On Tuesday, lawyers across all Egyptian governorates abstained from engaging with court treasury services for a full day, in protest against increased fees for automated court services. The move follows a decision by the national Bar Association and marks an escalation after demonstrations held in front of local bar association branches on Monday.
Local bar associations throughout Egypt organized protest sit-ins on Monday outside courthouses of various levels, expressing their rejection of the decision by heads of appellate courts to raise judicial fees and cash payments for services provided by the courts.
Lawyers from several regional bar associations participated in the demonstrations, including those from Sharqia, South Giza (Al-Saff court), South Qalyubia, North Giza, Damietta, South Giza (6th of October court), East Tanta, South Dakahlia, and the New Valley. They protested a decision they described as an additional burden on litigants and a direct threat to the right to access justice.
These escalating actions follow the joint meeting of the General Bar Council and the heads of regional bar associations, led by President Abdel Halim Allam, aimed at confronting the resolution issued by the Council of Appellate Court Presidents to impose fees under the label of “automated service charges.” The decision has faced widespread objection from lawyers and rights advocates, who argue it violates the constitution and legal principles.
The local bar associations have instructed all their members to fully comply with the General Bar Council’s decisions issued at the joint meeting and to participate in executing these resolutions as a clear rejection of what they consider unlawful fees imposed on court services.
Litigation Fees Threaten Justice
Aziza El-Tawil, a lawyer at the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights (EIPR), stated that lawyers were shocked at the beginning of April, following the Eid al-Fitr holiday, when several appellate courts issued official statements announcing a fivefold increase—up to 500%—in “automated service” court fees.
Speaking to Zawia3, El-Tawil explained that these steep increases have imposed a significant financial burden that restricts citizens’ access to the judiciary. Fees that previously ranged between 100 and 200 EGP have, in some cases, surged to nearly 5,000 EGP. This has left lawyers with two difficult options: either neglect their professional duty by failing to submit case bundles (which include essential client documentation), or pass the financial burden onto clients, potentially discouraging them from pursuing their legal claims.
She added that the past few weeks have seen a state of confusion within courtrooms, with some judicial panels refusing to accept incomplete case files, thereby obstructing the work of lawyers and hindering the legal process.
In response, the Bar Association opted for escalation, initiating actions such as boycotting court fee payments on designated days. While some appellate court presidents responded by partially reducing the increases, fees remain significantly elevated—especially amid rising inflation and declining public incomes. El-Tawil stressed that the vast majority of citizens seeking justice have nothing but their constitutional right to litigation, a right now jeopardized by exorbitant costs, undermining their access to legal defense.
The Bar Association has since intensified its protests. Sit-ins were held outside courthouses yesterday, and today, lawyers began refusing to pay fees at all treasuries of primary and general courts—whereas earlier refusals had been limited to appellate courts. Meanwhile, several lawyers have turned to legal recourse by filing administrative court appeals to annul the fee hikes, arguing that they impose serious restrictions on the right to litigation.
In a related development, the Egyptian Center for Economic and Social Rights (ECESR) filed a legal challenge on April 10 before the Administrative Court of the State Council, seeking to annul the decision issued by the President of the Cairo Court of Appeals to raise fees on various court services.
The petition, filed by lawyers Malek Adly, Khaled El-Gammal, Sameh Samir, and Wael Ghali, argued that the contested decision imposed higher charges on 33 judicial services, including motions for reinstatement after dismissal, motions to expedite proceedings, renewals after cassation, correcting procedural appeal forms, party additions, reviewing case bundles, service of process, re-service, and issuing official copies of verdicts and expert reports.
The center emphasized that these fee increases have no legal basis and that requiring such payments to proceed with litigation constitutes a direct violation of Article 68 of the Egyptian Constitution, which guarantees that “litigation is a protected and guaranteed right for all.” The petition further asserted that Law No. 46 of 1972 governing judicial authority does not empower court presidents to impose or amend court fees.
The ECESR argued that the decision represents a blatant legal violation, placing unnecessary financial strain on litigants and undermining the principle of fair and accessible justice.
Fees That Cement Class Discrimination
The legal controversy over rising litigation fees has now reached the courts, as several lawyers have filed a direct misdemeanor complaint against Prime Minister Dr. Mostafa Madbouly, Minister of Justice Counselor Adnan Fanjari, and the heads of courts who issued the recent fee increase decisions. They are being accused of “betrayal” (ghadr), a charge based on Article 114 of the Egyptian Penal Code. This article specifically states: “Any public official involved in the collection of taxes, fees, dues, or fines who knowingly requests or collects amounts not due, or in excess of what is legally owed, shall be punished by temporary hard labor or imprisonment.” The lawyers argue that the newly imposed increases in judicial fees represent an illegal collection of funds exceeding constitutional and legal limits.
In previous statements made to Zawia3 by several judges and legal experts, Counselor Mohamed Nagy Derbala, former Vice President of the Court of Cassation, described the latest fee hikes as “flawed” and a “blatant violation” of constitutional principles—particularly Article 97, which states: “Litigation is a safeguarded right guaranteed to all, and the state is committed to bringing courts closer and simplifying their procedures.” Derbala argued that these increases have erected a “massive financial barrier” that prevents citizens from accessing their natural right to judicial remedy.
He emphasized that the decisions institutionalize discrimination among citizens based on financial capacity, in clear violation of Article 53 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law. According to Derbala, this policy effectively excludes a wide segment of litigants due to the high cost and deprives them of their right to seek justice. He warned that the social consequences could be severe, as citizens might resort to alternatives outside the judicial system. He called for the immediate reversal of the fee hikes and urged reinforcement of judicial independence to ensure that access to courts remains a right for all—not a privilege for the wealthy alone.
In a similar context, Nasser Amin, head of the Arab Center for the Independence of the Judiciary and the Legal Profession, told Zawia3 that the recent decisions constitute “an unprecedented violation” of both the Constitution and the law—particularly the fundamental principle that “no taxes or fees may be imposed except by law.” Amin asserted that what the Ministry of Justice, some courts, and public prosecutions are doing blatantly breaches this principle. He argued that the money collected from citizens under these decisions amounts to an illegal levy extracted through “betrayal,” constituting, in his words, “a clear legal crime.”
Amin added that this direction is not new, but rather part of a broader policy adopted by the state over the past decade aimed at reducing its obligations in providing basic services—including judicial services. He stressed that the state is constitutionally and internationally bound to ensure citizens’ access to justice without financial obstacles. He also revealed that the center is preparing to file a direct misdemeanor complaint before Egyptian courts, accusing Prime Minister Mostafa Madbouly and the court presidents who signed the decisions of committing the crime of “betrayal” under Article 114 of the Penal Code, which mandates imprisonment or temporary hard labor for any public official who deliberately imposes unwarranted fees.
