Nagwa sits in her apartment in the city of Zagazig, her eyes fixed on the television screen, anxiously following every debate about the Old Rent Law. She was never particularly interested in public affairs, but the law that had guaranteed her stability for the past twenty years—since her divorce and move into the family’s apartment with her children—has now become a silent threat.
“They say they’re going to amend the law… but what about me? Where will I go?” she whispers to herself, barely audible, her anxiety mounting with each new report. Today, she lives off a government pension that barely covers her essentials. Even the thought of moving, or securing alternative housing, is beyond her means.
For weeks now, the proposed amendments to the Old Rent Law have been her greatest concern. While landlords eagerly await long-overdue reforms to regain control over their properties, tenants like Nagwa fear that such changes could mark the beginning of a quiet displacement—without the state offering any clear guarantee to those who have no alternative housing options.
Amid the escalating controversy over the Old Rent Law amendments, opinions are sharply divided between those demanding the restoration of landlords’ rights and those warning that the changes could severely harm millions of tenants, especially those with no other options. Many landlords argue that the current law is no longer fair, given the rent freeze that has persisted for decades. But tenants like Nagwa warn that any reform that overlooks the most vulnerable groups could become a direct threat to social stability.
The Egyptian House of Representatives is currently reviewing the draft law, after the government finalized the main version and submitted it to parliament, which referred it to the Housing Committee for internal discussions. A state of sharp division prevails among MPs regarding several articles of the law, with some describing them as illogical and lacking a social and humanitarian dimension.
In this investigation, Zawia3 spoke with over 20 citizens—both landlords and tenants—as well as legal experts and public officials, in an attempt to capture a range of perspectives and understand the motives and fears that drive each side of the dispute.
The Evolution of Egypt’s Old Rent Law
The Old Rent Law, officially Law No. 136 of 1981, which governs the relationship between landlords and tenants, remains one of the most controversial housing laws in Egypt. It grants tenants lifetime occupancy rights over a rental unit, with the tenancy extending to their children, all for a rent far below current market rates—sometimes as low as 50 pounds ($1) per month. In contrast, rents in the free market have skyrocketed in recent years, with a similar unit renting for over 10,000 pounds ($200) per month in some neighborhoods. This disparity has driven many landlords to demand reforms to the law.
Historically, this rent system traces back to the state’s initial intervention in the rental market during World War I in 1914, when Egypt faced a severe housing crisis. In 1947, a rent control law was introduced to protect tenants from price hikes and monopolization. A wave of legislation followed, particularly under President Gamal Abdel Nasser, who entrenched the concept of automatic lease extensions and fixed rent rates.
In 1996, a new law was enacted to liberalize rental relationships between landlords and tenants. However, it did not apply retroactively, meaning that older contracts remained subject to previous laws. In recent years, the issue has resurfaced amid soaring living costs and unprecedented real estate price hikes, prompting renewed calls by landlords to amend what they view as an outdated and unfair law.
On the other hand, tenants argue that the old rent system provides a vital social safety net, especially for low-income groups who lack suitable alternative housing. They fear that poorly designed amendments could compromise their right to adequate shelter.
In recent years, the government has taken limited steps toward reform, most notably by passing a law regulating rental arrangements for properties leased by legal entities, setting a timetable to phase out these contracts. However, the future of residential units under the old rent law remains uncertain. Public debate continues, with growing calls for inclusive dialogue and a gradual reform process that balances the rights of both landlords and tenants.
Property Owners: Between Support and Concern Over the Law
Mohamed El-Gammal, a property owner in the Matareya district of East Cairo, shares the anxiety felt by Nagwa—but from a different standpoint. He owns two buildings inherited from his parents and openly expresses concerns that the amendments to the Old Rent Law could harm a large segment of tenants, especially those living in working-class neighborhoods who rely on modest salaries or pensions that can no longer keep up with soaring living costs.
