1. Introduction
The approach of the Egyptian legislature toward persons with disabilities has undergone significant development in recent decades. This could be partially attributed to the sharp increase in their numbers due to various reasons, including the numerous armed conflicts and ongoing violence in the Middle East, poverty, and illiteracy (Ghazawy et al., 2020). It is also driven by international legislative developments that have increasingly emphasized human rights in general and the rights of persons with disabilities in particular. The evolution of international law concerning the rights of persons with disabilities has been accompanied by similar developments in Egypt. The Egyptian legislature has shown a strong commitment to upholding the rights of this group by adopting rules and policies consistent with international trends (Okasha and Shaker, 2024).
The Egyptian legislature’s attention to persons with disabilities has been demonstrated in various national laws and has become more evident following the adoption of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities of 2006 (CRPD; United Nations, 2006). This convention is the first international treaty dedicated to protecting the rights of persons with disabilities (Zhao and Zhang, 2018). It highlights the human rights nature of disability rights and sets the minimum protection aspects for persons with disabilities (Mitrus, 2024). It played a crucial role in motivating legislatures worldwide to strengthen the rights of persons with disabilities through comprehensive legal frameworks (Harpur and Stein, 2022). Consequently, the Egyptian legislature issued Law No. 10 of 2018 on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (Shouaib, 2020a).
Disability rights scholars usually distinguish between four conceptual models: Charity, medical, social and rights-based models. The charity model views persons with disabilities as a group of individuals that deserve compassion and benevolence. They should be offered help voluntarily and are expected to be grateful for it (Barnes, Mercer, and Shakespeare, 2010). The medical model suggests that disability is a defect that needs to be fixed, and that persons with disabilities are individuals who deserve treatment (World Health Organization and World Bank, 2011). By contrast, the social model considers persons are disabled “by society rather than by their bodies” (World Health Organization and World Bank, 2011). It emphasizes that disability is the result of social barriers (Goering, 2015). Finally, the rights-based model is a human rights approach that is adopted in the CRPD that regards persons with disabilities as rights holders who are entitled to equality and participation (Quinn, 2009; Browne and Miller, 2016).
However, a critical issue addressed in this article is whether the enactment of Law No. 10 of 2018 demonstrates a genuine shift from a traditional charity or medical approach to a rights-based approach that is consistent with the relevant international documents at the level of positive law. In other words, the article investigates whether the legislative development effectively expands the rights of persons with disabilities to enhance their integration into society.
The article adopts a doctrinal methodology, examining primary legal sources such as the Egyptian Constitution, Law No. 10 of 2018 on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and other related laws and court judgments. The doctrinal approach incorporates both descriptive and analytical elements. It describes the development of Egypt’s legal framework for disability rights and critically analyzes the extent to which these developments demonstrate a substantive shift toward a rights-based model that is consistent with international standards at the level of legislative texts. The article also reviews the policy of Egypt’s legislative development, tracing its progression from limited recognition to a comprehensive rights-based approach. The scope of analysis is the evolution of positive law and the legal structure governing their enforcement. It does not aim to provide an empirical analysis of how disability rights are implemented in practice.
This article first examines the evolution of the legal foundations of disability rights at both the constitutional and legislative levels. It then analyzes and compares the scope of these rights before and after the enactment of Law No. 10 of 2018. The article concludes by summarizing the main findings and presenting legislative recommendations.
2. The Development of the Legal Foundations of Disability Rights
In the twentieth century, the Egyptian legislature did not pay significant attention to persons with disabilities. The prevailing legislative approach during this period was primarily based on charity and social solidarity. Despite the issuance of Law No. 39 of 1975 Concerning Rehabilitation of Persons with Disabilities, this group did not enjoy a satisfactory level of protection. However, this approach witnessed substantial development in the early twenty-first century, when the legislature adopted an explicit legal foundation for these rights, as detailed below.
2.1 The limited recognition of disability rights during the twentieth century
In the twentieth century, the Egyptian legislature paid little attention to the rights of persons with disabilities. This approach was influenced by the prevailing trends in international law during this period. As a general rule, Egyptian laws enacted at the time lacked any explicit constitutional foundation, and the legislative foundation was limited.
2.1.1 The absence of an explicit constitutional foundation
Regarding the constitutional foundation, the repealed 1971 Egyptian Constitution did not contain any explicit references to the rights of persons with disabilities. However, it emphasized the principle of equality among all citizens. Article 40 explicitly stated that ‘All citizens are equal before the law. They have equal public rights and duties without discrimination due to sex, ethnic origin, language, religion or creed.’ This article was the constitutional foundation for prohibiting discrimination among all citizens. Although it did not mention disability as a basis for discrimination, it was interpreted to support the recognition of the rights of persons with disabilities and served as its constitutional foundation (Shouaib, 2020b).
The lack of any reference to disability rights in the constitution was consistent with the relevant international instruments drafted before the adoption of the CRPD (Shouaib, 2020a). During the twentieth century, the key international instruments did not pay considerable attention to the rights of persons with disabilities (Harpur and Stein, 2022), and did not contain explicit provisions addressing their rights (Nieminen, 2010).
