Egypt

Information uploaded as at July 2026

AT A GLANCE

Egypt’s use of AI in criminal justice remains at an early, largely exploratory stage, with law enforcement furthest ahead in deployment, all against a governance backdrop of non-binding soft-law instruments rather than dedicated legislation. Law enforcement uses AI for surveillance and data analysis, including a 24/7 Security Operations Centre that processes camera and behavioural data, supports facial recognition and anomaly detection, and monitors cybercrime. Smart-city infrastructure such as the Honeywell-built New Administrative Capital command centre incorporates AI-enabled video analytics, and a first digital forensics laboratory is under development. Human rights groups have raised concerns about the impact of such surveillance on freedom of expression. Prosecutors have announced plans for a “smart prosecution” system to analyse case data and prioritise resources, but this remains aspirational. Courts have no nationally deployed AI tool, but rely on increasingly digitalised case-management platforms (such as the Economic Courts’ Digital Justice Platform) and an AI-powered speech-to-text transcription system reporting over 96% accuracy. Defence lawyers have access to a growing range of general and Egypt-specific legal AI tools (including LegalMind, Laiwyer, Arabic.AI and HAQQ), while a KARNAK-powered legal assistant and the Shawwir chatbot help citizens and small businesses with legal queries. There is no mandatory AI training for legal professionals, though ad-hoc initiatives are underway, including Bar Association workshops and a UNESCO-led programme for prosecutors

Egypt has no dedicated AI statute, although a draft AI Act inspired by the EU AI Act is in development. In the meantime, the country relies on a cluster of non-binding instruments—the Egyptian Charter for Responsible AI (2023), the Guide to Egypt's National AI Governance Framework (2026), and the National Guidelines for Generative Artificial Intelligence (2026)—all issued under the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology and its affiliated bodies, none of which are legally enforceable. There are no specific guidelines for legal practitioners on AI use, nor dedicated Criminal Procedure Rules addressing AI, though general criminal procedure, data protection (Personal Data Protection Law 2020), cybersecurity (Anti-Cyber and Information Technology Crimes Law 2018), and constitutional rights provisions may be construed to apply to AI use in criminal proceedings. As at July 2026, no reported case law addresses the use of AI in Egyptian legal proceedings.

USE

​​Law enforcement

Egyptian law enforcement authorities have adopted a range of AI-powered and algorithmic systems to support surveillance, data analysis, and criminal investigations, spanning national security operations, smart-city infrastructure, and digital forensics.

Data review and analysis

In early 2025, the Egyptian Ministry of Interior announced the launch of a new AI-supported Security Operations Centre, running 24/7. As at July 2026, the operation systems have been integrated into the broader public security apparatus to:

1. Process very large volumes of data in a short time, including data drawn from cameras installed in public spaces.
2. Rapidly review surveillance footage, analyse behavioural patterns, connect information across different cases, and monitor suspicious movements in both physical and virtual spaces, with the aim of anticipating security incidents before they occur.
3. Support high-precision facial recognition, image analysis, anomaly detection, and real-time alerts when specific incidents occur or unusual activities are detected.
4. Monitor cybercrime, hacking attempts, online theft, and dark-web-related criminal activity using AI-assisted analytical tools.

These technologies have reportedly helped investigators identify links between otherwise separate cases and have been used to support investigations into crimes including murder, theft, harassment, cyber theft, blackmail, and online fraud.

As part of Egypt’s smart cities strategy, the authorities have already equipped the New Administrative Capital, the flagship smart-city project located approximately 45 kilometres east of Cairo, with a modern surveillance system known as the Honeywell Integrated Command and Control Centre, supplied by US firm Honeywell.

Moreover, in February 2019, the Administrative Capital for Urban Development signed an agreement with the US firm Honeywell (in collaboration with Honeywell’s local partner MTI) to integrate the new capital’s security systems into a single control point. The system connects video feeds from more than 6,000 Internet Protocol cameras and runs video analytics capable of monitoring crowds and traffic congestion, detecting theft, identifying suspicious individuals or objects, and triggering automated alarms in emergency situations. It also supports coordination among security response units, city police, and medical dispatch services. The system incorporates AI and other advanced technologies among its core features, including for traffic management.

