Egypt’s new asylum law seeks to establish a national system for recognizing and protecting refugees. But as the responsibility for asylum registration and status determination shifts from the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) to the Egyptian government for the first time in more than 70 years, uncertainty over procedures, documentation and legal safeguards is raising concerns about what the transition will mean for people needing protection.
The implications of the new legislation that began to be implemented over the summer extend beyond Cairo. The European Union has recently introduced its Pact on Migration and Asylum, a framework that provides for deeper cooperation on migration management with eventual host countries, including Egypt. Against this background, the implementation of the new law will test whether migration partnerships can strengthen refugee protection or leave vulnerable people facing greater legal uncertainty.
Ratified in 2024, Egypt’s Asylum Law No. 164 has been implemented in phases since August 2026. Its main purpose is to transfer the responsibility for registering asylum seekers, as well as determining refugee status, from UNHCR to the Egyptian government, specifically its Permanent Committee for Refugee Affairs (PCRA).
The legislation introduces several provisions that could improve the standing of refugees in Egypt. These include access to formal employment, a pathway to citizenship, and government-issued documents allowing refugees to travel abroad and return without losing their status. However, these provisions are subject to legal and administrative conditions and their practical benefits are therefore not guaranteed for every refugee.
A law promising greater rights is only as strong as the system responsible for delivering them.
The reform also raises questions about how responsibility will be divided between the Egyptian authorities and the UNHCR both during and after the transition. The law provides for continued cooperation with the UN agency, which will carry on providing technical support for asylum processes after handing over direct management to PCRA although the practical arrangements remain unclear.
Egypt has been a long-term strategic partner of the European Union, having entered a renewed partnership in 2024 backed by a €7.4 billion financial package for 2024-2027, which includes €200 million for migration management. In 2025, the package was increased by €75 million.
In addition to economic support and security cooperation, migration control is an important part of this relationship. The EU’s financial support comes amid growing concerns over irregular migration across the Mediterranean. The region has become a bigger focal point since the outbreak of the Sudan war, which has brought about 1.5 million Sudanese refugees to Egypt. Moreover, Egyptians themselves are becoming a leading African country for migration to Europe.
Europe wants Egypt to help to control migration. But what happens when migration control and refugee protection pull in opposite directions?
Aside from its political backdrop, the asylum law also opens up wider financial prospects. Kelsey Norman of the Baker Institute of Public Policy argues that the possibility of increased EU funding may provide a major incentive for Egypt to demonstrate progress on human rights. Such financing is likely to be granted more often, and quicker, if the new legislation makes human rights a positive focal point. A credible asylum system could help to ease European concerns about cooperation with Cairo, strengthen arguments for treating Egypt as a safe third country, as well as helping to implement the EU’s “return hubs” policy, a major part of the bloc’s new Pact on Migration and Asylum.
Although the law introduces provisions that could improve refugees’ access to employment, travel and citizenship, it has raised concerns about the legal safeguards that govern asylum decisions.
Civil society organizations have criticized the limited consultation regarding the law’s development. Questions also remain about the role UNHCR, which has managed the process since 1954, will play once the Egyptian authorities assume full responsibility for registration and refugee status determination.
NGOs as well as the UNHCR argue that the law falls short of international refugee protection standards in several areas.
The broader the grounds for refusing asylum, the greater the risk that people fleeing persecution will be denied protection.
Access to essential services. Education, housing and social security are not explicitly named as fundamental rights for all refugees. The law also imposes severe penalties for civil organizations if they provide such services without approval from the authorities.
Broad grounds for exclusion. The legislation establishes a wide range of exclusion clauses, defining who might not be eligible for asylum, which, critics argue, go beyond those set out in international refugee law. This leaves room for the government to refuse asylum status to people usually protected under UNHCR, such as:
The ambiguity of these provisions could lead to the arbitrary detention and deportation of asylum seekers. The legislation’s treatment of non-refoulement, the principle prohibiting the return of refugees to places where they face threats or persecution, is another major concern.
Despite the improvements introduced by the executive regulations of the legislation published in June 2026 regarding the right to judicial appeal, the right to have representation in one’s own language, as well as protections for minors and vulnerable groups, the major issues outlined above have not been addressed.