For instance, Article 2 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that ‘Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status …’ This key instrument did not explicitly mention persons with disabilities. Instead, they are included under the broad phrase ‘other status.’
Similarly, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) never explicitly recognized the rights of persons with disabilities. Their rights are implicitly recognized under the broad phrase “other status” (Breillat, 2020). Article 2(1) of the ICCPR states that ‘Each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes to respect and to ensure to all individuals … the rights recognized in the present Covenant, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.’ Likewise, Article 2(2) of the ICESCR states that ‘The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to guarantee that the rights enunciated in the present Covenant will be exercised without discrimination of any kind as to race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.’
The absence of explicit references to the rights of persons with disabilities in international instruments suggests that their drafters did not fully recognize the importance of establishing a special framework for their protection.
During the twentieth century, the rights of persons with disabilities were explicitly mentioned only in Articles 2 and 23 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Article 2 prohibits discrimination based on disability, while Article 23 recognizes the right of children with disabilities to enjoy a decent life through providing access to healthcare, education, vocational rehabilitation and recreational activities free of charge whenever possible. Those two articles address the rights of children with disabilities rather than the rights of persons with disabilities in general.
Nevertheless, while international instruments in the twentieth century, as a general rule, did not contain explicit provisions on the rights of persons with disabilities, they affirmed the principle of equality before the law. These instruments explicitly stated that every individual must enjoy rights and bear obligations equally with others and receive the same level of protection without discrimination. Accordingly, persons with disabilities were implicitly covered under this principle of equality.
2.1.2 The limited legislative foundation
In addition to the limited constitutional foundation, the legislative foundation of disability rights was similarly limited. Various laws emphasized the constitutional principle of equality. Additionally, the Civil Code (1948) includes provisions that provide some protection to persons with disabilities in the context of legal capacity. It distinguishes between the ‘capacity to have rights,’ which is enjoyed by all persons, and the ‘capacity to act,’ which refers to a person’s ability to enter into legal transactions. The latter may be fully or partially limited depending on the degree of mental disability that affects a person’s ability to recognize the consequences of entering into legal transactions. Such limitations, whether full or limited, are not imposed automatically. Instead, they require judicial review.
The primary purpose of these limitations is to protect persons with disabilities from exploitation that they could suffer from if they enter into legally binding agreements without fully recognizing their implications. The Civil Code aims to strike a balance between protecting persons with disabilities and preserving their autonomy. To achieve this balance, the Civil Code directs courts to place ‘persons with full or limited legal capacity to act’ under special legal frameworks such as guardianship, custodianship, or trusteeship. This is in accordance with Article 47 of the Civil Code, which states that ‘Persons deprived of full or partial legal capacity are governed, as the case may be, by the rules of guardianship, custodianship, or trusteeship subject to the conditions and in accordance with the rules laid down by law.’ Accordingly, Law No. 119 of 1952 on Guardianship over Property was enacted to regulate these special frameworks.
Beyond these general civil law protections, the Egyptian legislature’s approach towards persons with disabilities witnessed a clear development in the last quarter of the twentieth century. It enacted Law No. 39 of 1975 Concerning the Rehabilitation of Persons with Disabilities a few months before the adoption of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Disabled Persons in December 1975, which lacked binding legal force. This law represented a legislative milestone, as it was the first Egyptian Legislation dedicated to persons with disabilities. However, its scope was relatively narrow. It did not address the right to education, accessibility to public facilities and services, integration into society, or social protection mechanisms. While this law represents a significant step forward, it therefore did not provide adequate protection to persons with disabilities.
2.2 The expanded recognition of disability rights during the twenty-first century
The Egyptian legislature’s policy toward persons with disabilities witnessed a fundamental development in the twenty-first century. This development was influenced by a similar development of international law in the context of disability rights, as highlighted by the adoption of the CRPD. Egypt signed the Convention in 2007 and ratified it in 2008. The Egyptian legislature, then, paid significant attention to persons with disabilities, which is evident at both the constitutional and legislative levels.
2.2.1 The evolution of the constitutional foundation of disability rights
The Egyptian constitutions adopted during the twenty-first century departed from the pre-2006 approach, which was mainly limited to upholding the principle of equality. Following the adoption of the CRPD, Egyptian constitutions explicitly recognized and affirmed the rights of persons with disabilities.
The Repealed 2012 Constitution did not merely repeat the principles stipulated in the preamble, such as the state’s commitment to equality and equal opportunities for all citizens. Instead, it went further by dedicating Article 72 to the rights of persons with disabilities, stating that ‘The state commits to providing people with disabilities with health, educational, economic and social care, and provides them with employment opportunities, raises social awareness of their situation, and adapts public facilities to suit their needs.’ The Constitution therefore explicitly obliged the state to provide comprehensive care for persons with disabilities across various sectors, including health, economic, and social fields. Moreover, it required the state to provide employment opportunities, to raise social awareness of disability issues, and to take all necessary measures to facilitate the integration of persons with disabilities into public life, including preparing public facilities to accommodate their needs.
The same approach was adopted in the current Egyptian Constitution of 2014. It not only affirms the principle of equality among citizens and criminalizes discrimination on any grounds but also imposes a direct obligation on the state to protect the rights of persons with disabilities, including individuals with dwarfism. Moreover, the state’s obligations are not limited to traditional health, social, or economic rights. They are also extended to ensure the full integration of persons with disabilities into society, including their participation in recreational, cultural, and political activities (Zakaria, 2020).
