Egyptian courts have repeatedly handed down reduced sentences to men accused of killing women, particularly in domestic violence cases. This pattern has sparked widespread debate over the legal provisions being invoked—especially when compared to the harsher sentences imposed on women accused of killing their husbands.
The most recent example came on Tuesday, April 15, when the Port Said Criminal Court acquitted a man charged with killing his mother. The court also sentenced his grandmother to one year in prison but suspended the sentence.
The court based its verdict on the totality of the investigations and witness testimonies, including that of the victim’s sister. She stated that both defendants assaulted her sister—one using a wooden stick and a rubber hose, and the other striking the victim in the face. The victim sustained severe injuries and was taken to Al-Salam Hospital in Port Said, where she later died.
Zawia3 has documented reduced sentences in six femicide cases across different judicial districts between January 2024 and February 2025. By contrast, in the same period, the platform recorded three cases in which courts upheld death sentences for women convicted of killing their husbands.
Don’t miss: No Virginity, No Rape? When Egyptian Courts Deny Justice Without Hymen Rupture
Reduced Sentences for Domestic Femicide
The most recent ruling follows a February 10 decision by the Nagaa Hammadi Criminal Court, which sentenced a man to just one year in prison—suspended—after he was found guilty of killing his wife by striking her with a fire extinguisher in Qena, a governorate in Upper Egypt. The defendant’s lawyer argued that the act was not premeditated and occurred in a moment of anger, resulting in the fire extinguisher fatally striking the victim’s head. The defense pleaded for leniency, citing the man’s role in raising their children following the mother’s death.
The case dates back to October 2023, when the defendant was charged with fatally hitting his wife during a domestic dispute.
Between early 2024 and the beginning of 2025, Egyptian courts have issued a series of rulings reducing sentences for men convicted of killing their wives in domestic violence cases across multiple governorates.
In January 2025, the First Circuit of the Criminal Appeals Court in Banha accepted the appeal of a car attendant who was convicted of killing his wife by beating her and smashing her head against the wall. The court reduced his sentence to five years of hard labor and ordered him to pay legal fees.
In December 2024, the Gharbia Criminal Appeals Court lessened the sentence of a man who had stabbed his pregnant wife 44 times in the village of Al-Rahebeen, Samannoud. The charge was reduced from “premeditated murder” to “assault leading to death,” and he was sentenced to five years of hard labor.
In September, the Minya Criminal Court of Appeals, presided over by Judge Abdelrahman Mohamed Abdelhafiz, overturned a death sentence for a man who killed his wife and young daughter by bludgeoning them with an axe. The sentence was reduced to life imprisonment.
In August 2024, the Court of Cassation accepted an appeal in a case from Qanater Al-Khayriya in Qalyubia, where a man was sentenced to death for intentionally killing his wife (in an unregistered marriage) by restraining and strangling her. After reviewing the case, the court reduced the sentence to life imprisonment.
In January 2024, the Minya Criminal Court handed a three-year prison sentence to a man convicted of killing his wife and ordered him to pay legal costs, with the civil claim referred to a relevant court.
Aya Mounir, founder of the women’s rights initiative Superwoman, told Zawia3 that Egyptian courts tend to reduce sentences in femicide cases under the justification of “temporary emotional outbursts” or “moments of rage.” She argues that this rationale fails to reflect the perpetrator’s fitness to parent or the potential danger he poses to society.
She continued: “We see similar patterns in the case of Aya Adel, an Egyptian woman who died recently in Jordan under circumstances linked to domestic abuse. Although her husband is accused of abusing her, the case is still being investigated as a misdemeanor rather than as intentional homicide. Our initiative has filed a legal petition demanding that the case be reclassified as a murder investigation.”
Mounir pointed out that Jordanian authorities, at a later stage, decided to place Adel’s children in the custody of her husband’s family, despite prior accusations of abuse. The request by her own family for custody was denied.