Mohamed says he hopes the amendments will allow him fair benefit from his properties, but at the same time, he does not want these reforms to come at the expense of society’s most vulnerable. He believes that “striking a balance is the solution,” and that doing justice to landlords should not automatically mean injustice to tenants.
On the other hand, Islam Gika sees the proposed amendments as a long-awaited glimmer of hope and a necessary opportunity to restore balance to the landlord-tenant relationship. His perspective stems from a personal experience involving his mother, who inherited a commercial shop in a busy popular market from her family, but has been unable to benefit from it fairly due to the extremely low rent paid by the tenant—and his consistent refusal to negotiate.
Islam explains that his mother tried to reach an amicable settlement, offering a fair amount of money to assist the tenant in vacating. But the tenant responded with a counter-demand that far exceeded the offer, coupled with a blunt message: “Take this and forget the shop.” To Islam, this incident exemplified what he described as “unacceptable entitlement” by some tenants who treat the property as if it were a permanent right, forgetting that rental relationships are inherently temporary—not ownership.
While many landlords argue that the Old Rent Law has severely harmed their interests for decades, the state had, in earlier periods, offered various incentives and support measures to encourage construction and real estate investment—even under frozen rent conditions. During the 1960s and 1970s, for instance, some landlords received land for development at symbolic prices or with payment facilities as part of urban housing projects. They also benefited from tax exemptions on rented residential units. Additionally, the construction sector received direct and indirect subsidies on essential building materials like cement and steel, which helped ease the overall cost burden of building during that era.
According to the 2017 census by the Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics (CAPMAS), the total number of housing units rented under the old system exceeded 3 million (3,019,000 units). The number of households residing in these units was estimated at around 1.642 million, with the total number of individuals living in them surpassing 6 million people.
According to CAPMAS, the largest concentration of these units is found in four main governorates: Cairo, Giza, Alexandria, and Qalyubia, as illustrated in the chart.
Proposed Amendments Threaten Social Stability
Economic and political researcher Zuhdi El-Shamy, a member of the Social Justice Front, describes the proposed amendments to Egypt’s old rent law as a “blatant tampering with social security,” warning against their approval without comprehensive social and economic studies. He asserts that the proposed law contradicts the rulings of the Constitutional Court and the Egyptian Constitution, posing a direct threat to social peace. El-Shamy cautions that the law, as presented, could ignite internal strife among millions of citizens and destabilize vulnerable housing and economic sectors.
In an exclusive interview with Zawia3, El-Shamy points out that the government aims to terminate rental agreements within just five years without providing realistic alternatives, considering this a “forced displacement of citizens from their homes,” including the elderly and pensioners already grappling with a severe economic crisis and unprecedented inflation.
He adds, “It’s not feasible to simply end the rental relationship of a million economic establishments that serve citizens at affordable prices. Who will bear the chaos that ensues? Who will control the expected skyrocketing prices of goods and services if this law is implemented?”
El-Shamy criticizes what he perceives as “catering to a segment of investors and property owners who had previously received financial compensation when renting out these units and benefited from government support in construction at the time.” He emphasizes that the government should have addressed the rampant real estate market, where apartment prices and rents have reached astronomical figures, instead of tightening the noose on ordinary citizens.
In November of the previous year, the Supreme Constitutional Court ruled that the first paragraphs of Articles 1 and 2 of the 1981 old rent law were unconstitutional. These articles had fixed annual rental values for residential properties, and the court urged the House of Representatives to amend them before the end of the current legislative session. The ruling was based on the premise that “freezing rental values at a specific point in time, regardless of the passage of decades, inflation rates, and the declining purchasing power of annual rent, constitutes an assault on the value of justice and a violation of property rights.” The law had set a cap on annual rent increases at 7% of the land value at the time of licensing and buildings based on actual construction costs.