For instance, Article 81 of the 2014 Constitution is dedicated to persons with disabilities, stating that ‘the state shall guarantee the health, economic, social, cultural, entertainment, sporting and education rights of dwarves and people with disabilities. The state shall provide work opportunities for such persons and allocate a percentage of these opportunities to them, in addition to equipping public utilities and their surrounding environment. The state guarantees their right to exercise political rights, and their integration with other citizens in order to achieve the principles of equality, justice and equal opportunities.’ Article 93 states that ‘the state is committed to the agreements, covenants, and international conventions of human rights that were ratified by Egypt. They have the force of law after publication in accordance with the specified procedures.’
Additionally, Article 53 prohibits discrimination among citizens based on disability. Article 54 obligates the police department to provide the necessary assistance if the arrested person is disabled. Article 55 emphasizes the importance of the accessibility of prisons and police stations for persons with disabilities. Even if persons with disabilities are sentenced, they must be able to access prison facilities easily. Otherwise, a prisoner with a disability would be subject to an additional punishment not applied to prisoners without disabilities, even if they committed the same crime (Dullum, 2017). Article 80 requires the state to guarantee the rights of children with disabilities, their rehabilitation, and their integration into society.
Moreover, Article 180 guarantees the representation of persons with disabilities in local councils, which are elected bodies within each local administrative unit responsible for overseeing development plans, monitoring activities, and supervising executive authorities. This article requires that allocated quotas for youth, women, workers, and farmers must include appropriate representation of persons with disabilities. However, it does not specify what constitutes an appropriate representation, leaving this issue to be determined by the law concerning local administration. Nevertheless, this law has not been issued yet.
Finally, Article 214 establishes the National Council for Persons with Disabilities. The Council has a legal personality and enjoys financial and administrative independence. It must be consulted when drafting any laws or regulations related to persons with disabilities.
In sum, the current constitution dedicates several articles to disability rights. These articles serve as a strong constitutional foundation for disability rights and impose clear obligations on the state. It is necessary though to expedite the enactment of the public administration law to fully realize the constitutional right of appropriate representation in local councils.
2.2.2 The evolution of the legislative foundation of disability rights
This constitutional development was accompanied by parallel legislative reform, as the evolution of the Egyptian legislature’s approach to persons with disabilities extended beyond constitutional provisions. The legislature explicitly recognized the rights of persons with disabilities, as highlighted in the enactment of Law No. 10 of 2018 concerning the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Article 4(4) of this law stipulates that the state is obliged not only to protect the rights of persons with disabilities but also to guarantee the rights specified in the CRPD and any other international instruments to which Egypt is a party. This article unequivocally affirms that ratified international instruments are an integral part of the Egyptian legal system. As Egypt has ratified the CRPD, the convention has the force of law (Saleh, 2026). Persons with disabilities should enjoy all the rights stipulated in this Convention, even if the national legislation does not explicitly regulate them. It may therefore be argued that Egyptian law recognizes the commitment to ensuring that persons with disabilities enjoy all the rights set out in the CRPD. Although Egyptian courts may rely directly on the CRPD pursuant to Article 4(4), the incorporation of all rights in the legislation remains necessary to ensure clarity and implementation in practice.
Moreover, Article 1 of the law explicitly states that the policy behind its enactment is to protect the rights of persons with disabilities. This protection is achieved by ensuring their full enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms on an equal basis with others, including those specified in international instruments ratified by Egypt as explicitly provided in Article 4(4). The law further aims to promote their dignity, integrate them into society, and secure a decent life for them. This is consistent with Article 1(1) of the CRPD, which states that ‘The purpose of the present Convention is to promote, protect and ensure the full and equal enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms by all persons with disabilities, and to promote respect for their inherent dignity.’ (United Nations, 2006).
The law explicitly sets out a range of rights for persons with disabilities. It also imposes an obligation on the state to take all necessary measures to ensure their enjoyment of these rights to facilitate their integration into society, as will be shown below.
Overall, the Egyptian legislature now explicitly recognizes the rights of persons with disabilities. These rights are currently based on a clear legal foundation derived from the Constitution and the aforementioned law’s provisions. Having examined the legal foundation of these rights, the next section will explore their scope, focusing on the content of the legal protection provided to persons with disabilities.
3. The Evolution of the Scope of Disability Rights
The scope of the rights granted to persons with disabilities under Egyptian legislation has witnessed significant development in the twenty-first century, as compared to the twentieth century. The details of this evolution will be discussed below.
3.1 A limited scope of disability rights in the twentieth century
Before the adoption of the CRPD, the Egyptian legislature paid limited attention to persons with disabilities. The legislative approach was primarily limited to an implicit recognition of the rights of persons with disabilities. This was based on the principle of equality in rights and obligations among all citizens and the prohibition of discrimination on any grounds. This principle served as the primary legal foundation for the rights of persons with disabilities and influenced the scope of rights they enjoyed.