The executive regulations issued in June established a nine-month period for the government to complete the transition from the UNHCR. Yet, according to Halem Henish, Legal Associate at the Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy (TIMEP), the transition has made little practical progress.
“On paper, the transition has begun, but in practice it has not. The Committee’s [PCRA] members, headquarters and working procedures were never announced,” Henish told DevelopmentAid.
“Nearly two months after the law’s executive regulations entered into force, the Committee has not started its work, and its membership has not been made public. Meanwhile, the UNHCR continues to operate as before: it is still receiving new registration requests and scheduling residence appointments for refugees and asylum seekers,” he added.
The transition has begun on paper. On the ground, refugees are left waiting for a system that is not ready yet.
The lack of clarity on what the move will mean for refugees is a significant drawback. Henish explained that alongside the violations reported in recent years, including mass arbitrary arrests, detention, refoulement, torture and enforced disappearances, and the exclusion of political and social actors, “refugees are increasingly living in a state of legal uncertainty”.
He added, “they face serious difficulties renewing their residence permits and securing appointments with UNHCR, and much of this uncertainty stems from the transitional period. Added to this uncertainty is the long-standing problem that authorities do not recognize UNHCR cards on their own; only a valid residence permit is accepted as proof of lawful status.”
The transition therefore risks compounding existing administrative problems. Ingie Gohar, a Research Analyst at the Arab Center, argues that “the existing system, even with UNHCR support, is already unable to keep pace, leaving thousands without secure status and exposing them to arrest and deportation”.
In 2025, Refugees International reported that only around 600,000 of the 1.2 million Sudanese refugees in Egypt had registered with UNHCR, leaving many people unidentified.
Uncertainty also affects those whose refugee status has already been recognized by UNHCR. The Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights (EIPR) argues that this could place some particularly vulnerable groups at risk. “This lack of clarity is of particular concern for those already recognized by UNHCR on the grounds of religion or belief, sexuality, human rights defense, and non-violent political activism. Reopening the asylum files of these special protection cases creates a risk of denial or revocation of already determined refugee status.”
Even refugees recognized by UNHCR may have reasons to fear that the protection they secured will no longer be enough.
Unclear official communication is itself a problem for those relying on governmental systems to secure their future. “For this reason, in the transitional phase between the old system and the new law, what happens must be monitored closely”, Henish commented.
As experts warn that a nine-month period is too short, fears are growing that the government will rush the transition, and the migrants and the organizations assisting them will be put under even more pressure. Therefore, for humanitarian organizations working in Egypt, the priority is to understand how the new system will affect refugees’ documentation, access to services and ability to challenge asylum decisions.
Advocacy is another potential avenue. Humanitarian organizations could press the Egyptian authorities to publish the committee’s procedures, clarify the treatment of existing UNHCR-recognized refugees and ensure that asylum decisions are subject to effective safeguards. They could also raise concerns with European institutions over the relationship between migration cooperation, financial assistance and refugee protection. Claudio Francavilla, Associate Director of EU Advocacy at Human Rights Watch, argues that the EU’s “cash-for-migration-control approach exposed the EU to complicity in abuses”.
Humanitarian organizations face a difficult choice: push for stronger safeguards now or risk confronting the consequences after the damage is done.
Isabel Rosenbaum, Coordinator for the Middle East and North Africa Programme at Chatham House, has called on the EU to “increase transparency … and condition further funding on Egypt taking steps to address the drivers of the current socio-economic crisis”. By leveraging its power, and by adhering to its own human rights standards, the EU could possibly convince Egypt to “revise the 2024 Asylum Law and strengthen protections for migrants and asylum seekers,” she added.
The Egyptian government, meanwhile, has asked for more assistance, urging the EU to “fulfill their responsibilities in supporting Egypt to bear the burden of hosting millions of refugees and migrants on its territory”.
Egypt’s demand for support and European concerns about migration management are not inherently incompatible with refugee protection. The vital question is whether the financial and political relationship will create incentives for a functioning asylum system with enforceable safeguards, or primarily rewards the containment of migration.