Some human rights groups have criticised Egypt's use of surveillance as a means to tighten control over the population and jeopardise freedom of expression.

In September 2025, the Ministry of Justice announced that work was underway to establish Egypt’s first digital forensics laboratory. The laboratory is intended to examine digital evidence from computers and mobile phones using the latest global techniques. No details have been published about the specific AI-based tools the laboratory will use, or the timeline for its completion.

Prosecutors

Evidence review and analysis

The Prosecutor General and other members of the prosecution service have made a number of public statements indicating that the institution has entered into cooperation protocols and drawn up plans to introduce AI solutions with the support of other government bodies, including the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology. According to those statements, AI is expected to be used in the near future to support a ‘smart prosecution’ service, capable of analysing millions of cases and decisions, and of making prosecutorial decision-making more efficient, accurate, transparent, and better informed. There are also plans to use AI to analyse crime rates and workloads across different prosecution offices, with a view to concentrating institutional efforts on urgent matters and distributing work more effectively.

Courts

As at July 2026, there is no specific AI tool used nationally across Egyptian courts. The court’s case management system has become increasingly digitalised and certain aspects of the court process, such as transcription, have been automated.

Case management

Some courts in Egypt already operate digital case-management systems. These systems do not yet include AI capabilities, but AI features may be added in the near future. The Economic Courts, for example, use a Digital Justice Platform developed by Link Development, in collaboration with the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology, and Microsoft Egypt. The platform was launched during Cairo International Information and Communication Technology Exhibition 2020, and later milestones included the roll-out of additional e-services and digital tools. It automates end-to-end judicial processes, including case filing, assignment, scheduling, and tracking.

In October 2025, the Ministries of Planning and Justice, together with the Armed Forces Signal Department, signed a protocol to develop additional Digital Justice Platforms incorporating AI features. According to the announcement, these new platforms are intended to further streamline case management, support litigation procedures, and facilitate access to legal services.

Engineers at the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology’s Applied Innovation Centre have also developed an AI-powered speech-to-text transcription system for use in the Egyptian courts. The tool automatically converts oral proceedings, including pleadings, judicial rulings, and defendants’ statements, into written transcripts, thereby replacing the manual drafting of court minutes while preserving an exact record. It reportedly achieves an accuracy rate of over 96 per cent and operates without an Internet connection as a security measure.

Defence

Legal research, analysis, and drafting support

As at July 2026, there are no specific tools for defence counsel in Egypt, but generally available legal AI tools may be used. For example:

In addition to these specialised tools, Egyptian lawyers are increasingly making use of general-purpose AI platforms such as ChatGPT, Claude, and Copilot for drafting, translation, and research tasks. International legal technology platforms with Arabic-language capabilities, such as Thomson Reuters Westlaw MENA and LexisNexis, are also available to Egyptian practitioners.

Victims

Legal research, analysis and drafting support

The Ministry of Communications and Information Technology announced in February 2026 that a new AI legal and regulatory assistant, powered by KARNAK, the Egyptian Government’s own Arabic ‘sovereign’ large language model. The Ministry’s legal assistant has been developed to help citizens and small businesses navigate Egypt's regulatory landscape.

Moreover, Shawwir is an AI chatbot through which users can ask basic legal questions on family law, commercial law, labour law, and real estate, and receive an AI-generated response in less than 30 seconds, free of charge. Where the issue is more complex, the platform allows users to book an online consultation with a lawyer certified by the Egyptian Bar Association for a fixed fee.

TRAINING

As at July 2026, there are no uniform or mandatory training programmes on AI for legal professionals in Egypt.

Egypt’s Ministry of Communications and Information Technology (MCIT) and the Egyptian Public Prosecution jointly launched specialised training programs for over 2,000 Public Prosecution members, delivered by the National Training Academy (NTA), the Egyptian Anti-Corruption Academy, ITIDA, and Microsoft. The curriculum covered safe and responsible AI use, generative AI, project management, Microsoft 365 Copilot tools, and the application of emerging AI models in government. The initiative aimed to strengthen institutional digital capabilities, build skills in digital technologies and data protection, and promote responsible AI governance aligned with international standards across government operations.