However, the actual ability to exercise these rights was severely constrained. This was primarily due to the lack of appropriate infrastructure to accommodate their needs. The legislature did not explicitly obligate the state to take the necessary measures to ensure that persons with disabilities could fully exercise their rights. Therefore, as a general rule, persons with disabilities did not enjoy significant special rights in the period before the adoption of the CRPD (Barnartt, 2014). The rights granted to them under Egyptian legislation at that time were mainly limited to basic medical care and a few additional benefits (Barnartt, 2014).
Exercising this minimal level of healthcare was only possible after a set of complex bureaucratic procedures. Persons with disabilities were required to appear before a specialized medical committee to assess their disability, determine how it affected their ability to perform daily tasks independently, and establish their level of need for assistance. These procedures were highly complex to the extent that many persons with disabilities did not follow them. As a result, access to even the most basic healthcare and support services for persons with disabilities often depended on the extent of family solidarity and the influence of religious teachings within Egyptian society (Barnartt, 2014). Islamic teachings, as the dominant religious teaching in Egypt, played a significant role in shaping social attitudes towards persons with disabilities.
Beyond healthcare rights, Law No. 39 of 1975 Concerning the Rehabilitation of Persons with Disabilities was enacted to provide more rights to persons with disabilities. Article 3 of this law obliged the state to provide free rehabilitation services to persons with disabilities. However, it limited this obligation to the financial limits set in the budget for this purpose. Article 9 required employers in the private sector with at least 50 workers to allocate at least 5% of their jobs to persons with disabilities. Similarly, Article 10 required the state to ensure that at least 5% of its employees are persons with disabilities.
Additionally, Law No. 186 of 1986 Concerning Customs Exemptions was enacted. Article 2(9), as amended in 1996, exempted persons with disabilities from customs duties on medically equipped vehicles imported in their name. The law prohibited the transfer of ownership of the exempted vehicle for five years from the date of customs clearance unless the due customs duties were paid. After five years, the owner may transfer ownership of the vehicle without paying the customs duties and obtain a new exemption for another medically equipped vehicle. However, to avoid abusing this exemption, any transfer of ownership before the five years without paying the customs duties constituted a customs evasion crime.
Accordingly, in Appeal No. 39042 of Judicial Year 59 (Supreme Administrative Court, 2019), the Supreme Administrative Court decided that a person with a disability could enjoy a customs exemption for a vehicle after the administration refused to implement the exemption. The refusal was based on Article 14 of the Executive Regulations of the Customs Exemption Law, which required persons with disabilities to submit a report from the General Medical Council specifying their medical condition. The plaintiff argued that he should not be required to provide a new medical report since he submitted a similar report 10 years earlier when he benefited from his first vehicle customs exemption, especially since the old report stated that his disability was permanent. The court ruled that if a disability is permanent, as confirmed in the medical report submitted for the first vehicle exemption, requiring a new medical examination is unjustified.
Customs exemption for a medically equipped vehicle was the subject of another appeal before the same court, in a case where a person with visual impairment was denied permission to import such a vehicle because he could not obtain a driving license. In Appeal No. 71851 of Judicial Year 62 (Supreme Administrative Court, 2020), the Supreme Administrative Court held that the rejection was unreasonable, noting that the plaintiff could use the vehicle with a driver’s assistance.
However, the scope of rights granted to persons with disabilities witnessed a significant expansion following the adoption of the CRPD. Their rights were no longer limited to healthcare services and other limited rights. They were expanded to include other rights, as will be discussed below.
3.2 The expanded scope of disability rights in the twenty-first century
The enactment of Law No. 10 of 2018 affirms the legislature’s commitment to strengthening the rights of persons with disabilities. It shows the belief that persons with disabilities must be entitled to a comprehensive set of rights (Shinekeneva et al., 2022). Article 1 of this law determines the policy behind its enactment. It states that it safeguards the rights of persons with disabilities and ensures they enjoy all human rights and fundamental freedoms equally with other citizens. Furthermore, the law seeks to promote their integration into society and guarantee a dignified standard of living. This policy is aligned with Article 53 of the Constitution, which prohibits discrimination on any grounds including disability, and Article 1 of the CRPD, which states that the purpose of the convention is to ‘ensure the full and equal enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms by all persons with disabilities.’ (United Nations, 2006).
Article 2 expanded the definition of persons with disabilities to cover anyone with a total or partial impairment, whether physical, intellectual, mental, or sensory, provided that such impairment is stable and prevents them from full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others. This is a significant development compared to the definition adopted by Article 2 of Law No. 39 of 1975, which defined persons with disabilities as anyone who has become unable to depend on themself in performing their job or performing another job due to a physical, mental, or sensory impairment or a congenital disability since birth. While the old law associated disability with the inability to work only, the new law adopts a modern approach. It recognizes disability as a condition that affects full and equal participation and integration in society. The definition of disability is particularly important as it determines who qualifies for special treatment provided to persons with disabilities under the law (Al Shawabkeh, 2016). The definition of persons with disabilities under the current Egyptian law is consistent with its definition in Article 1 of the CRPD, which refers to persons ‘who have long-term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairments which in interaction with various barriers may hinder their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others.’ (United Nations, 2006).
