sep 18, 2026
Law and Democracy Support Foundation (LDSF) and Egyptian Commission for Rights and Freedoms (ECRF) condemn the continued detention of Egyptian writer and novelist Peter Tawfik Kamel in connection with Case No. 1184 of 2026 (Mallawi Administrative Case), as well as the criminal prosecution he faces on the basis of his intellectual views, personal beliefs, and literary work.
The two organizations consider this case a troubling example of the use of criminal proceedings against individuals for the peaceful exercise of their rights to freedom of thought, conscience, belief, opinion, expression, and literary creativity, rights guaranteed under both the Egyptian Constitution and international human rights law.
The organizations further denounce the decision issued by the Mallawi Criminal Court on 17 September 2026 to renew Peter’s pretrial detention for an additional 15 days, despite the peaceful nature of the allegations against him and their direct connection to the exercise of his fundamental rights.
Peter Tawfik Kamel has now spent several months in detention solely because of ideas and opinions he expressed peacefully through his writings, online publications, and literary works. On 14 April 2026, he reported to the National Security headquarters in Mallawi in response to a security summons. However, he was detained from that date onward without being brought before an investigative authority and without being allowed to communicate with his family or lawyer until he appeared before the Public Prosecution on 22 April 2026.
During that period, his family submitted official complaints to the Public Prosecutor, the Minister of Interior, and the National Council for Human Rights, reporting his detention and requesting information regarding his whereabouts.
The case file also reveals a clear discrepancy between the facts documented by his family and the account contained in the arrest report dated 22 April 2026, which claims that he was apprehended on a public road during a security operation. This contradiction raises serious concerns about the circumstances of his arrest and the conditions of his detention during the period preceding his appearance before the prosecution, and underscores the need for an independent and transparent investigation into these events.
The charges against Peter are directly tied to his peaceful exercise of freedom of thought, expression, and literary creativity. According to the case documents, the prosecution is based on his personal beliefs, online publications, and literary writings, most notably his novel, Farewell, My Dear God.
He faces charges of “exploiting religion to promote extremist ideas with the intent of showing contempt for the Abrahamic religions through the internet.” National Security investigations reportedly characterized his non-religious views and his questioning of certain religious beliefs as “extremist ideas,” despite the absence of any allegations involving incitement to violence, hatred, or discrimination.
The two organizations emphasize that disagreement with the content of a philosophical, religious, or literary viewpoint can never constitute a legitimate basis for criminalization, detention, or prosecution. Literary works should be debated, criticized, and discussed within cultural and intellectual spaces, not used as grounds for criminal punishment or security intervention. Peter Tawfik Kamel is among a new generation of Egyptian literary voices and has published several novels, including The Land of Absurdity, Wandering and Love, Not Born for Reassurance, Sonata for the Weeping Violet, Psalms of Exile and Nothingness, and The Returning One’s Labyrinth. Disagreement with the content of a literary or philosophical work can never justify criminal prosecution or deprivation of liberty.
The questioning of the National Security officer who conducted the investigation exposed significant flaws in the evidentiary basis of the case. The officer acknowledged that his findings relied primarily on undisclosed confidential sources. He was also unable to establish key facts, including when the allegedly offending ideas were first published, when the social media account attributed to Peter was created, or the purpose for which it had been established.
These shortcomings reinforce concerns that the prosecution is rooted primarily in Peter’s personal beliefs and peaceful expression. The organizations maintain that the case constitutes a direct violation of freedom of thought, conscience, belief, opinion, expression, and literary creativity, in contravention of Article 64 of the Egyptian Constitution, which guarantees absolute freedom of belief; Article 65, which protects freedom of thought and opinion; and Article 67, which safeguards artistic and literary creativity.
The prosecution is also incompatible with Egypt’s international obligations to protect freedom of expression, intellectual and cultural pluralism, and the right to hold and exchange ideas and opinions without fear of punishment or criminal prosecution.
The organizations further note that this case forms part of a broader pattern involving the use of Article 98(f) of the Egyptian Penal Code, commonly referred to as the “contempt of religion” provision, to prosecute individuals on the basis of their opinions, beliefs, intellectual output, and literary works.
The organizations stress that the vague and overly broad language of this provision, particularly concepts such as “extremist ideas” and “contempt of religion,” enables the criminalization of the peaceful expression of opinions, intellectual convictions, and personal beliefs, thereby undermining fundamental rights and freedoms protected under both Egyptian law and international human rights standards.
The organizations are also concerned by information contained in the case file indicating that authorities extensively examined Peter’s mobile phone, reviewed his personal correspondence, private conversations, photographs, and electronic files, and used portions of this material in the investigation. They emphasize that the right to privacy, including the protection of personal communications and correspondence, is a fundamental right that must not be restricted or used as a means of punishing individuals because of their opinions or intellectual convictions.
The organizations further express concern regarding Peter’s health condition. Medical records indicate that he has received specialized psychological treatment and ongoing mental health care for several years. His family has formally informed the authorities that he requires regular treatment and medication during his detention, making it essential that he have uninterrupted access to appropriate medical and psychological care.
This case comes against the backdrop of a recurring pattern of criminal prosecutions linked to the peaceful expression of personal opinions and beliefs, as well as cultural and literary production. It reflects the continued use of criminal law as a tool to restrict freedom of thought, artistic expression, and freedom of expression in Egypt.
The Organizations Call For:
- The immediate and unconditional release of writer and novelist Peter Tawfik Kamel.
- The dismissal of all charges arising from his peaceful exercise of freedom of thought, belief, opinion, expression, and literary creativity.
- An end to the use of “contempt of religion” charges and other vaguely worded legal provisions to criminalize the peaceful expression of beliefs, opinions, or literary works.
- An independent and transparent investigation into the circumstances of his detention, the period preceding his appearance before the Public Prosecution, and the concerns raised regarding the circumstances of his arrest.
- Uninterrupted access to the medical, psychological, and pharmaceutical care that he requires.
- Respect for the right to privacy and an end to the use of personal correspondence, private communications, and digital content as tools for punishing individuals because of their beliefs, opinions, or peaceful expression.