Ilham Aidarous, co-founder of the Bread and Freedom Party (under establishment) and a member of the Social Justice Front, believes that the core of the old rent crisis lies not in the conflict between long-term tenants and original landlords but in state policies that have abandoned their regulatory role, leaving the relationship between the two parties strained for decades after abolishing the Rent Determination Committee and halting fair pricing mechanisms.
In her exclusive interview with Zawia3, Aidarous states, “The real problem began when companies and contractors entered the real estate market, purchasing old properties at low prices in recent years, awaiting the moment to liberalize contracts for massive profits. These are not old landlords who inherited properties but new investors who bought with full knowledge of the status of these units.”
She insists that any amendments to the law should ensure that these new investors do not benefit from any increases in rental values, suggesting that only original landlords or their heirs should gain from any changes.
Aidarous opposes any proposal that sets a transitional period for liberalizing rental relationships, citing Supreme Constitutional Court rulings from 1997 on commercial contracts and 2002 on residential contracts, which state that the legal extension of lease agreements is permissible for only one generation. She explains, “Old rent contracts are naturally phasing out with the death of the second generation of tenants, so why the rush? The Constitutional Court limited the legal extension to just one generation, meaning old contracts will expire over time without the need for controversial amendments.”
She proposes increasing rent based on a fixed legal standard rather than fluctuating market considerations, asserting that tenants should not bear the responsibility for the property’s location or current price hikes. She references the “1997 Commercial Schedule” experience, which implemented gradual increases based on rental categories.
Aidarous suggests categorizing properties into three groups: units with rent less than 20 EGP should be quintupled to a minimum of 100 EGP, then increased by no more than 5% annually; rents between 20 and 100 EGP should be doubled once; and rents above 100 EGP should not be doubled but increased by a reasonable percentage.
She highlights the growing burden on landlords regarding maintenance, cleanliness, and repairs, noting that most tenants actively participate in these expenses. She advocates for the formal activation of “occupants’ associations” to systematically distribute costs between landlords and tenants, preventing landlords from being compelled to sell properties to real estate investors.
Aidarous emphasizes the state’s constitutional responsibility to protect architecturally significant buildings, especially in areas like downtown Cairo and other historic neighborhoods. She argues that preserving these properties should not be solely the landlord’s responsibility but should include direct government support for restoration and maintenance to safeguard urban heritage.
In conclusion, Aidarous asserts that the primary issue is not the old rent system but the “rampant” real estate and new rental markets, where properties have become a means of wealth accumulation rather than residential stability. She adds, “The state does not provide sufficient social housing, and the units it offers are exorbitantly priced and located in remote areas, making discussions about alternative housing for long-term tenants unrealistic. If the state intends to resolve the old rent crisis, it must first reform the new real estate market and provide genuine housing options for the youth, rather than pushing them towards displacement.”
According to the 2017 Population, Housing, and Housing Conditions Census by the Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics, nearly one-third of families residing in units under the old rent system—approximately 600,000 families—pay monthly rents below 50 EGP. Meanwhile, 20% of families, or about 327,000 families, pay rents ranging from 50 to 100 EGP per month.
The segment paying monthly rents between 100 and 200 EGP represents about 19% of families, or nearly 307,000 families. The remaining third of families pay rents ranging from 200 EGP to over 900 EGP per month, depending on the area and size of the residential unit, as illustrated in the accompanying chart.
Don’t miss: Development versus Demolition: How the Government Sacrificed Its Citizens for Road Projects in Egypt
Restructuring Property Ownership
Ibrahim Ezz El-Din, an architectural planning engineer and researcher specializing in the right to housing, believes that the indicators emerging from the government’s draft law on old rent point to an imminent crisis that may affect both landlords and tenants, without yielding real gains for either side. Rather than offering a fair and balanced solution, the proposal signals a complex scenario that could result in severe social and economic harm.