Furthermore, to maximize protection, the legislature adopted a broad definition of discrimination. Article 3 defines discrimination as ‘any distinction, exclusion, or restriction based on disability that results in harm or the denial of any right stipulated by the law or hinders the ability of persons with disabilities to exercise their rights on an equal basis with others.’ (United Nations, 2006). The definition does not require proof of discriminatory intention. Instead, the decisive criterion is whether the act results in discriminatory treatment. Adopting this comprehensive definition is a significant step since Law No. 39 of 1975 did not define discrimination based on disability. The adopted definition in the new law aligns with the definition adopted in Article 2 of the CRPD, which defines discrimination based on disability as ‘any distinction, exclusion or restriction on the basis of disability which has the purpose or effect of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal basis with others, of all human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil or any other field. It includes all forms of discrimination, including denial of reasonable accommodation.’ (United Nations, 2006).
Examining the provisions of Law No. 10 of 2018 on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities shows that it grants them various rights. These rights are the same rights enjoyed by persons without disabilities, in addition to special rights designed to ensure their integration into society.
The principle of equality is the source of their enjoyment of the rights of persons without disabilities. This principle is emphasized in Article 4(1), which explicitly prohibits discrimination based on disability and imposes an obligation on the state to ensure equality in enjoying all human rights and fundamental freedoms in all areas. It further obliges the state to take all necessary measures to enable persons with disabilities to exercise their rights. Disability should therefore not justify denying persons with disabilities their rights or access to services granted under laws and regulations.
Regarding the special rights granted to persons with disabilities, their primary source is Law No. 10 of 2018, which regulates various rights for persons with disabilities and imposes obligations on the state to ensure their implementation. These obligations are designed to enable persons with disabilities to exercise their legal rights effectively and be integrated into society. The most important rights under this category are addressed in the following subsections.
3.2.1 The right to healthcare and rehabilitation
The right to healthcare is considered a human right (Masuku, Bornman, and Johnson, 2023). Law No. 10 of 2018 emphasizes the right of persons with disabilities to access healthcare services to help them achieve the highest possible level of independence. It affirms that persons with disabilities are entitled to benefit from healthcare services, rehabilitation programs, and support services.
One of the most important rights established according to Article 5 of this law is the Disability Identification Card, which serves as an official document to prove disability and enable its holder to access healthcare services. This card is renewed every seven years unless the person’s disability status changes, necessitating an update before the expiration of this period.
Article 5 also states that ‘A person with a disability who does not have health insurance is entitled to the healthcare services using his disability identification card, in accordance with the law.’ (Government of Egypt, 2018). The phrasing of the article suggests that a special law shall be enacted to determine rules and procedures for benefiting from these healthcare services without health insurance. However, such a law has not yet been enacted. To address this legislative gap, the State Council, in its Advisory Opinion No. 1691 of 2023, instructed the government to provide healthcare services to persons holding a disability identification card and to treat them as beneficiaries under Social Insurance and Pensions Law No. 148 of 2018.
Article 7 determines the aspects of the healthcare services that persons with disabilities are entitled to. This determination clearly defines the obligations of the Ministry of Health. The Ministry is entrusted with developing early detection programs for diseases that may cause disabilities and taking all necessary preventive measures to decrease their impact. It is also obliged to provide both medical treatment and medical rehabilitation. While medical treatment focuses on curing diseases or alleviating symptoms through medication and nutritional supplements, medical rehabilitation aims to improve the person’s abilities, mobility, and independence through physical therapy and assistive devices. Additionally, the Ministry must provide psychological rehabilitation programs, which positively impact the right to education as well (Tindle et al., 2022). Also, reproductive health services and premarital medical examinations must be provided. The variety of services shows a significant shift towards a comprehensive and inclusive healthcare system.
To facilitate planning in the long term, Article 6 requires the Ministry of Health to develop a national database of persons with disabilities. The database also helps to monitor the healthcare services provided. While the law requires the Ministry to ensure the confidentiality of personal data in the database, it does not specify how such data should be protected. It is therefore necessary for the legislature to determine the rules and procedures that the Ministry must follow to protect the data of persons with disabilities.
Finally, Article 8 entrusts the Ministry of Health, the General Authority for Health Insurance, the National Council for Persons with Disabilities, and the Ministry of Social Solidarity with the task of issuing standard guidelines for the medical treatment and rehabilitation of persons with disabilities. It also obligates the Ministry of Health to establish well-equipped healthcare centers to diagnose disabilities and efficiently provide the necessary medical interventions. Furthermore, it requires the Ministry of Health to ensure the availability of specialized healthcare professionals to address the medical needs of persons with disabilities.
To conclude, Law No. 10 of 2018 significantly expands the right to healthcare and rehabilitation. Before the enactment of the law, healthcare was limited to basic treatment and rehabilitation subject to complex procedures, which represented a basic medical disability model. However, Law No. 10 of 2018 expanded this right by introducing the Disability Identification Card, allowing healthcare services even without insurance, and obliging the state to provide various new services. This marks a shift towards a rights-based model that is consistent with international standards in positive law. This right can be supported by enacting the implementing law that would allow persons with disabilities to enjoy healthcare services without health insurance. Also, it is important to establish rules and procedures to protect personal data in the national database.