Aya Adel, an Egyptian citizen residing in Jordan with her husband and children, died after falling from the balcony of her seventh-floor apartment in the Al-Rusaifa district, northeast of Amman. Her death triggered public outcry due to conflicting accounts from her husband and her family. Her relatives insist that her death was the result of years of domestic abuse, while her husband denies the allegations.
Don’t miss: Doubling Tragedies: Women in Egypt Bearing the Weight of Poverty and Rising Murders
Bias and Discrimination Against Women
Aya Mounir, founder of the Superwoman initiative, argues that femicide cases in both Egypt and the wider Arab world often do not result in strict or deterrent penalties. She warns that men convicted of killing their wives may receive reduced sentences and later resume normal lives, even after being found guilty of murder.
In her comments to Zawia3, Mounir explains that such judicial leniency enables a culture of violence against women, particularly within marital relationships. She points out that some women live in fear of repeated threats from their husbands, such as: “I’ll kill you and won’t spend a day in jail.” These threats are not empty—they are often grounded in a legal reality where courts have previously reduced sentences in similar cases under claims of “honor crimes” or “temporary rage,” reinforcing the belief among some men that their violence can be legally justified.
Mounir also highlights the negative role played by media coverage. She notes that certain news reports offer justifications for femicide in headlines or story framing—citing “family disputes” or “honor-related motives”—thus normalizing violence against women rather than identifying it as a criminal violation of the right to life.
In a similar vein, Entessar El-Saeed, a lawyer at the Court of Cassation and Chair of the Board of Trustees of the Cairo Foundation for Development and Law, emphasizes that life imprisonment may, in some cases, serve as a more effective deterrent than capital punishment. However, she warns that reduced sentences for men who kill their wives on the grounds of “jealousy” or “defending honor” are manifestations of gender-based discrimination.
El-Saeed adds that the legal system often fails to take into account the broader context of the crime—particularly patterns of emotional or physical abuse suffered by the wife. Rather than being recognized as a victim, the woman is sidelined while the husband’s motivations are prioritized. She cautions that reducing sentences for “psychological” or “social” reasons only further marginalizes women’s suffering and reinforces a judicial outlook that minimizes the value of their lives.
She notes that some courts perceive the killing of women as an act that can be justified under certain circumstances, which erodes the efficacy of legal protections. “In many cases, the crime is the result of accumulated abuse, but the perpetrator is seen as a victim of his own circumstances and given leniency, while the victim’s pain and trauma are ignored,” she says.
Amr Mohamed, a lawyer and founder of the Haqi (My Right) initiative, believes that legal provisions are sometimes applied selectively, resulting in clear bias in the justice system. Speaking to Zawia3, he notes that certain laws are used to reduce sentences for male defendants, but are not applied similarly when the defendant is a woman.
He cites, for instance, Article 7 of the Penal Code, which permits “disciplinary action” within families. This article may be used to justify a father’s violent actions toward his children, but a mother accused of killing her child—allegedly in the name of discipline—does not receive equal consideration under the law. Mohamed describes this legal inconsistency as a structural flaw in achieving equality before the law and as evidence of systemic bias in evaluating the context of crimes.
In some domestic violence cases, especially those involving femicide, judges in Egypt have invoked Article 60 of the Penal Code, which falls under Chapter IX titled “Justification and Grounds for Exemption from Penalty.” This article, depending on its interpretation, can be used to justify violence under the guise of a “right to discipline,” thereby allowing more lenient sentences for crimes committed within the family. This practice has been flagged by women’s rights organizations and defense attorneys as a loophole frequently exploited in court.
A rights lawyer following the issue reported a recent case in which a wife was fatally beaten over three consecutive days with a leather belt. Despite the severity of the abuse, the husband received a reduced sentence—a decision the lawyer sees as a direct consequence of legal discrimination, especially when the perpetrator is male and the victim is female.
This pattern of lenient rulings reveals a clear gap between the principles enshrined in Egypt’s Constitution and their implementation in practice. Article 53 of the Egyptian Constitution states: “Citizens are equal before the law and are equal in rights, freedoms, and public duties, without discrimination based on religion, gender, origin…” It also defines discrimination and incitement to hatred as crimes punishable by the state and commits to eliminating all forms of discrimination.
