a simple administrative step.
Each part of the law should become the subject of open general-assembly sessions, she tells Zawia3. A committee would then draft the proposals on which members agreed, identifying both provisions to retain and those to amend.
The completed draft should return to the general assembly for approval before being submitted to parliament. Ezzat says legislators should respect the syndicate’s position because the law directly governs its members.
For Ezzat, the immediate priority is implementing the sixth conference’s recommendations. Opening a new legislative battle on the eve of an election would put process and timing ahead of the membership’s considered agreement.
Implementing those recommendations could, she says, prepare the ground for a later discussion of amendments with a clearer vision and the general assembly’s consent.
More broadly, Ezzat favours a framework in which members determine their organisations’ internal affairs free from government interference. She proposes a general law establishing the basic right to organise while leaving each professional or trade union to set its own internal rules.
She relates this approach to International Labour Organization Conventions 98, on the right to organise and collective bargaining, and 87, on freedom of association and protection of the right to organise. Article 3 of Convention 87 recognises organisations’ freedom to draw up their rules, elect representatives and organise their activities, while requiring public authorities to refrain from interference that restricts those rights.
The need to represent digital journalists therefore intersects with a different question: whether reform will emerge from an inclusive process controlled by members, or expose the syndicate to new forms of outside influence. That is the dispute confronting journalists as they head to the polls.