3.2.2 The right to vocational rehabilitation and training, and the right to employment
To achieve the full integration of persons with disabilities into society, Article 18 requires the state to provide vocational rehabilitation and training programs for persons with disabilities. To fulfill this obligation, the Ministry of Social Solidarity is responsible for licensing qualified vocational rehabilitation and training institutions. The Ministry must also ensure that these institutions comply with quality standards, safety regulations and utilize modern technology to enable persons with disabilities to reach the highest possible level of independence.
Furthermore, the Ministry is tasked with ensuring that all essential tools and assistive devices required for vocational training are provided either free of charge or at a minimal cost. It is also responsible for preparing specialized personnel for the rehabilitation of persons with disabilities and developing training programs designed for their specific needs.
Article 19 affirms that persons with disabilities who successfully complete a rehabilitation and training program are entitled to receive a certificate issued by the institution and approved by the Ministry of Social Solidarity. This certificate must be granted free of charge. In Appeal No. 7275 of Judicial Year 93 (Court of Cassation, Labor Chamber, 2024), the Court ruled that persons with disabilities must hold a vocational certificate to be entitled to be hired within the 5% percentage.
Global surveys have shown that the employment rate of persons with disabilities is significantly lower than that of persons without disabilities (Heymann, Wong, and Waisath, 2021). The Egyptian legislature addresses this form of discrimination through Article 20. It provides that persons with disabilities must enjoy the same rights, benefits, and salaries as non-disabled individuals. They must also be permitted to work in the same positions, and the same promotion policies must apply to them.
Another aspect of protection is provided in Article 22, which requires employers in both the public and private sectors with at least 20 employees to allocate no less than 5% of their jobs to persons with disabilities. While this obligation was mentioned in Law No. 39 of 1975, as discussed earlier, Article 22 lowers the threshold for its application from 50 employees to 20. It therefore enhances the protection of persons with disabilities and strengthens their inclusion in the job market.
Moreover, to encourage employers to hire more persons with disabilities than the required quota, Article 23(2) provides for a 5% increase in the employer’s income tax exemption for each additional employee with a disability hired above the minimum percentage required by law.
Additionally, Article 24 provides that persons with disabilities are entitled to a one-hour reduction in daily working hours without any decrease in salary. Persons without disabilities enjoy the same benefit if they serve as caregivers for a person with a disability who is a first or second degree relative. When implementing this benefit in practice, a debate has emerged regarding whether beneficiaries who are entitled to a 2-hour daily reduction (one hour according to Article 24 and another hour according to the Civil Service Law) may request a reduction of one full working day per week instead of the daily two-hour reduction. In its Advisory Opinion No. 277 of 2024, the State Council directed governmental employers to accommodate such requests, interpreting Article 24 as encouraging flexible working schedules for persons with disabilities and their caregivers.
In this respect, before the enactment of Law No. 10 of 2018, the protection of the right under discussion was limited to the 5% employment quota, which suggested the adoption of a welfare disability model. However, this law lowered the quota threshold, introduced tax incentives and guaranteed equal pay and promotion. This signals a transformation to a rights-based model based on equality and non-discrimination rather than social assistance only.
3.2.3 The right to social protection
To ensure adequate protection for persons with disabilities and to promote their integration into social life, the legislature emphasized several social rights aimed at granting persons with disabilities greater independence and guaranteeing them a dignified standard of living. In this context, Article 25 requires the state to provide financial assistance to persons with disabilities in the form of monthly allowances to help them fulfill their living expenses. These financial aid programs are regulated under the Social Security Law No. 137 of 2010. Article 64(6) of the executive regulations of the Law on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities stipulates that a creditor cannot seize the monthly allowance provided to persons with disabilities.
Additionally, as an exception to the general provisions of the Social Insurance Law No. 79 of 1975, the legislature grants persons with disabilities the right to receive two pensions simultaneously, whether from their own entitlements or those of a spouse, parent, child, or sibling. Moreover, persons with disabilities are eligible to receive their pension payments in addition to any wages they earn from employment without any restrictions.
Another social right granted to persons with disabilities is stipulated in Article 26, which requires that 5% of new housing units constructed or subsidized by the state be allocated to persons with disabilities.
Similarly, Article 27 emphasizes that persons with disabilities must enjoy special treatment in military service procedures, especially when applying for exemption from mandatory military service. The legislature entrusted the Minister of Defense with establishing the rules and procedures of this special treatment.
In the context of combating poverty, Article 28 imposes an obligation on the state to take into consideration the rights and needs of persons with disabilities when adopting poverty-combating policies and sustainable development programs.
Overall, the earlier legislation offered minimal support to persons with disabilities that was consistent with a welfare disability model. Law No. 10 of 2018 significantly expanded the protection of persons with disabilities through monthly allowances, pension privileges and housing allocations. While the law contains some welfare model elements, it clearly moves toward recognizing social protection as a legal right.
3.2.4 The right to accessibility
Accessibility is a fundamental right for persons with disabilities. It ensures their participation and integration into society (Shahraki, 2021). Disability scholarship adopts a comprehensive concept of accessibility. It is no longer limited to physical access (Miller, 2024). It has been extended to include various aspects such as essential services, products, and even media content (Ferri, 2024).