Similarly, Article 11 mandates the state to “protect women against all forms of violence, ensure a balance between family duties and work requirements, and provide protection for women in need.”
These constitutional commitments align with Article 1 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), which defines gender discrimination as “any distinction, exclusion, or restriction made on the basis of sex which has the effect or purpose of impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by women… of human rights and fundamental freedoms.”
Paragraph (f) of Article 2 of the same convention obliges states to “take all appropriate measures, including legislation, to modify or abolish existing laws, regulations, customs, and practices which constitute discrimination against women.”
Despite the clarity of these national and international obligations, judicial practices in Egypt continue to exhibit inconsistency in their application—particularly when legal interpretations grant male offenders mitigating circumstances while ignoring the social and psychological contexts endured by the female victims. This undermines public trust in the justice system and perpetuates the cycle of violence against women.
Calls for Legislative Reform
Lawyer Amr Mohamed is calling for urgent legislative amendments to the articles of the Egyptian Penal Code that grant judges broad discretion to reduce sentences and show leniency in certain cases—particularly those involving domestic violence against women. Mohamed explains that these legal provisions are often used in favor of husbands accused of killing or injuring their wives.
He points out that the law includes at least six articles frequently invoked to mitigate sentences for perpetrators of violent crimes. These include Article 7, which states: “The provisions of this law shall in no way prejudice personal rights established by Islamic Sharia,” thereby leaving the door wide open for religious interpretations.
Article 17 is among the most commonly cited in the mitigation of criminal penalties. It allows judges, if moved by the circumstances of a crime, to reduce a sentence from the death penalty to life imprisonment or rigorous imprisonment, or from life imprisonment to a lesser form of incarceration, and so forth. Similarly, Article 55 enables courts to suspend the execution of a sentence if the judge deems the offender deserving of leniency based on “their past record, age, or the circumstances of the crime,” creating a broad discretionary space that is often used to the benefit of male defendants.
Article 60 is another legal clause that serves as a justification for acts of violence committed within the family. It states that: “The provisions of this law shall not apply to any act committed in good faith in accordance with a right established under Sharia,” a formulation that can be used to categorize domestic violence as permissible disciplinary action.
Article 62 declares that: “A person is not criminally liable if they committed the crime while suffering from a psychological or mental disorder that impaired their perception or volition.” According to several lawyers, this article is sometimes used to justify lighter sentences on the basis of alleged mental distress at the time of the offense.
Meanwhile, Article 236 stipulates: “Anyone who intentionally wounds or strikes another without the intent to kill, and this act leads to death, shall be punished with imprisonment for three to seven years.” This article is frequently used to reclassify cases from “premeditated murder” to “assault leading to death,” as seen in several rulings where life sentences were reduced to five years.
Lawyer Entessar El-Saeed, Chairperson of the Board of Trustees at the Cairo Foundation for Development and Law, believes these articles need comprehensive revision to restore justice in cases of domestic violence. She stresses that leniency should not be used as a pretext to reduce sentences for the murder of wives. Instead, she advocates for the enactment of a unified law criminalizing violence against women and girls—one that acknowledges victims’ human rights and provides adequate legal protection.
El-Saeed adds that many judges still lack awareness of the psychological and physical impact of violence on women, and this absence of understanding contributes to the rationalization of crimes and reduction of penalties. She emphasizes that true criminal justice demands laws that protect victims and prevent discrimination, rather than facilitating impunity.
She also recalls that calls for a unified law to combat violence against women have existed since 2018, when MP Nadia Henry first submitted a draft bill. It was reintroduced in March 2022 by the Women’s Task Force in cooperation with MP Nashwa El-Deeb and supported by 60 parliamentarians. The proposed law includes 53 articles covering various forms of violence, including domestic abuse. However, two years later, the draft remains shelved and has yet to be placed on the parliamentary agenda.