Additionally, several notable ad-hoc initiatives have taken place, including:

• Egyptian Bar Association Workshops: In September 2025, the Egyptian Bar Association announced a series of workshops on generative AI for lawyers, organised with the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology and the Information Technology Industry Development Authority. The workshop was scheduled to run during October 2025, targeted to 2,500 lawyers, and to cover generative AI concepts, prompt engineering, legal case studies, and ethical issues. In January 2026, the Bar reported that these workshops were continuing.
• Second International Conference on Judicial Training: In September 2025, at the Second International Conference on Judicial Training in Riyadh, Mohamed Samir Marai, an Egyptian judge and member of the Technical Office of the National Centre for Judicial Studies at the Ministry of Justice, presented an electronic platform designed to train legal professionals by simulating lawyers’ performance during litigation. Judge Marai explained that the aim was to strengthen the competencies of judges and public prosecutors through customised learning based on a skills matrix, supported by digital simulations of procedures and digital evidence. The platform is also reported to include pre- and post-assessment systems. However, as at July 2026, its deployment status in Egypt is not clear.
• UNESCO: In March 2026, UNESCO, the Egyptian Public Prosecutor’s Office, and Cyber Ethos, with support from the European Union, co-organised a two-day training event that UNESCO described as Egypt’s first national initiative dedicated to exploring the role of AI in justice. The event brought together judges, prosecutors, and legal experts and focused on aligning AI innovation with human rights and the rule of law. Participants engaged with the UNESCO Guidelines for the Use of AI Systems in Courts and Tribunals (2025) and discussed practical approaches to ensuring that AI deployment respects due process and equality before the law. Topics covered included digital literacy, legal-technical expertise, the evaluation of AI-generated evidence, algorithmic bias, data privacy, and explainability. The event concluded with a shared commitment by the Public Prosecutor’s Office to integrate AI training into national training programmes for prosecutors.
• Police Force Migration Management: The Egyptian Ministry of Interior alongside the International Organization for Migration conducted a five-day training at the Egyptian Police Academy to strengthen the capacities of 15 police officers on the responsible and rights-based use of AI and advanced technologies in countering transnational crime. The programme aimed to strengthen participants’ knowledge of digital evidence, data protection principles, risk analysis, and relevant legal frameworks, contributing to safer, more orderly, and rights-based migration management in Egypt. This training was made possible under the ‘Integrated Migration Management: Fostering Migration Governance, Safeguarding Communities, and Ensuring Regular Pathways’ project.
• AI Leadership Programme for Public Sector: The MCIT and the National Training Academy have launched the Artificial Intelligence for Government Organisation Leaders National Initiative, a programme designed to equip senior public-sector leaders with practical AI skills and digital leadership knowledge in support of the National AI Strategy 2025–2030. The curriculum spans strategic leadership in the AI era, generative AI, agentic AI, digital twins, cybersecurity, data governance, and AI legal and ethical frameworks, combining foundational and frontier topics through hands-on training, pre- and post-assessments, and graduation projects to ensure applied rather than purely theoretical outcomes. Building on their earlier Digital Egypt Leaders National Initiative, the programme targets three institutional outcomes: boosting government efficiency, broadening AI competencies across public institutions, and fostering innovative business models aligned with international digital standards.

Judicial Training: Egypt’s National Telecommunications Institute (NTI) and the State Lawsuits Authority have signed a cooperation agreement covering digital transformation, AI, cybersecurity, and digital capacity building for the judiciary. The agreement provides specialized training for counsellors and members of judicial bodies, with technical and advisory support from NTI, and expands the AI Ambassadors programme—launched in 2025—into a second cohort with more advanced levels of AI training designed to develop a deeper understanding of AI capabilities and limitations for responsible use in judicial operations. Communications Minister Raafat Hendy framed the agreement as part of broader government efforts to support state institutions in digital transformation, while State Lawsuits Authority President Counsellor Abdel Naser Abu El-Azm Eissa described it as a further step in investing in human-capital development and keeping pace with advances in technology and AI, with joint training programmes planned for the next phase.

