“During the period I spent in the ‘Reception’ section of the prison, I was sexually assaulted by one of the female guards, resulting in bleeding that lasted for 15 days, accompanied by severe exhaustion, acute dizziness, and unbearable back pain. Due to severe overcrowding in the cells, I wasn’t able to sleep on my back. Female prisoners were forced to sleep in only one position—lying on one side without any movement allowed.” With these words, Sana’a Abdellah (a pseudonym used to protect her personal safety) began recounting her testimony about the severe violations she faced during her last detention period between 2019 and 2020.
Sana’a, who was arrested four times between 2017 and 2020, does not only describe general violations faced by prisoners but specifically highlights arbitrary practices committed against women inside detention facilities, particularly prisons.
Continuing her account to Zawia3, Sana’a says: “After several days of continuous bleeding, I requested to see a gynecologist to examine my condition and find a solution, but my request was ignored for a full 10 days. When they finally decided to transfer me to the prison hospital, I discovered the gynecologist was absent that day and was replaced by a general practitioner, who did not perform any real medical examination or attempt to find out the cause of the bleeding. He merely gave me some pills, saying, ‘Take this medication, and the bleeding will stop.'”
Sana’a adds: “I returned to the Reception section extremely angry due to medical neglect and the absence of healthcare. Some prisoners then informed me that the gynecologist in the prison had previously harassed several female inmates during medical examinations. They added that all the victims were criminal detainees and that the doctor exploited their fear of objecting or filing complaints against him. They also told me I was fortunate the doctor was absent when I went to the hospital.”
Sana’a explains that staying in the Reception section sometimes lasts a month or more in women’s prisons, despite this procedure being unlawful, and prisoners are later transferred to various wards.
Prisons Ignore Women’s Needs
Sana’a believes prisons are entirely ill-equipped to meet women’s needs or consider their particular circumstances, starting from the “Reception” phase, where prisoners are initially received before distribution to wards. She continues, for instance, in Qanater Prison, the Reception area is a small room of about 3×4 meters, housing at least 40 to 50 women, sometimes reaching 70. Basic needs are not considered; bathroom use is scheduled, and prisoners must wait their turn, regardless of circumstances.
She adds that bathing is prohibited, and if a prisoner is lucky enough to bathe, it happens once a month for only 10 minutes. If she overstays, the “Nabtashia” (a prisoner responsible for organizing) intervenes to remove her. Combing hair is also prohibited. Sleep is restricted between midnight and 6 a.m., and prisoners are neither allowed to sleep nor wake up outside these hours, even if they are sick or pregnant.
The New Woman Foundation issued a national report on Beijing +30 outcomes titled “Women’s Conditions in the Criminal Justice System,” addressing numerous issues women face within the justice system, including female prisoners’ conditions and violations. The report highlighted the neglect of health needs for women in prison laws and regulations, noting prisons only recognize pregnant women from the third month onwards. Consequently, menstrual needs and the free provision of sanitary pads are overlooked, exacerbating menstrual poverty due to high prices at prison canteens.
The report also highlighted the deterioration of detention facilities, from prison infrastructure design to living conditions, ventilation, cleanliness, overcrowding, and lack of privacy for women, especially mothers and pregnant inmates.
The report recommended “publishing internal prison regulations and presenting them to detainees to inform them of their rights, complaints mechanisms, and the importance of serious measures to end sexual violence as a systematic punishment. It also emphasized considering women’s health and physical needs regarding infrastructure, living conditions, and medical facilities within prisons. Additionally, it stressed the Public Prosecution’s responsibility in judicial oversight of prisons to verify inmates’ treatment and living conditions to prevent rights violations.”
Nevine Obeid, Executive Director of the New Woman Foundation, commented: “Firstly, human and women’s rights are key components of Beijing’s framework, and our report included many recommendations beyond prisons. Secondly, there are gender-related issues and campaigns addressing sanitary pads and women’s menstrual needs in prisons. Thirdly, the case of Marwa Arafa—a political detainee held in pretrial detention for over four years—highlights the misuse of pretrial detention against women, demanding a review of justice in such cases.”
