Ahmed Kamel – Egypt Daily News
In a significant ruling with implications for press freedom and individual dignity, Egypt’s Supreme Constitutional Court has upheld the constitutionality of key provisions in the Penal Code criminalizing the public defamation and insult of private individuals through published material.
The court, presided over by Chief Justice Boulos Fahmy Eskandar, rejected a legal challenge contesting the constitutionality of Articles 302 (paragraphs 1 and 3), 303(1), 306, and 307 of the Egyptian Penal Code. These articles criminalize acts of slander and libel committed against individuals by way of publication and impose penalties ranging from fines to imprisonment.
In its reasoning, the court emphasized that the Egyptian Constitution mandates the state to uphold and protect human dignity through its legislation. The ruling asserted that protecting individuals from reputational harm is a constitutional obligation, reflecting one of the most fundamental aspects of personal rights.
The court stated:
“The Constitution obliges the state to preserve human dignity through its laws, preventing any violation thereof, and to defend it. This commitment aims to ensure that every person living on the land of this nation has the right to the protection of their dignity.”
The judgment clarified that the criminalization of public defamation is essential to safeguarding this dignity, especially when such attacks fall outside the limited scope where criticism is protected—such as legitimate scrutiny of public officials or persons in public office, provided it is done in good faith and within legal bounds.
Crucially, the court cited the third paragraph of Article 302 of the Penal Code, which prioritizes the protection of human dignity over the potential public benefit of exposing certain truths. Even if the defamatory statements are factually accurate, the court noted that they may still cause irreparable harm to an individual’s reputation and social standing.
This reasoning is rooted in a core legal principle: preventing harm takes precedence over gaining a benefit. The court stated that “even the disclosure of truthful information may, in some cases, unjustly damage a person’s dignity and cannot be justified if it causes disproportionate harm.”
While the Egyptian Constitution guarantees freedom of thought, opinion, and expression—including through speech, writing, and publication—the court clarified that such freedoms must not be exercised at the expense of others’ personal dignity or the right to privacy.
“Freedom of expression,” the court ruled, “does not extend to violating the dignity of others or intruding on private life through the attribution of allegations—even if true—that would subject the individual to punishment or societal contempt.”
Regarding the increased penalties for defamation and insult when committed through media or publications, the court affirmed that these heightened punishments are consistent with constitutional principles. It emphasized that the penalties lie within prescribed minimum and maximum limits, and that trial courts have the discretion to suspend the execution of sentences under Article 55 of the Penal Code.
In conclusion, the Supreme Constitutional Court declared that the criminalization of public defamation and insult against private individuals, and the corresponding legal penalties, align with Egypt’s constitutional framework. The ruling reinforces the state’s responsibility to protect citizens from reputational harm while balancing the rights to free expression and personal dignity.