Ezz El-Din tells Zawia3 that today, about 1.5 million families reside in units governed by the old rent law, while another 1.5 million property owners suffer from the inability to fully benefit from their assets. This is not the fault of individuals, he explains, but the result of a legislative legacy imposed by the state for decades—one whose consequences remain unresolved due to a lack of serious intervention.
As a researcher in housing rights, Ezz El-Din argues that a just solution must uphold the rights of both parties: tenants have the right to stable housing at costs proportionate to their income, and owners have the right to benefit fairly from their properties. It is the state, which originally created the legal framework, that must now assume responsibility for correcting this historical imbalance—without shifting the burden onto citizens.
He adds that the government’s proposal offers tenants a five-year grace period, after which landlords can go to court to evict them. In exchange, families would be offered units by the New Urban Communities Authority, either through ownership or rental. However, those units are typically expensive and geographically distant from residents’ current neighborhoods, and there is no realistic plan to ensure alternative housing or social justice. As the transitional period expires, thousands of families face the risk of displacement, amid the absence of clear mechanisms to protect housing rights or offer adequate alternatives—a situation that portends a looming housing and social crisis for which the state has yet to present any concrete solutions.
Ezz El-Din points out that most properties under the old rent system are located in neighborhoods such as Shubra, El-Waily, El-Duweiqa, and El-Sahel—all areas targeted by the “Cairo 2052 Development Plan.” Once the rental relationship ends, the legal barrier to expropriation disappears, opening the door for state intervention and the involvement of the New Urban Communities Authority. Landlords may suddenly find themselves asked to vacate their buildings or entangled in legal disputes over compensation, he explains.
The housing rights researcher further reveals that, behind the scenes, plans are already being made to acquire or control these properties and their strategic locations. Local and regional investors, along with major real estate companies, are waiting for the moment when the landlord-tenant relationship is legally dissolved. In this scenario, landlords are unlikely to fully reclaim their properties, and tenants will lose their homes. These buildings, he warns, will become lucrative investment assets handed over to those who have been watching from afar.
What is unfolding, according to Ezz El-Din, is not merely a legal amendment but a project to restructure property ownership in Egypt at the expense of the most vulnerable. In five years, we may see tenants on the streets and landlords in court, while major companies announce luxury real estate projects on the ruins of working-class neighborhoods like Shubra or El-Waily—in a scene where the poor are excluded in the name of “urban development,” and land is sold not to those who lived on it, inherited it, or built it, but to those with influence and power.
Unjust to Both Sides?
Lawyer Yasser Saad warns that the proposed amendments to Egypt’s Old Rent Law contain clear constitutional violations and risk triggering new disputes without offering a real solution to the long-standing crisis between landlords and tenants.
Speaking to Zawia3, Saad explains that the amendments violate two core constitutional principles upheld by Egypt’s Supreme Constitutional Court. The first is the principle that “contracts are the law of the contracting parties,” which prohibits interference by third parties in civil contractual relationships—except in cases of extreme necessity such as war or national emergencies. “Terminating a civil contract by legislative decree, absent urgent necessity, constitutes a blatant infringement of fundamental civil rights,” he said.
The second violated principle is that of “acquired rights,” which the constitution guarantees and protects from retroactive interference. Saad argues that abruptly ending tenancy agreements or imposing new conditions without mutual consent breaches this principle. He notes that the Constitutional Court previously ruled in two landmark decisions: the first limiting lease inheritance to only one generation, and the second requiring that rent value align with market conditions and economic realities—yet without granting the state absolute authority to amend or terminate contracts unilaterally.
Saad emphasizes that the state’s role should be limited to supervision and general regulation, such as through rent assessment committees outlined in Law No. 54, which have gradually lost influence. “The state is not a party to the contract, but rather a guarantor of balance in accordance with the law and constitution,” he added.
He argues that the proposed amendments will exacerbate the crisis rather than solve it, threatening the housing stability of thousands without ensuring landlords receive fair compensation or full restoration of their rights. He insists that the solution must be rooted in broad and inclusive social dialogue involving all stakeholders—tenants, landlords, and experts—to reorganize rental relationships fairly.
