Despite his family’s long political history, when security forces raided Hossam’s* home in mid-2024 and forcibly disappeared him for several days before he reappeared at the Supreme State Security Prosecution, his family chose to remain silent “so as not to provoke them,” as Hossam, who has since been released, told Zawia3.

Hossam acknowledges that “legally, there is no room for provocation.” He affirms that his family was well aware of the legal procedures required in cases of enforced disappearance. “But in practice, filing a disappearance report only brings more harm to the disappeared,” he explained. His family feared that speaking out might cost him the chance that his disappearance was merely intended as “a lesson in obedience.”

Hossam sees his family’s silence—despite their awareness of the importance of documenting enforced disappearances—as “a defeat or surrender to a crime that keeps recurring.” However, he does not blame them, adding, “Even friends and lawyers advised us not to speak or write about it.”

If Hossam’s well-connected family chose “not to provoke them,” then the same option was taken by Ali’s* family, who lacked political influence and social connections. Ali told Zawia3: “I spent a terrifying night watching security forces hover around my home for six hours, trying to reach me. After my arrest, my family feared taking any action that could harm me. They contacted my colleagues, who advised them to remain silent and wait, arguing that if the news spread widely, it might draw more attention to me and raise questions among the security forces about why the media was interested in me this way.”

Hossam and Ali’s experiences are not exceptions. According to Ahmed Nadeem, Executive Director of the Egyptian Front for Human Rights, 6,736 people were detained in state security cases between April 2022 and November 2024—three times the number of those released in the same period, which totaled 2,302 individuals.

This disparity persists despite Egyptian authorities’ attempts to whitewash their image over the past two years, highlighted by the National Dialogue, launched in May 2023, and the National Human Rights Strategy (2021–2026).

Short-Term Enforced Disappearance

Reports of Egyptian authorities practicing enforced disappearance began surfacing after 2013. According to the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, this crime is defined as:

“The arrest, detention, abduction, or any form of deprivation of liberty by agents of the state, or by persons or groups acting with the authorization, support, or acquiescence of the state, followed by a refusal to acknowledge the deprivation of liberty or concealment of the fate or whereabouts of the disappeared person, thereby placing them outside the protection of the law.”

In 2015, the term “short-term enforced disappearance” emerged for the first time when the United Nations Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances expressed concern over what it described as a “recent surge” in such cases. The Working Group reiterated its concerns in 2016 in a document condemning the rise in enforced disappearances, particularly short-term ones. It urged Egyptian authorities to “immediately provide accurate information on the detention of individuals, their whereabouts, and any transfers to family members, lawyers, or other parties with a legitimate interest in such information.”

The “Stop Enforced Disappearances” campaign adopted the concept of short-term enforced disappearance in its eighth annual report, “Endless Violations”, defining it as a disappearance lasting between two days and six months. The report highlighted that this is the most common pattern of enforced disappearance: out of 3,611 cases documented by the campaign between 2015 and 2022, 2,411 victims were disappeared for periods of less than six months.

The campaign attributed the increasing use of short-term enforced disappearances by Egyptian authorities to an attempt to “normalize enforced disappearance as part of the arrest and detention process.” Hossam and Ali believe this strategy has been successful after nearly a decade of short-term enforced disappearances. “Families have been forced to accept the disappearance of their loved ones as routine, refraining from asking questions about their whereabouts in the hope of a swift release without formal charges,” Hossam explained.

The expansion of enforced disappearance policies has even targeted women and children. Reports from Amnesty International and the Egyptian Front for Human Rights documented the enforced disappearance of 12 children between 2015 and 2018. Additionally, in its 2018 report, “The Winter of the Disappeared in Egypt,” the Egyptian Front for Human Rights documented 12 cases of women, aged between 20 and 56, who were forcibly disappeared in connection with the “Allahuma Thawra” (O God, Revolution) case.