Obeid explained the foundation closely monitors female detainees in freedom of speech cases, including campaigns demanding sanitary pads in prisons. The foundation also tracks cases of women recently arrested for solidarity movements like supporting Palestine or participating in public demonstrations. The report covers the period from 2020 to 2025, during which many of these women were released.
A UN report revealed an unprecedented increase in threats facing women’s and girls’ rights globally, highlighting rising discrimination, declining legal protections, and reduced funding for women’s support programs and institutions.
The Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action aims to support women’s and girls’ pursuit of gender equality, ensuring the international community continues addressing inequalities across civil, political, social, economic, and cultural areas. So far, five reviews have resulted in documents committing states to uphold global commitments on women’s rights, setting priorities for subsequent years.
Prison Laws Between Enforcement and Amendment
Sana’a continues her testimony about the violations she experienced during her last detention: “While I was in Qanater Prison, there were repeated altercations between me and the security personnel responsible for inspecting our bags during visits or court sessions. When they found sanitary pads, they would open them, which led to their contamination. The disputes between us continued, and I filed complaints with the prison administration, but they insisted it was part of the visitation inspection, without realizing that these pads must remain sterile and that contamination could cause health damage. As for police stations, sometimes sanitary pads are allowed in for criminal detainees, but the issue of using the bathroom remains catastrophic in every sense.”
Human rights lawyer Hala Douma believes that women’s crises inside detention centers are not limited to their needs, but extend to the duration of their detention, which can last for years without regard to the presence of their children. The case of “Marwa Arafa” is a clear example of this. As for the needs of women inside prisons, Douma believes the matter is related to Prison Regulation Law No. 396 of 1956, where two aspects are involved: the actual application of some articles of the law and the need to amend others.
Douma adds in her statement to Zawia3: For example, in the case of imprisoned mothers, we need nothing more than the actual implementation of Articles 19 and 20 of the law, with consideration for the specific conditions of pregnant women. We also aspire to amend the regulation to explicitly recognize sanitary pads as essential items for female inmates.
The human rights lawyer explains, based on testimonies from former inmates of Qanater Prison, that sanitary pads are sometimes used as a means of abuse against prisoners by preventing their entry. This forces some women who have money to buy them from the prison canteen (a designated place for selling inmates’ needs) at prices up to three times their actual cost. Therefore, it is necessary for the prison law to explicitly state that sanitary pads are essential needs, so they are not exploited as a tool for pressure and abuse against inmates. She confirms that these testimonies are specific to Qanater Women’s Prison and she is unsure if they apply to other prisons.
In March 2019, the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights issued a research paper titled “Menstruation in Prisons,” which confirmed that menstruation, as a healthy and natural part of women’s bodies, is entirely absent from the law. It is not mentioned in any article, nor in the internal prison regulation, nor in ministerial decisions related to it. The paper clarified that the law does not acknowledge the specific needs of women’s bodies until the third month of pregnancy, when it comes to distributing special meals for pregnant women, according to Minister of Interior Decree No. 468 of 2017 amending Decree No. 361 of 1998.
Article 19 of the Prison Regulation Law states: “A pregnant inmate shall be treated with special medical care regarding food, work, and sleep from the moment her pregnancy is confirmed by a medical report until she gives birth and forty days have passed after delivery. The mother and her child must be provided with necessary healthcare, appropriate food and clothing, and rest. A pregnant inmate or a mother must not be deprived of her prescribed food for any reason.”
Article 20 of the law, according to the latest amendment under Law No. 106 of 2015, states: “The child of a female inmate shall remain with her in the prison nursery until the age of four, and she shall accompany him during the first two years. If she does not wish for him to stay with her or if he reaches this age, he shall be handed over to the person legally entitled to custody. If that person refuses, he shall be handed over to the next eligible person. If all entitled individuals refuse custody, the prison warden must place the child in a specialized care facility and inform the inmate mother of the location, facilitating periodic visits as specified by the internal regulation.”
Prison Conditions Between the Egyptian Constitution and the Bangkok Rules
Article 55 of the Egyptian Constitution states: “Anyone who is arrested, detained, or whose freedom is restricted must be treated in a manner that preserves their dignity. It is prohibited to torture, intimidate, coerce, or physically or morally harm them. Their detention or imprisonment must only occur in designated, humane, and healthy places…” Article 56 also states: “Prison is a place for reform and rehabilitation. Prisons and detention centers are subject to judicial oversight, and anything that contradicts human dignity or endangers health is prohibited. The law shall regulate the provisions of reforming and rehabilitating convicted persons and facilitating their reintegration into dignified life after their release.”