REGULATION

Egypt has developed a series of national strategies, charters, and governance frameworks to shape the development and regulation of AI, issued primarily by the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology and its affiliated bodies, alongside a small number of binding statutes that apply more generally to data protection and cybersecurity. As at July 2026, there is no dedicated AI statute in force, although a comprehensive AI Act inspired by the EU AI Act is being drafted.

In the meantime, Egypt relies on a mixture of soft-law instruments—including the Egyptian Charter for Responsible AI, the Guide to Egypt's National AI Governance Framework, and the National Guidelines for Generative Artificial Intelligence—none of which are legally binding or enforceable. There are no specific guidelines for legal practitioners on the use of AI, nor any Criminal Procedure Rules or reported caselaw addressing AI use in criminal proceedings. However, existing general laws, such as the Personal Data Protection Law (2020) and the Anti-Cyber and Information Technology Crimes Law (2018), together with constitutional rights protections, may be construed to regulate the use of AI and AI-generated material in criminal and court proceedings.

AI Regulations

Egyptian Charter for Responsible AI (2023)

In 2023, the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology’s National Council for Artificial Intelligence, the highest authority for AI policy direction and governance in Egypt, launched the Egyptian Charter for Responsible AI (2023). The Charter represents Egypt’s first formal ethical framework for AI governance.

The Charter applies to all levels of individuals or groups that interact with AI, including government agencies, academic institutions, and private sector companies. Foreign companies seeking to deploy AI products in Egypt must also adhere to the Charter and ensure models are ‘trained using local data, relevant to the Egyptian market’ and ‘adhere to local customs and religious and social traditions and norms’ (Implementation Guideline 13, p. 6). The Charter serves as best practices guidelines and a soft law instrument. It is not legally binding and therefore is not enforceable.

The Charter establishes five core principles for the use of AI, around which the provisions are based: human-centeredness, accountability, fairness, security and safety, and transparency and explainability. Some key provisions include:

Furthermore, the Charter makes clear that all AI systems must comply with Egyptian law (including data protection and consumer protection laws) and must undergo domain-specific certification for safety and reliability, and be supported by public awareness and capacity-building programs accessible to both technical and non-technical audiences (Guideline 7, p. 3).

In addition, the Charter also provides Implementation Guidelines, which serve as technical considerations applicable to any entity developing, deploying or managing an AI system. Such Guidelines provide, for example, that AI systems should be robust, secure and safe throughout their entire lifecycle (Implementation Guideline 1, p. 1) and that the use of any data must be pre-authorised by the data owner except for data available in the public domain (Implementation Guideline 11, p. 6).

Guide to Egypt’s National AI Governance Framework (2026)

The Egyptian Centre for Responsible AI is an institutional body created under the National Council for Artificial Intelligence to oversee, regulate, and promote ethical AI development and deployment. On 15 March 2026 the Centre for Responsible AI published the Guide to Egypt’s National AI Governance Framework.

The Guide sets out comprehensive regulatory architecture for AI governance. The Framework adopts a ‘State as Orchestrator’ philosophy whereby the government serves as both an enabler of AI innovation and a guardian establishing regulatory safeguards for high-risk applications. The Guide is a ‘regulatory manual’: it is not legally binding and therefore it is not enforceable.

The Framework introduces a four-tier risk classification system (Guide, Section 4.2, pp. 21-22):

(1) Tier 1 (Prohibited): AI systems posing unacceptable risks to sovereignty or fundamental rights;

(2) Tier 2 (High Risk): Critical infrastructure and biometric systems requiring mandatory ‘Dual-Check’ compliance (Ethical Impact Assessment plus Technical Audit);

(3) Tier 3 (Limited Risk): Systems such as chatbots and deepfakes requiring transparency and labelling; and

(4) Tier 4 (Minimal Risk): Standard software tools subject to voluntary codes of conduct.

For high-risk AI systems, providers must complete two mandatory pre-deployment assessments:

(1) First, an AI Ethical Impact Assessment evaluating potential impacts on fundamental rights and societal values, and

(2) A Technical Conformity Assessment using the TEVV (Test, Evaluate, Verify, Validate) methodology (Guide, Section 5.2, pp. 23-24).