Law No. 10 of 2018 introduces various measures that enable access to buildings, essential services, necessary products, and media content. Physical access to buildings and public facilities is a key aspect of the accessibility right. Article 29 obliges urban planning and regulatory authorities to ensure compliance with the accessibility standards determined in the Egyptian Building Code before issuing any building permit. This guarantees that building entrances and facilities are accessible to persons with disabilities. The accessibility standards apply to all buildings, regardless of their ownership or purpose. To emphasize this requirement, Articles 7(5), 32, and 33 require that healthcare facilities, courts, and banks ensure that their premises are accessible to persons with disabilities. These provisions enable persons with disabilities to access healthcare, judicial, and banking services equally with others.
The law regulated accessibility to essential public services as well. Due to the importance of public transportation for persons with disabilities (Hernandez and Rodriguez, 2023), Article 30 requires the state to ensure that public transportation is adapted to accommodate their needs. It provides that designated seats must be allocated to persons with disabilities. Additionally, persons with disabilities enjoy fare reductions of at least 50%. Regarding judicial services, Article 31(5) exempts persons with disabilities from paying court fees regardless of whether they are plaintiffs or defendants, provided that the case relates to their disability rights. This exemption not only strengthens the protection of persons with disabilities but also promotes access to justice (Dorfman, 2024). Similarly, in banking services, Article 33 obliges all banking and financial institutions to adopt special rules and procedures to facilitate banking services to persons with disabilities.
The law further facilitates access to essential products. This includes assistive and medical devices, and medically equipped vehicles. Article 31(3) exempts all assistive devices, medical equipment, and support tools used by persons with disabilities from customs duties. This exemption applies provided that the items are imported either by persons with disabilities for personal use or by institutions offering services to them.
Moreover, Article 31(4) expands the exemption from customs duties on medically equipped vehicles imported by persons with disabilities. While this exemption was provided for by Article 2(9) of the repealed Law No. 186 of 1986 Concerning Customs Exemptions, Article 31(4) exempts persons with disabilities from the value-added tax as well. Article 31(4) codified the rule established by Appeal No. 71851 of Judicial Year 62 (2020), which was discussed earlier. Persons with disabilities who are not eligible to obtain a driving license are still exempted from customs duties provided that the vehicle is driven only by a personal driver or a first-degree relative.
Under the repealed Law No. 39 of 1975, enjoying this benefit was conditional upon undergoing a medical examination conducted by a special medical committee. This procedure was time-consuming and sometimes involved mistakes. In some cases, persons with disabilities were denied the benefit due to the inaccuracy of medical examination. For example, in Appeal No. 3177 of Judicial Year 64 (2024), the Supreme Administrative Court reviewed a case in which a person with a disability was denied a customs exemption in 2016. Although he was entitled to it, he had to wait until 2024 to receive a final judgment in his favor.
Introducing the Disability Identification Card under Law No. 10 of 2018 eliminated this requirement. This card allows persons with disabilities to enjoy all their special benefits simply by presenting it. In Appeal No. 63516 of Judicial Year 67 (2023), the Supreme Administrative Court reviewed a case involving a person with a disability who held a valid Disability Identification Card but was denied the exemption due to his refusal to undergo a medical examination to prove his disability. The Court decided in favor of the plaintiff, affirming that the Disability Identification Card now serves as the official document for proving disability and enjoying all relevant services and benefits.
Finally, the legislature extended the principle of accessibility to media. Article 34 obliges both public and private media outlets to adopt measures that facilitate access to media content by persons with disabilities. Additionally, it requires these outlets to broadcast content that presents persons with disabilities respectfully and positively (Al-Hamdan and Afandi, 2022).
To conclude, Law No. 10 of 2018 expanded the concept of accessibility. It is no longer limited to some customs exemptions. It encompasses accessibility across buildings, transportation, services, assistive devices and media. This indicates that the Egyptian legislature’s approach has shifted toward the CRPD’s rights-based disability model.
3.2.5 The right to inclusive education
Inclusive education aims to create a flexible learning environment that accommodates the diverse needs of all students, including those with disabilities (Dukmak et al., 2024). It encourages teachers to use various teaching methods, technologies, and accessible learning resources to ensure students’ participation (Dukmak et al., 2024). The law emphasizes the right of persons with disabilities to inclusive education. Article 10 requires that educational curricula include content that promotes awareness of disability rights. It also requires the Ministry of Education and all educational institutions to take the necessary measures to enable persons with disabilities to exercise their right to education. This applies to both public and private schools and universities.
The law prohibits educational institutions from discriminating in admissions based on disability. Article 11 explicitly prohibits educational institutions from denying a student enrollment due to their disability. The legislature determined strict penalties to avoid this discrimination. An educational institution that violates this obligation shall first receive a formal warning requiring it to admit the student within 15 days. If the institution fails to comply, its license is suspended for six months. The license is permanently revoked if the institution continues its failure to admit the student.
Additionally, the law determines minimum percentages for admitting and accommodating students with disabilities. If the percentage of applicants with disabilities at an educational institution exceeds 5% of the total applicants, Article 12 obliges the institution to allocate at least 5% of its admissions to them. Similarly, with respect to university housing, if the percentage of applicants with disabilities exceeds 10% of the total number of applicants, Article 15 obliges the university housing administration to allocate at least 10% of available housing to them.