Feminist activist Ilham Eidawars believes there are numerous contradictions between the conditions of prisons in Egypt and the treatment of female inmates, and the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (Nelson Mandela Rules), as well as the Bangkok Rules for the Treatment of Women Prisoners. These contradictions apply to both infrastructure and treatment.
Regarding infrastructure, Eidawars states in her interview with Zawia3 that some prisons suffer from deteriorating infrastructure needing renovation, and there is no accurate information on whether updates have been made to women’s prison facilities. What is certain, however, is that the number of women’s prisons is far fewer than men’s. The physical aspect also includes waiting areas, visitation spaces, inspection methods used on female inmates, and the general conditions of the cells, which are part of the broader issue.
Eidawars adds that the treatment of female inmates is divided into two types: the first includes clear violations of laws and regulations such as harassment and mistreatment inside prisons, which are criminalized by prison laws themselves. The second concerns aspects that are not addressed by laws and regulations at all. For example, body searches involving the penetration of body cavities. If we refer to the “Bangkok Rules” or “Nelson Mandela Rules,” we find that they are very strict in specifying how and when such searches can be conducted. Many countries have adopted technological alternatives to invasive body searches, but these solutions are not applied in Egypt.
The feminist activist notes that the more alarming issue is the question of virginity, which is not related to contraband searches but is conducted for moral reasons intended to humiliate the inmate. For example, in some cases, inmates were asked whether they had previously married or had sexual relations. Several organizations have documented this practice and filed complaints with the National Council for Women, but to no avail. These practices blatantly violate the regulations, especially after the Administrative Court’s decision to ban “virginity tests” completely following the January Revolution.
Eidawars continues that regarding matters not addressed by the prison regulations, there are no articles that include women’s needs such as sanitary pads, even though they are considered basic rights like food and water, but are not explicitly stated in the regulation. She points out that the violations faced by political prisoners sometimes differ from those faced by criminal prisoners. Criminal inmates are treated with more condescension, while political prisoners are subjected to distinctive violations, such as imprisoning both the mother and father despite the presence of children, as happened with journalist Solafa Magdy, who was arrested along with her husband and both were imprisoned for nearly two years despite having a small child. Both were subjected to numerous violations.
The feminist activist believes that in cases of pretrial detention, a mother’s detention should be postponed if she has a young child to protect them, but this is not applied in political cases. Moreover, the National Council for Women and the National Council for Childhood and Motherhood play no effective role in protecting politically imprisoned women, especially in regard to maternal responsibilities.
Article 488 of the Criminal Procedure Code No. 150 of 1950 and its amendments states: “If a man and his wife are sentenced to imprisonment for a period not exceeding one year—even for different crimes—and they have not previously been imprisoned, the execution of the sentence for one of them may be postponed until the other is released. The same applies if they are the guardians of a minor under 15 years old and have a known residence in Egypt.”
The Nelson Mandela Rules represent the globally recognized model for prison management in the 21st century. They define the minimum conditions for imprisonment, provide guidance, and set clear standards for prison staff on how to maintain safety, security, and human dignity. These rules consider the individual needs of prisoners, especially vulnerable groups, and emphasize that punishment is the deprivation of liberty, aimed at rehabilitation. Therefore, prison treatment should not increase the suffering of the person deprived of freedom.
The Bangkok Rules acknowledge that women in prisons have specific needs that must be addressed, including physical and mental healthcare. They stipulate the need for special healthcare for pregnant women and mothers in prison, including medical care during and after childbirth. They also require the provision of a suitable environment for children accompanying their mothers in prison, ensuring their physical and psychological well-being. Additionally, they call for appropriate health services for female inmates, including regular medical check-ups, treatment for physical and mental illnesses, and sexual and reproductive healthcare. Furthermore, they emphasize the need for protective measures against all forms of violence, whether from fellow inmates or staff, and prohibit degrading inspection practices, including invasive body searches that violate the dignity of female inmates.