Post-deployment requirements include continuous monitoring, incident reporting, and feedback loops. The Framework mandates that ‘end-users are informed when they are interacting with an AI system rather than a human’ and ensures individuals’ right to challenge unfair AI-driven decisions (Guide, Section 3.3, Ethical Principle 5, pp. 19-20).

The Guide identifies key institutional bodies and their proposed functions in relation to AI, including:

National Guidelines for Generative Artificial Intelligence (2026)

In March 2026, the National Council for Artificial Intelligence and Egyptian Centre for Responsible AI, under the auspices of the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology issued the National Guidelines for Generative Artificial Intelligence. The Guidelines serve as best practices guidelines and a soft law instrument. They are not legally binding and therefore are not enforceable.

The Guidelines identify key challenges posed by generative AI, including hallucinations, inaccurate outputs, intellectual property concerns, data protection risks, excessive reliance on AI leading to the erosion of human skills, and unclear allocation of responsibilities between developers and users. Developed in alignment with frameworks from UNESCO, the OECD, the Council of Europe, and the G7 Hiroshima Process, the Guidelines are underpinned by core values of human rights, transparency, explainability, robustness, safety, accountability, and environmental sustainability, and draw on the UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence (2021), the OECD AI Principles (updated 2024), the Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights, Democracy, and the Rule of Law (2024), and the G7 Hiroshima Process International Guiding Principles for Organizations Developing Advanced AI Systems (2023), as well as national experiences from Saudi Arabia, Singapore, and China.

The Guidelines apply to developers, deployers, institutional users, individual users, and those operating in high-impact contexts such as education, media, elections, employment, and justice, with obligations scaled to the level of influence and risk.

The Guidelines rest on foundational assumptions set out in Section 2.3, including that: generative AI is a ‘rapidly evolving’ technology requiring ‘adaptive governance’ subject to periodic review rather than fixed regulation; that it poses ‘unique risks’ such as ‘deepfakes and misinformation’ demanding ‘dedicated safeguards proportionate to context’; that ‘human oversight remains essential’ since ‘AI systems cannot independently guarantee accuracy or ethical compliance’; and that ‘transparency—through disclosure, documentation, and traceability—is a prerequisite for trust and accountability’ (Section 2.3).

The Guidelines provide actionable guidance across several areas, including: obtaining fair and unbiased results; avoiding hallucinations by treating all AI outputs as ‘probabilistic suggestions, not confirmed facts’ and independently verifying critical information; protecting privacy by avoiding sharing personal or sensitive data with generative AI tools unless authorised and necessary; transparency and disclosure, requiring users to ‘clearly inform users and the public when content or outputs or recommendations are AI-generated or significantly AI-assisted’; and maintaining ethical use by using generative AI ‘only for lawful, legitimate and constructive purposes aligned with ethical values’ (Section 2.6). The Guidelines require human judgment in all high-impact decisions and disclosure of AI-generated content. They include dedicated provisions for agentic AI (Section 2.7), requiring clearly defined autonomy boundaries and human oversight over all agent actions; for deepfakes and lip-sync technologies (Section 2.8), permitting legitimate uses (such as film production, dubbing, accessibility, and education) only with ‘transparent disclosure and labelling, whether through visual notices or technical provenance mechanisms such as metadata or watermarks,’ and prohibiting use to ‘mislead the public into believing that a real person said or did something they did not’; and for education and research (Section 2.9), prohibiting misrepresentation of authorship — ‘AI tools may not be listed as authors or co-authors because authorship entails responsibilities that can only be attributed to humans’ — and mandating disclosure of AI use in published work (Section 2.10).

Designed as a living framework, the Guidelines are subject to periodic review as international standards and technology evolve (Sections 1.1 and 2.3).

Draft AI Act

As at July 2026, Egypt is currently in the process of drafting dedicated AI legislation, ‘inspired by the EU AI Act’. It has been reported that the Draft Law was developed through multi-stakeholder consultation involving the private sector, civil society, academia, and international organisations. Moreover, the drafters gathered input from the public during a formal government listening session attended by 70 companies.