Don’t miss: Social Isolation After Release: How Former Detainees Face Systematic Exclusion

A Crime Without a Complete Record

No single human rights organization has a comprehensive count of those forcibly disappeared in Egypt since 2013. The available figures only reflect what organizations have been able to document, rather than the actual total number. In its 2016 report titled “Egypt: Officially, You Do Not Exist – Disappeared and Tortured under the Guise of Counter-Terrorism,” Amnesty International explained the difficulty in compiling accurate data due to the “official secrecy” surrounding enforced disappearances, in addition to “families fearing that reporting their missing relatives to human rights organizations, the media, or any other entities could expose them to further harm.”

To illustrate the scale of enforced disappearances, Amnesty International referenced official arrest policies implemented by security forces after 2013. According to government statistics, security forces detained approximately 22,000 suspects in 2013 and 2014, while the Ministry of Interior estimated that 12,000 more individuals were arrested in 2015. The organization also pointed to the expansion of Egypt’s prison infrastructure, noting that “ten new prisons were built or planned between 2013 and 2016 to accommodate the increasing number of detainees.”

The “Stop Enforced Disappearances” campaign reported in its latest publication that it had documented 4,677 cases of enforced disappearance between its establishment in 2015 and August 2024. The period between August 2015 and August 2016 recorded the highest number of cases, with 912 documented disappearances, averaging two to three disappearances per day.

This figure aligns with documentation from the “Freedom for the Brave” campaign, which recorded 163 disappearances in just April and May 2015. Similarly, the Egyptian Coordination for Rights and Freedoms documented 1,023 cases of enforced disappearance in the first eight months of 2015, bringing the total for the year to 1,840 cases—double the number recorded by “Stop Enforced Disappearances” between late 2015 and the end of 2016.

Over time, documented cases have declined, with the annual number of reported disappearances by “Stop Enforced Disappearances” ranging between 300 and 400 cases.

However, the campaign acknowledges that these numbers do not accurately reflect the true extent of enforced disappearance. Speaking to Zawia3, a representative of the campaign stated, “In 2024 alone, the Supreme State Security Prosecution handled approximately 7,000 cases. Lawyers confirmed that nearly all detainees in these cases had been subjected to enforced disappearance for periods ranging from a single day to over a month.”

Meanwhile, Mahmoud Shalaby, an Egypt researcher at Amnesty International, uses the term “normalization” to describe how “the government has imposed enforced disappearance as if it were part of the criminal justice system.” In his comments to Zawia3, he argued that the purpose of widespread enforced disappearance is not only to imprison political opponents but also to punish them through disappearance, torture, and subsequent detention in extremely harsh conditions. He added, “It is a systematic package of punishments, with enforced disappearance becoming an entrenched practice.”

Shalaby believes that the actual number of disappearances since 2013 is much higher than reported in human rights organizations’ figures, as “the state does not provide any information on prisoners in general.” Additionally, he noted that recent reports on enforced disappearances have declined due to “security crackdowns on lawyers and human rights defenders, asset freezes, and travel bans.”

Lawyers: Guardians of Rights Weighed Down by the Burden of Struggle

If families of the forcibly disappeared—referred to as “Al-Ahliyya” in legal circles—have found themselves forced to choose between denouncing their loved ones’ disappearances and risking further retaliation, or remaining silent in the hope of their reappearance, many have chosen the latter. Human rights lawyers have not been spared from this dilemma either. For over a decade, they have been confronting policies that reinforce the normalization of enforced disappearance, according to two lawyers who spoke to Zawia3.

Khaled, a human rights lawyer, prefers to describe the situation as “habitualization rather than normalization”* of enforced disappearance among lawyers. He explained, “We must distinguish between normalization and habitualization. Normalization means accepting something willingly, whereas habitualization is more akin to resignation—closer to the reality we are living.”

He elaborates: “For a long time, lawyers were committed to filing reports and making efforts to secure the release of forcibly disappeared individuals. However, over time, they became reluctant to take legal action, knowing it would lead nowhere.”

Under Egyptian law, when a person disappears, their family is required to file a report with the Public Prosecutor (as the supreme judicial authority), the Minister of Interior (as the highest police authority), or the President (as the head of the executive branch), urging an investigation into the disappearance. Khaled explains that these reports serve two purposes: “They push the prosecution to verify the disappearance, and they serve as official documentation that lawyers can later use in defense of the disappeared person if they resurface.”