Accordingly, Law No. 10 of 2018 explicitly recognizes inclusive education as a disability right. It prohibits discriminatory admissions and introduces severe legal sanctions for non-compliance. It also imposes admission and housing quotas to ensure the rights of students with disabilities. This highlights the legislative shift toward a rights-based disability model.
4. Conclusion
This article has examined the evolution of Egyptian law regarding the rights of persons with disabilities in light of the relevant developments in international law, particularly the adoption of the CRPD in 2006. It highlighted the significant shift in the Egyptian legislature’s approach toward a rights-based disability model at the level of legal texts in the twenty-first century.
The article showed the evolution of the legal foundation upon which the rights of persons with disabilities are based. The legal foundation of disability rights during the twentieth century was merely the constitutional principle of equality and Law No. 39 of 1975, which provided limited rights to persons with disabilities. In contrast, disability rights were explicitly recognized in the Egyptian constitutions adopted in the twenty-first century. Additionally, Law No. 10 of 2018 significantly expanded the scope of these rights.
The article then compared the scope of disability rights under the repealed Law No. 39 of 1975 and Law No. 10 of 2018. It noted and analyzed the expanded scope of disability rights under the latter in various areas, including healthcare, education, employment, accessibility, and social protection.
A separate issue that was not analyzed in this article is whether the evolution of the Egyptian legislature’s approach towards disability rights is merely a theoretical development in the legal texts, or whether it has transcended the theoretical sphere and contributed to a tangible improvement in practice that enables persons with disabilities to exercise their rights every day without difficulty, as embodied in the legal texts. Answering this question in detail requires a separate study. Until such a study is prepared, it can be said that while the Egyptian legislature has clearly demonstrated, through the enactment of law No. 10 of 2018, its commitment to protecting the rights of persons with disabilities, this commitment has not yet fully translated into practical implementation.
Studies suggest that most public places, including squares, government offices, universities, schools, and hospitals are largely, if not entirely, inaccessible to persons with disabilities (Hamza et al., 2025; Zakaria, 2025). Consequently, they cannot exercise their freedom of movement, which in turn hinders their integration into society, despite such rights being guaranteed by law.
There are numerous reasons for the aforementioned result. The authors will only address some of the legal factors. A close examination of the provisions of Law No. 10 of 2018 reveals notable ambiguity. This ambiguity stems, in part, from the lack of precise and clear determination of who is obligated to implement the commitments outlined in the law. An analysis of the provisions of Law No. 10 of 2018 shows that they mostly merely stipulate obligations that the state and society must observe to guarantee the rights of persons with disabilities, without precisely identifying the authority responsible for enforcing these obligations. Furthermore, they fail to specify the means or mechanisms for implementing these obligations, which leads to inadequate implementation of these provisions in practice and renders them ineffective in protecting the rights of persons with disabilities. To illustrate this point, one can refer to Article 4, which states that: ‘The State is obligated to respect the rights of persons with disabilities guaranteed by this Law or any other law, including the rights stipulated in ratified international conventions.’ Such wording does not specify the authority responsible for implementing these obligations, nor does it clarify who is responsible for any failure to implement them.
Furthermore, even where the law specifies the authority responsible for implementing the obligations, these obligations are formulated in such broad terms that they are open to multiple interpretations. This ambiguity makes it extremely difficult to ascertain their precise content and, consequently, to implement them in practice.
Moreover, Law No. 10 of 2018 does not provide adequate sanctions for non-compliance with its obligations. This renders the law ineffective and deprives persons with disabilities of its value. An example of this situation is Article 38, which obligates the state to take all possible measures to facilitate the living conditions of persons with disabilities residing in healthcare institutions. A close examination of this article shows that it places a broad responsibility on the state to improve the living conditions of these residents within these institutions. However, it does not determine any sanction for failure to comply, which weakens its effectiveness.
The same applies to Article 39, which obligates the state to take all necessary measures to enable persons with disabilities to move freely, allowing them to participate in public life. The article does not impose any sanctions in case of non-compliance, thus limiting its practical effectiveness.
To conclude, the evolution of disability rights in the Egyptian legal system is evident. The Constitution and the Law No. 10 of 2018 do not treat disability as a matter of charity or social care only. Persons with disabilities are entitled to a broad range of legal rights. In this sense, the Egyptian legal system is moving towards a rights-based approach that is consistent with the CRPD. However, this shift is not fully reflected in practice due to a variety of factors, including financial, administrative and legal constraints. From a legal perspective, some obligations are formulated in broad terms. In other provisions, the law does not specify the authority responsible for implementing the legal obligations. Similarly, some provisions lack adequate legal sanctions in cases of non-compliance. Therefore, while the evolution of disability rights is evident at the level of legal texts, its practical realization is not at the same level.
To ensure that persons with disabilities enjoy the rights guaranteed by the Constitution and Law No. 10 of 2018, the legislature should formulate state obligations in clear and precise terms, explicitly specify the authority responsible for implementing each legal obligation, and impose certain legal sanctions in cases of non-compliance.
Competing Interests
The authors have no competing interests to declare.