The proposed law will include: (1) definitions of AI systems; (2) data protection measures said to be aligned with Egypt’s 2020 Personal Data Protection Law; (3) mandatory requirements for algorithmic fairness, transparency, and auditability; (4) incentives for innovation including AI incubators and research and development centres; and (5) the establishment of ethics committees and training programmes for public sector staff.

The draft law introduces a three-tier risk-based classification framework:

• Prohibited AI systems: banned outright due to unacceptable risks including harm to safety, rights, or public order;
• High-risk AI systems: requiring prior approval, detailed documentation, transparency, and ongoing regulatory oversight (examples include AI in healthcare, law enforcement, critical infrastructure, and education);
• Limited-risk AI systems: permitted with minimal safeguards such as user transparency, labelling of AI-generated content, and optional user consent.

Guidelines for practitioners

As at July 2026, there are no specific guidelines for legal practitioners in Egypt on the responsible use of AI in practice.

While Egypt has not formally adopted the UNESCO Guidelines for the Use of AI Systems in Courts and Tribunals (2025), the Egyptian Public Prosecutor’s Office engaged with them at a March 2026 training event co-organised with UNESCO and Cyber Ethos, which UNESCO described as Egypt’s first national initiative dedicated to exploring the role of AI in justice.

Criminal procedure rules

As at July 2026, there are no specific Criminal Procedure Rules which regulate AI. While no specific Criminal Procedure Rules address AI, several provisions of Egypt’s Code of Criminal Procedure (Law No. 150 of 1950, as amended) may be construed to apply. These include: provisions governing the admissibility of evidence, under which courts have broad discretion to evaluate the probative value of evidence presented. For example, Article 302 provides that judges shall base their conviction on evidence presented in the proceedings and assessed according to their personal conviction; provisions on expert evidence (Articles 85–89), under which the court or investigating judge may appoint experts to examine technical matters, which could encompass the evaluation of AI-generated evidence or the methodology of AI systems.

Data protection legislation

Personal Data Protection Law (Law No. 151 of 2020)

The Personal Data Protection Law, enacted in 2020, governs privacy, consent, and data-handling obligations for processing personal information, including systems processing personal data (Arabic, and unofficial English Translation). The Personal Data Protection Law regulates the collection, processing, storage, and transfer of both personal and sensitive personal data in line with international standards.

The Personal Data Protection Law imposes specific obligations on personal data collection, including: requiring the data controller to obtain explicit consent from the data subject before collecting or processing personal data, unless otherwise permitted by law (Article 2); mandating that data collection be limited to the minimum necessary for the specified and legitimate purpose (Article 3(1)); requiring the data controller to inform the data subject of the purpose of data collection, the types of data being collected, and the entities to which data may be transferred (Article 4(9)); obligating data controllers to implement appropriate technical and organisational measures to protect personal data against unauthorised access, alteration, or destruction (Article 4(6)); requiring the appointment of a data protection officer (Article 8); and restricting the cross-border transfer of personal data to countries that provide an adequate level of protection, subject to authorisation from the Personal Data Protection Centre (Article 14).

In the specific context of AI, the Guide to Egypt’s National AI Governance Framework reinforces the Personal Data Protection Law by ‘mandating a licence to control cross-border transfer of critical government and sensitive citizen data, ensuring it is stored and processed subject to Egyptian jurisdiction.’ This is likely to have implications for AI tools processing personal data in criminal proceedings, such as facial recognition systems or biometric identification tools.

The National AI Strategy indicates that a Personal Data Protection Authority (PDPA) is being established to oversee and enforce data protection regulations, and that it will be responsible for monitoring compliance, investigating data breaches, and imposing penalties for non-compliance.