However, he continues: “We later realized that these reports provoked the police, especially since they often included the names of officers involved in the disappearance.” The result, he explains, was “further harm to the disappeared individual.” Additionally, “the prosecution had grown accustomed to ignoring its duty to investigate enforced disappearances, meaning these reports became a source of harm rather than a tool for justice.”

To navigate this challenge, Khaled explains that lawyers began advising families to send telegrams (telegraf) to the Public Prosecutor instead of filing official reports.

He differentiates between the two: “A telegram does not have the same legal weight as a formal report. Telegrams are sent to the Public Prosecutor’s office and are simply filed away, ensuring that the entity responsible for the disappearance remains unaware of the family’s action. In contrast, an official report is assigned a case number, requires a response from the prosecution, and ultimately alerts the authorities responsible for the disappearance.” Some lawyers, he adds, have gone even further, advising families to remain silent altogether, effectively acknowledging the futility of legal action.

Beyond what he describes as “despair” leading some lawyers to abandon legal efforts, Khaled highlights the personal threats that lawyers face, which impact their ability to work. He states, “A lawyer handling enforced disappearance cases faces significant risks because they are dealing with an issue the government does not want to address or acknowledge.” He adds, “I don’t want to say that lawyers are afraid for their own safety, but no one is immune from danger anymore.”

Omar, another human rights lawyer who left Egypt in 2019 due to security pressures, agrees with Khaled.* He describes an atmosphere where lawyers must exercise extreme caution while working within the Supreme State Security Prosecution. “Inside the country, no one knows what will happen to me if I am arrested,” he says.

Enforced disappearance became a major human rights issue in 2015, as complaints surged. Activist groups and campaigns, such as “Freedom for the Brave,” “Stop Enforced Disappearances” (run by the Egyptian Commission for Rights and Freedoms), and the Egyptian Coordination for Rights and Freedoms, were active in documenting cases and advocating for victims.

Today, however, only the Egyptian Commission for Rights and Freedoms remains operational. “Freedom for the Brave” ceased its activities in 2022, according to its last update on Facebook, while the Egyptian Coordination for Rights and Freedoms was shut down, and its officials have been sentenced to prison terms ranging from five years to life imprisonment.”

Listing the remaining organizations still working on enforced disappearance cases, the lawyer estimates that only two remain operational, and “one of them does not engage in documentation at all.”

Crackdowns Strip Organizations of Their Capabilities

After families and lawyers, human rights organizations form the third line of defense against enforced disappearance in Egypt. Among the earliest initiatives dedicated to this issue was the “Stop Enforced Disappearances” campaign, launched by the Egyptian Commission for Rights and Freedoms (ECRF) in August 2015. The campaign set out to raise awareness of the dangers of enforced disappearance, hold perpetrators accountable, and pressure decision-makers to address legislative shortcomings.

However, in its conversation with Zawia3, the campaign acknowledges that its current capabilities are incomparable to what they were when it was first launched over nine years ago, citing increasing restrictions.

At the time of its founding, the campaign explains, “We could meet with families of the disappeared at our headquarters. Today, this is impossible—not just because of security crackdowns but also due to families’ reluctance to report disappearances, whether to the authorities or to us, as despair has taken hold.”

Looking at early reports from “Stop Enforced Disappearances,” it is clear that the campaign relied heavily on families—either through in-person interviews, phone calls, or submission of disappearance reports via forms provided by the campaign.

After the campaign lost the ability to document cases through families, lawyers became the primary source of documentation over the past six years. However, this transition was not without challenges.

One of the most significant obstacles, the campaign explains, was the shift to remote detention renewal hearings via video screens, which prevented lawyers from meeting detainees. “The disappeared person is only physically present during their first appearance before the prosecution. If a lawyer misses this first appearance, there is a 90% chance they will never be able to meet the detainee,” the campaign explains.

In 2020, Egypt’s Ministry of Justice implemented remote pretrial detention renewal hearings as part of its COVID-19 measures. On December 20, 2021, the decision was extended indefinitely, restricting in-person appearances to only the detainee’s first session before the prosecution. The decision was widely criticized by human rights organizations at the time.