MP Freddy El-Bayadi, a member of the House of Representatives and Deputy Head of the Egyptian Social Democratic Party, also criticized the current draft of the Old Rent Law. He warned of its repercussions on the most vulnerable segments of society, stating that the draft is “unjust to both landlords and tenants.” El-Bayadi firmly rejected the idea of sudden rent increases, noting that jumping from 5 or 10 pounds to 1,000 pounds per month is an unbearable burden for low-income individuals.
Speaking to Zawia3, El-Bayadi called for a fair transitional period for implementing any rent hikes, one that considers the economic and social conditions of tenants, rather than relying on “unrealistic” eviction policies. He also opposed the article that mandates vacating a property within five years.
El-Bayadi proposed an alternative solution based on direct financial support from the state for tenants in need, particularly pensioners and recipients of social protection programs like Takaful and Karama. He argued that this approach is more practical than relocating people to newly built units that are often far from their workplaces or children’s schools. “Solutions should not come at the expense of tenants,” he added.
He concluded that setting a unified minimum rent of 1,000 pounds reflects a lack of fairness, as it fails to distinguish between an apartment overlooking the Nile and a one-bedroom unit in a remote area. “What the country needs is not just legal reform, but a flexible and fair vision that balances the rights of landlords with the dignity of tenants, as part of a comprehensive housing policy grounded in economic and social realities.”
In his policy paper published by Diwan Al-Omran titled “Toward a Just Solution for Egypt’s Old Rent Crisis,” urban researcher Ibrahim Ezz El-Din proposes a comprehensive reform package centered on social justice and the right to housing.
Ezz El-Din argues that the old rent crisis cannot be addressed without confronting deeper flaws in Egypt’s broader housing policies. Speaking to Zawia3, he stresses that the first necessary step is “regulating the real estate market” through fair tax mechanisms to curb speculation and redirect capital toward social housing instead of high-profit ventures. He calls on the state to resume direct construction of housing for low- and middle-income families, warning that a sole focus on high-return investment projects will only deepen the crisis.
His proposals don’t stop there. Ezz El-Din advocates requiring the private sector to allocate clear quotas within their projects for affordable housing, under a partnership framework that ensures more equitable distribution of urban resources. In terms of social protection, he proposes expanding direct support programs for vulnerable families, including through soft loans and rent-to-own mechanisms that guarantee sustainable, dignified housing.
He emphasizes the need to review existing urban legislation to ensure it aligns with principles of social justice. He also calls for a clear legal definition of “forced eviction” consistent with international standards, and for the state to guarantee fair compensation and alternative housing for those affected—along with local community participation in policymaking to avoid top-down exclusion.
Regarding landlord-tenant contractual relations, Ezz El-Din proposes re-regulating them on more equitable grounds, beginning with gradual rent increases tied to inflation or tenant income. He calls for an end to automatic contract renewal, except in humanitarian cases such as allowing the spouse to remain temporarily. He also recommends ending the “open inheritance” of rental contracts and integrating vacant units into the formal housing market through clear mechanisms—ensuring that no eviction takes place without an alternative being provided.
Going further, Ezz El-Din suggests creating a Transitional Support Fund financed by the state budget and tax settlement revenues to ease the burden on both landlords and tenants during the reform period, while offering tax exemptions for affected landlords.
Meanwhile, the parliamentary joint committee continues its discussions on the two government-proposed draft laws to regulate old rent contracts. The committee—which includes the Housing, Local Administration, and Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committees—announced it will begin holding public hearings next week, meeting with landlords on Sunday and tenants on Monday.
This initiative comes in response to directives from Speaker of Parliament Hanafy El-Gebaly, who stressed the importance of real public dialogue to produce balanced legislation that protects the rights of all parties and avoids triggering a wave of social unrest.