Cybersecurity laws

Anti-Cyber and Information Technology Crimes Law (Law No. 175 of 2018)

The Anti-Cyber and Information Technology Crimes Law provides the legal framework for combating cyber threats and penalises different forms of pre-defined cybercrimes in Egypt (in Arabic and an unofficial translation in English). Key provisions of the Anti-Cyber and Information Technology Crimes Law (Law No. 175 of 2018) that may apply to AI systems used in criminal proceedings include:

• Article 2, which requires internet service providers and IT companies to retain and store usage data for a period of 180 days, including data that may be relevant to AI-driven surveillance or monitoring tools;
• Articles 6 and 11, which address the admissibility and handling of digital evidence and empowers competent authorities to seize and examine electronic data and equipment. These provisions collectively establish a framework that may govern the deployment and oversight of AI-based tools in criminal investigations and proceedings.
• Articles 14-17, which criminalise the unlawful access to, interception of, or interference with information systems, data, or electronic communications, which may be relevant where AI tools collect or process data without proper authorisation;
• Article 25, which penalises violations of privacy, including the unauthorised use or disclosure of personal data obtained through information systems; and
• Article 26, which criminalises the misuse of personal data made available through electronic means for purposes other than those for which it was provided.

Guide to Egypt’s AI Governance Framework (2026)

Under the Guide to Egypt’s AI Governance Framework, the National Telecommunications Regulatory Authority (NTRA) is responsible for ‘verification and licensing of hardware and connected devices (IoT, Edge AI) that embed AI capabilities, ensuring they meet national safety and spectrum standards.’ The Egyptian Computer Emergency Response Team (EG-CERT) is responsible for ‘validat[ing] the cybersecurity resilience of High-Risk AI systems against adversarial attacks (e.g., model poisoning, evasion) as part of the conformity assessment process’. These provisions have potential application to AI tools used in criminal proceedings that process sensitive data or connect to critical infrastructure. These provisions are set out at Section 2.5 of the Guide (p. 15).

Human rights

Egypt’s Constitution provides for fundamental rights that form the legislative foundation for all Egyptian laws, and is referred to in the Guide to Egypt’s AI Governance Framework as the ‘bedrock’ instrument of the envisioned AI governance framework in Egypt. Specifically, the AI Governance Framework refers to the fundamental right to privacy enshrined in Articles 57 and 58 of the Constitution.

Other fundamental rights contained in the Constitution which may interact with AI include:

• Article 53, which guarantees equality before the law and prohibits discrimination on grounds including religion, belief, sex, origin, race, colour, language, disability, social class, political affiliation, or any other reason, which may be engaged where AI systems produce discriminatory outputs or biased decisions;
• Article 54, which protects personal freedom as a natural right and provides for protections against arbitrary detention;
• Article 68, which guarantees the freedom of governmental information and the right of the public to access the same;
• Article 69, which protects all types of intellectual property;
• Article 96, which provides that the accused shall be presumed innocent until proven guilty in a fair legal trial in which the right of defence is guaranteed;
• Article 97, which guarantees the right of access to courts and prohibits any act that immunises administrative decisions from judicial oversight.

Egypt is also a party to key international human rights instruments whose guarantees may be relevant to the use of AI in criminal proceedings:

• The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR): Article 14 guarantees the right to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent, and impartial tribunal, the presumption of innocence, and minimum guarantees in the determination of any criminal charge, including the right to adequate time and facilities for the preparation of a defence and the right to examine witnesses; Article 17 protects against arbitrary or unlawful interference with privacy, family, home, or correspondence, which may be engaged by AI-driven surveillance tools; and Article 26 provides for equality before the law and equal protection of the law without discrimination, which may be relevant where AI systems produce biased or discriminatory outcomes.
• The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC): Article 3 requires that the best interests of the child be a primary consideration in all actions concerning children, including by courts of law and administrative authorities; Article 16 protects the child from arbitrary or unlawful interference with privacy; and Article 40 guarantees children accused of criminal offences the right to be treated in a manner consistent with the promotion of the child’s sense of dignity and worth, which reinforces procedural safeguards that may constrain the use of AI in juvenile justice proceedings.

Outlook

Egypt’s National AI Strategy 2025-2030 has set ambitious targets for Egypt, including: raising the ICT sector’s contribution to GDP to 7.7% by 2030; cultivating 30,000 AI specialists; establishing 250+ AI-driven companies; increasing AI integration into daily life for 36% of the population; and expanding AI research output to more than 6,000 academic publications, all of which require an accommodating legislative framework, and utilisation of AI in governmental functions.

Moreover, as noted above, as at July 2026 Egypt is in the process of drafting a risk-based AI law.

CASES

As at July 2026, there are no reported cases concerning the use of AI in legal proceedings in Egypt.