In addition to legal restrictions, the campaign cites the impact of “direct threats against lawyers,” which have not only affected their ability to document cases but also forced many to leave the profession altogether. The campaign states, “Some lawyers have received summons from National Security, while others, fearing for their safety, have fled the country.” The departure of lawyers, the campaign adds, “is a major loss, as we lose people who work on the ground, maintain direct contact with families, and understand the realities of Egypt’s security climate.”

It is not just lawyers who have left. Parts of the campaign team itself have been forced to flee the country due to state surveillance. The campaign explains, “This has affected our ability to gather and document cases, not to mention the loss of our security awareness and risk-assessment experience.”

The impact of these restrictions is evident in the sharp decline in documented cases. In its ninth and latest report (August 2024), the number of documented disappearances fell to nearly half of what was recorded in the previous year—438 cases compared to 821.

However, the campaign insists that this decline in documentation does not indicate a decrease in enforced disappearances but rather an escalation in repression. The campaign warns that “Egyptian authorities use the drop in documented cases and reports as evidence to support their official narrative, which denies the existence of enforced disappearances when addressing international organizations.” The campaign adds, “We struggle to convey to the international community that fewer documented cases do not mean the situation has improved—it simply means repression has intensified. It is difficult for anyone outside Egypt to understand this equation.”

The reality of this repression is exemplified by Amal, a 58-year-old mother*, who has spent months trying to prove the disappearance of her son, who was taken in early 2024 in connection with a protest-related case. She explains that she had no trouble sending a telegram to the Public Prosecutor reporting her son’s disappearance since it was sent from a post office rather than a security facility. However, she adds, “What happened afterward was shocking. I obtained CCTV footage from a nearby shop showing my son being taken by security forces. I posted the footage on social media, and shortly after, security forces arrested the shop owners as punishment for helping me. Their families turned against me, and I was forced to leave my home.”

Don’t miss: Cross-Border Suppression: Egyptian Consulates Impose New Restrictions

Past and Present: What Has Prosecutorial Negligence Done to Us?

Helal Abdel Hamid, a politician and General Coordinator of the Egyptian Democratic Front Party (under formation), does not consider enforced disappearance a recent phenomenon in Egypt. However, he explains why this violation has escalated significantly since 2013.

Having lived through Egypt’s previous regimes, Abdel Hamid attributes the surge in enforced disappearances to the absence of a protective barrier—one that the prosecution is supposed to provide through oversight and accountability. He explains, “In the past, when families reported a disappearance to the prosecution, prosecutors would inspect police officers, and officers feared that such inspections would uncover illegal detention sites.” He notes that “police inspections used to result in severe measures against officers.”

With **no deterrent in place today, enforced disappearance has expanded beyond political cases to include criminal cases, especially in Upper Egypt and rural areas. Abdel Hamid warns that the situation outside urban centers is even worse: “People in rural areas suffer from continuous human rights violations, but these cases receive no media attention and are ignored by human rights organizations.”

According to Article 189 of the Egyptian Constitution, the Public Prosecution is responsible for investigating and initiating criminal proceedings. In legal terms, the prosecution acts on behalf of society and represents public interests in criminal cases.

Meanwhile, the United Nations Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances considers enforced disappearance “a crime that can amount to a crime against humanity when practiced on a widespread or systematic scale.” The gravity of enforced disappearance goes beyond the crime itself—it leads to other severe violations, including physical and psychological torture, the denial of a person’s legal identity, and violations of their right to liberty and security.

The Egyptian authorities continue to deny any involvement in enforced disappearance while simultaneously ignoring calls from human rights organizations to ratify the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance. Ratifying this treaty would legally obligate Egypt to criminalize enforced disappearance within its national legislation.

It is worth noting that in 2014, before becoming President of the National Council for Human Rights (NCHR), Ambassador Moushira Khattab publicly expressed the importance of Egypt signing the convention. In a letter to the Association of Victims of Kidnapping and Enforced Disappearance, she stated that failing to ratify the treaty constitutes a violation of the Egyptian Constitution, emphasizing that the right to protection from enforced disappearance is a fundamental human right that cannot be debated.